Perhaps the way to go is throught the Supreme Court

[question everything]

and not through ballot measures.

I am talking about same sex marriage.

I went back and visited an op-ed by David Boies who, together with Ted Olson - yes, that Ted Olson - are appealing Prop. 8 all the way to the supreme Court.

I know that many in the gay community have their doubts about that move; some want to give California voters another chance. Which, by itself, is not bad. When I lived in California we voted on the same issue four times, lost the first two, won the last two and the battle. And, if the Supreme Court turns it down, many are afraid that this could seal the issue for good.

However, with so many states - most of them, I think, in the bible belt - passing such a prohibition, perhaps going through the Supreme Court is the way.

This is from that op-ed, published in the WSJ, by the way:

Gay Marriage and the Constitution

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=465032

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the right to marry the person you love is so fundamental that states cannot abridge it. In 1978 the Court (8 to 1, Zablocki v. Redhail) overturned as unconstitutional a Wisconsin law preventing child-support scofflaws from getting married. The Court emphasized, "decisions of this Court confirm that the right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals." In 1987 the Supreme Court unanimously struck down as unconstitutional a Missouri law preventing imprisoned felons from marrying.

There were legitimate state policies that supported the Wisconsin and Missouri restrictions held unconstitutional. By contrast, there is no legitimate state policy underlying Proposition 8.

There are those who sincerely believe that homosexuality is inconsistent with their religion -- and the First Amendment guarantees their freedom of belief. However, the same First Amendment, as well as the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses, preclude the enshrinement of their religious-based disapproval in state law.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. I appreciate heterodox thinking, but this won't end well at all

The US Supreme Court will not find a right to same-sex marriage.

The fact that a case can be made notwithstanding.

[ruggerson]

4. Kennedy authored both Romer and Lawrence

He may be sympathetic to Olsen and Boise's Prop 8 case and use it to issue a broad ruling.

Let's hope Sotomayor is as good as Souter was.

[RoyGBiv]

2. Yes ...

Some of us have been saying this all along.

[WeDidIt]

3. One of the following five would have to leave the court first (and during Obama's admin.)

John Roberts
Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy
Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito

That right there is a solid block that will always vote against gay marriage.

[ruggerson]

5. That may or may not be true

Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in both landmark gay rights cases. He is not far right on the issue at all.

Whether he will find a right to marriage equality for same sex couples is another story, but Loving is a very, very strong precedent.

[Clio the Leo]

6. And how Clarence Thomas can have that attitude....

.... is anyone's guess. Disgraceful.

(Justice Thomas and his wife Virginia)