I think it was about as good as could be expected. The California court wasn't going to out and out say "the majority of voting californians are insensitive idiots to love" and get hoisted on the "activist judiciary" pike some like to toss around, which might end up having the courts get targeted for more bench packing.
Instead, they have left the 18,000 existing marriages in place, which will turn out, on average, maybe better, than most man+woman marriages. I bet there will be less divorces, births, and abuses than a sampling of all the other marriages at the same time.
Over time, these people may be examples of how much of a non-issue this really is. It's only a matter of a little more patience, understanding, and education.
And the republicans will kick this dead whale down the beach as long as the possibly can because it causes more furor within the Democratic party than within their own.
> I agree that the people of a state have the right to amend a state constitution however they see fit, even if it is retarded
I disagree. Part of living in a Republic, as opposed to a Pure Democracy, is that people have rights that can't be voted away. You can't sign a contract that sells yourself into slavery, for example. Constitutional Amendment or not, any law that denies equal treatment under the law is unconstitutional. We learned this here in Colorado during the Amendment 2 fiasco. Looks like California isn't going to learn quite as quickly. :P
Fags are the new niggers. I guarantee that history will look upon this amendment the same way we look back on Jim Crow laws today
( ... )
>I disagree. Part of living in a Republic, as opposed to a Pure Democracy, is that people have rights that can't be voted away. You can't sign a contract that sells yourself into slavery, for example. Constitutional Amendment or not, any law that denies equal treatment under the law is unconstitutional. We learned this here in Colorado during the Amendment 2 fiasco. Looks like California isn't going to learn quite as quickly. :P
( ... )
Comments 6
Instead, they have left the 18,000 existing marriages in place, which will turn out, on average, maybe better, than most man+woman marriages. I bet there will be less divorces, births, and abuses than a sampling of all the other marriages at the same time.
Over time, these people may be examples of how much of a non-issue this really is. It's only a matter of a little more patience, understanding, and education.
Reply
Reply
I disagree. Part of living in a Republic, as opposed to a Pure Democracy, is that people have rights that can't be voted away. You can't sign a contract that sells yourself into slavery, for example. Constitutional Amendment or not, any law that denies equal treatment under the law is unconstitutional. We learned this here in Colorado during the Amendment 2 fiasco. Looks like California isn't going to learn quite as quickly. :P
Fags are the new niggers. I guarantee that history will look upon this amendment the same way we look back on Jim Crow laws today ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
Oh, I thought that this WAS that case...
Guess I should RTFA before I open my mouth.
Reply
Leave a comment