Originally posted by: newnameman
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: winnar111
It's a good thing Jerry Brown is representing the will of the people.
51% of the people should not be able to strip the rights of 49% of the population.
Yeah, ok.
Here comes a new lawsuit forcing Jerry Brown to recuse himself from the issue.
I think we should strip your rights to post here, but you don't see me circulating petitions to codify it into law. Maybe you should just step back from your homophobic bigotry for a moment and realize it's a personal problem, not something that you need to wave around proudly like a flag.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Americans of dozens of states have proudly rejected the gay agenda.
As usual you fail to see what is wrong with this whole propostion verses changing the Constitution via the amendment process......
A propostion only needs a majority...an amendment needs a 2/3 majority to pass!
Had Proposition 8 failed by over 66% I honestly would have nothing to say other than I believe it to be wrong!
yet the people opposing gay marriage if they chooise to change the California Conbstitution should be held to the same standards...2/3 majority and it passes.
Instead you have people taking away a fundamental right of one groups of people!
But until it happens to you I am afraid you will never understand why this is just totally wrong!!
You need to check your facts, buddy. An amendment to the California constitution needs a simple majority to pass; only a
revision (defined as a "substantial change to the entire constitution") needs a 2/3 vote.
Nope you are wrong my friend---
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/81854
My main point is totally valid--
The California Constitution Requires That Proposition 8 Be Overturned
I have taken excerpts from this article feel free to reads the whole thing!
With the misinformed and discriminatory vote under question by county governments and marriage equality advocates, many Californians are wondering whether they've lost the right to amend or revise the constitution.
The answer is no, according to the constitution itself and the legislative and legal history regarding the difference between an "amendment" and a "revision." However, since California Proposition 8 is a "revision" to the constitution, Proposition 8 would have required approval of 2/3 of the California State Senate, 2/3 of the California State Assembly, AND 2/3 of the voters on Election Day. Those requirements and standards were not met with the passage of Proposition 8 on November 5.
Proposition 8 is a substantial alteration of the entire California constitution because it singles out a class of people for discrimination. Proposition 8 targets a historically vulnerable group and eliminates their right to marriage ? a civil and moral right that over 18,000 same-sex couples have enjoyed ever since the conservative California Supreme Court overruled the ban on marriage equality in June. Both the United States Constitution and the California Constitution guarantee "equal protection under the law."
The California Constitution itself states that the people may amend the Constitution by the initiative process, where they collect signatures, qualify an amendment to the Constitution, and pass it. However, legislative "permission" is required for voter-initiated amendments such as Proposition 8. "The electors may amend the Constitution by initiative" (Article 18, Sec. 3). However, the people of California may not "revise" the Constitution unless 2/3 of the legislature AND 2/3 of the voters approve the revision. Proposition 8 was an attempt to "revise" the California Constitution. Thus, the proper legislative procedures were not followed when Proposition 8 was placed on the ballot.
Explaining the clear distinction between an amendment and a revision is University of California, Berkeley Department of Public Science Chairman Emeritus Dr. Eugene C. Lee, who, in 1991, wrote:
"Specific changes to the California constitution may be proposed by amendment. Substantial changes may be proposed by a constitutional convention or by the legislature as constitutional revisions. Regardless of their origin, all changes must be approved by a majority of the electorate voting on the issue. Legislative amendments, the method most commonly used, require a two-thirds vote in each house of the legislature. Initiative amendments may be placed on the ballot by a petition of registered voters equal in number to 8 percent of the total vote cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. By explicit language in the constitution concerning initiatives and by court interpretation with respect to measures arising in the legislature, amendments are required to be limited in scope. As far back as 1894, the California Supreme Court distinguished between a revision of the constitution and a mere amendment thereof (Livermore v. Waite, 102 Cal. 113). As reiterated in 1978, the court held that a revision referred to a 'substantial alteration of the entire constitution, rather than to a less extensive change in one or more of its provisions' (Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of Equalization, 22 Cal.3d 208)."
Proposition 8 must now be overturned by the California Supreme Court because discrimination and bigotry against same-sex couples is wrong and immoral. Proposition 8 significantly revises the State Constitution by targeting a single group of individuals to eliminate their rights. Lesbians and gays should not be singled out for discrimination, and Proposition 8 does just that.
Facebook
Twitter