I'm as mad as any DUer about the Cali Supreme Court decision today, but there's a silver lining here

[arbusto_baboso]

All the Cali Supremes said was that they were upholding the right of the California electorate to amend the state's constitution. They made no decision at all about whether this particular law itself is valid. They wiggled out of that one, and left room for it to go to the SCOTUS.

Yes, it should've been struck down NOW. But it's going to happen. And soon. Just not today.

So, convert the anger into determination and let's get back to work. It ain't over yet.

[Hepburn]

1. My thoughts about this:

If the bigots can get an amendment to the Cal Const passed, so can the people who support equal rights for all.

I say we dig in and fight! :hi:

[Stellabella]

3. Yes, we'll win eventually. It's happened with every other issue the right

has been wrong about: equal rights, voting rights, choice, etc.

I think that's why the wingnuts are so angry: they've lost over and over again and they will continue to lose because they're wrong.

[T Wolf]

4. BUt there are no deep=pocket bigots like the Morons and Papists to back another expensive

ballot fight.

Direct action against those churches is needed before another try to eliminate them from having any influence. Unless the battlefield is leveled, the bigots will win again.

[Hepburn]

8. Look with Obama did with having 1,000s give $25 contributions...

...instead of 25 give $1,000 contributions.

There are more of us than there are Mormons! :hi:

[Tesha]

20. Actually, that may not be true.

> There are more of us than there are Mormons!

Actually, that may not be true, especially when you weight the populations
by motivation and capacity to give.

http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html

Survey Response %, June 1996 %, March 2001 %, March 2002
Protestant 53 53 52
Catholic 23 23 24
Mormon
(Latter-day Saints) 2 2 2
Orthodox 1 1 *
Non-denominational 1 0 0
Something else (Specify) 1 * 2
Not practicing any religion 1 0 0
Don't know/Refused 2 3 2
TOTAL CHRISTIAN 84% 82% 82%

And remember, the donor pool *AGAINST* marriage equality is *MUCH*
larger than just the Mormons.

Tesha

[Ioo]

2. Taking it to SCOTUS would be death for the gay rights movement

please don't

[arbusto_baboso]

5. No, because it will take years to get to SCOTUS, and SCOTUS will look VERY

different by that time.

Hopefully we can solve in Cali first. Like next year, with another ballot initiative.

[Libertyfirst]

9. You cannot depend on it taking years. If it is appealed the

Supreme Court could hear it next term, since cases move from state supreme courts directly to the SCOTUS. We DO NOT want the present SCOTUS to hear the question. It would be a disaster.

[arbusto_baboso]

12. It won't get there on this particular issue, though.

The decision weasn't on the constitutionality of the issue itself, but on the legality of the process. Big difference, and not one that same-sex marriage advocates can successfully argue in in Cali.

[EFerrari]

6. Agreed. We need to stay local. n/t

[Hepburn]

10. The Cal Supremes did this ruling based on how the Cal Const is or is not...

...amended. IMO, the USSC would not even grant cert on this ~~ so I doubt if anyone would consider taking it up.

I say we amend the Cal Const and have the last word.

[Ms. Toad]

27. You are correct - the complaints were carefuly crafted

so that it would be decided solely on state law and it could not be taken to the U.S. Supreme Court. For now, that is a good thing.

[shadowknows69]

15. Agree, it's bullshit that California has passed the buck on this.

[LynneSin]

7. There is brilliance in that post

What does happen if the Supreme Court turns this ballot measure over and gives gays the right to marry. Wouldn't this stand as the same impact that RoeVWade had over 30 years ago?

[sandnsea]

11. Actually they said the law didn't remove any rights

It only removed the word marriage. So there's an opportunity to move California to a civil unions for all state.

[SPedigrees]

13. I highly recommend doing civil unions first, wait several years for homophobia to die, then go for

marriage. That's how it worked here in Vermont.

[sandnsea]

14. No no, Civil Unions ONLY

For everybody. Leave marriage to the churches.

[SPedigrees]

16. I'd have no problem with my 40 year old marriage being commuted to a civil union.

It wasn't a religious ceremony and it was performed in a law office by a justice of the peace.

I'm just saying though, if you give homophobes a few years to realize that gays getting married or CUed affects their hetero marriages and daily lives about as much as the mating habits of the Amazonian umbrellabird, they get over their fear-based bigotry.

[shadowknows69]

18. Homophobia, unfortunately, is immortal

Luckily the people in power who foment it eventually die.

[Wednesdays]

17. K&R

:kick:

[ruggerson]

19. this is a state issue - the USSC would not take it up

[Tesha]

21. A state can't deny rights granted by the Federal Government.

SCotUS could easily take this up and enforce it if they wished, but right now, you
know the ruling wouldn't go in favor of marriage equality.

Tesha

[ruggerson]

22. well it could be appealed on equal protection grounds

which is the rumblings I'm hearing.

I disagree about the Court. I think it would be 5-4 in our favor.

With Kennedy writing the majority opinion.

[Tesha]

24. It's a big gamble; are you sure you'd be willing to take the stakes?

If you lose, you'll likely lose a lot for a long time. Plessey was in
effect for 58 years before it was reversed.

Ny comparison, the political process is swinging strongly towards
equal marriage in several parts of the country and the momentum
is likely to spread as people become more and more used to the
idea and see it as perfectly ordinary.

Tesha

[varelse]

23. I'm disgusted that a simple majority vote is all that is required to amend California's Constitution

Imagine what our republic would be like if the U.S. Constitution could be amended so easily.

[shadowknows69]

25. We can't even convict a criminal President without two thirds in the Senate

I don't completely disagree with the theory behind CA's system but there should be some things that are simply untouchable by this process. Um...like human and civil rights for one.

[malaise]

26. Yep it was a cowardly decision n/t