1
   

Supreme Court Prop 8

 
 
xxxx
 
Reply Wed 27 Mar, 2013 10:37 pm
Proposition 8 was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment passed in the November 2008 state elections. The measure added a new provision, Section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights, to the California Constitution, which provides that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. To say that gays can't get married because it was in the Bible complete forces their religion on others. Hindering peoples right of religion and it takes away their liberty and pursuit of happiness.
I really hope they see this prop as something that goes against the constitution.
This was taken to the Supreme Court. How do you think the Court will rule on prop 8?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds4ROog37iA
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,033 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 07:40 am
@xxxx,
Just to address a couple of your points.

Quote:
To say that gays can't get married because it was in the Bible

The Bible does not address gay marriage. There is nothing in the Bible about gay marriage. Granted, the Bible does seem to indicate that homosexual practices are considered sin, just as stealing, lying and adultery are sin. But gay marriage is not addressed.

Quote:
forces their religion on others

Nobody is forcing Christianity on anyone else by opposing gay marriage. Many gay marriage opponents are not particularly religious. What would be forced on everyone is simply a law not allowing gay marriages. It does not force religion on anyone. It does force people to obey a law they may not agree with, but how is that different than any other law that the government passes?

Quote:
Hindering peoples right of religion

No, it does not. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Quote:
it takes away their liberty and pursuit of happiness

At least you have one statement that you can reasonably argue. Although opponents of gay marriage would disagree and also have a reasonable argument. You cannot take something away that has never been. So I could argue that gay marriage opponents are not taking away any liberty or taking away someone's ability to pursue happiness. But at least you would be able to intelligently argue that they are doing so.

Quote:
How do you think the Court will rule on prop 8

I have no idea. If they strictly follow the constitution, then I think they would rule in favor of prop 8. The constitution, like the Bible, does not mention marriage and thus the regulation of marriage should be left to the states. The people of California voted to live in a society where marriage is defined as between 1 man and 1 woman. So be it. But I expect they will not uphold prop 8. I think they will dodge it all together. But that is another discussion.

And as a bonus just for you, I also believe that DOMA should and will be struck down. Gay marriage opponents cannot have it both ways. You cannot leave marriage regulation up to the states and then argue for the federal government to regulate it.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 07:47 am
@CoastalRat,
IF on a purely constitutional basis, I fee that the court would have to drop Prop 8. By its existence it essentially denies civil rights to a class of people.

If DOMA is overturned, then the USSC would probably dump it all back to the states and what that does to prop 8 for the long term will be something to follow. Demographics dont favor those that are against gay marriage or gay unions
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 08:01 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
By its existence it essentially denies civil rights to a class of people.
I would disagree with that argument unless all such actions of the government are struck down. Our politicians have gone to great lengths to create a class of people that they target with different laws. The "rich" get one tax rate, the "poor" get a free ride and the middle class gets a different tax rate. You cannot deny that these are not classes of people since politicians are constantly using the terms to classify us. (I know that for legal purposes I am missing the point here, but I submit that any group can get together and claim they are a minority class of people who deserve to be considered a class for legal purposes. Hope I'm not being too confusing.)

Quote:
Demographics dont favor those that are against gay marriage or gay unions
I agree totally.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 08:15 am
@CoastalRat,
with civil rights I mean "who benefits"? most states dont have gay couples enjoy any of the family benefits or even insurance and inheritence laws.
DOMA seems to keep those inequalities in effect by playing the role of an overarching Federal LAw.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 08:32 am
Fifty years from now a whole generation will look back at this argument with the same disgust and disbelief many of us feel when we discuss that some States were willing to secede from America in order to preserve their right to allow people to own people.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New York New York! - Discussion by jcboy
Prop 8? - Discussion by majikal
Gay Marriage - Discussion by blatham
Gay Marriage -- An Old Post Revisited - Discussion by pavarasra
Who doesn't back gay marriage? - Question by The Pentacle Queen
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Supreme Court Prop 8
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/22/2021 at 11:16:48