"I voted against Prop. 8...But I think the will of the majority should be supported by the state."

[alp227]

Seriously. That's what Los Angeles Times columnist George Skelton thinks about California Proposition 8, the 2008 voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage that a federal court overturned earlier this month. Both the Governor (Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republican) and Attorney General (Jerry Brown, Democrat) have refused to support Prop. 8.

Skelton tries to sound smart instead of bigoted:

But whether a law is unconstitutional is a court's job to decide. The attorney general's job is to defend and enforce state laws. People didn't elect him chief judge. They elected him chief law officer.

Same with the governor. He can appoint judges. But he can't become one unless he resigns his office.

Schwarzenegger has been on both sides of this issue. He vetoed bills in 2005 and 2007 to allow same-sex marriage, declaring that voters had spoken in 2000 when they passed an initiative to ban homosexual matrimony. He asserted that the initiative, Prop. 22, couldn't be repealed by the Legislature.

Ultimately, the California Supreme Court ruled that Prop. 22 violated the state Constitution. Then Prop. 8 amended the Constitution to restore the ban.

Now the governor is arguing that gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry immediately, even before Prop. 8 runs its course in the courts — if, indeed, there's any running room left with both Schwarzenegger and Brown refusing to defend the measure.

In this case, Skelton is trying to be "I'm not homophobic, but it's the voters' choice whether to allow same-sex marriage." Apparently he thinks that it's more important to defend the uninformed ignorance of the majority rather than the basic rights of a minority. The anti-gay lobby has had years and years to prove that same-sex marriage will cause the end of the world...and failed. So that's why they lost in court!

Back in the '60s, would Skelton have written "I'm not racist, but I'd rather let the voters, not Congress, decide whether to allow blacks to have equal civil rights?"

[msongs]

1. so he wouldnt mind if voters approved a ballot to gas all his religious group? nt

[rpannier]

2. or allow marriage between people of different races

We should just let the voters decide everything

We could all live in a kind of American Idol 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

Narrator: Mike and Nancy have known each other for 11 years (since 6th grade) and they want to get married. If you think they should be allowed to vote 'Yes' if not vote 'No'
And remember, if you vote 'No' you also need to choose alternates mates for both.
Voting closes in 5 minutes

[NMMNG]

3. So when do we get to vote on his rights?

Funny how those who keep insisting LGBT rights should be voted on have never had to worry about their civil rights being subject to "the will of the people", nor have any of them offered to put them up to a popular vote.

Civil rights do not belong in the hands of the voters. Period.

[guitar man]

4. Well then

I'd like to propose a ballot initiative that says you can't be a reporter if you flunked civics in high school, which this guy obviously did. ;)

[pinboy3niner]

5. Skelton has done some good writing on CA budget and other issues

So it's surprising to see him take this position. But I wouldn't assume it's homophobia. He's arguing that the AG has a duty to defend ANY decision made my the voters.

He's wrong in this case. The AG evaluates decisions of various kinds, and is not obligated to defend those that he finds legally untenable. Too bad--Skelton really screwed up on this one.

[david13]

6. What an idiotic thing to write. Maybe he's just trying to cater to the

crackpots. I can't seriously believe anyone is that stupid, but can get a job with a newspaper.
dc

[Sanity Claws]

7. I'll bet he didn't react that way when the Supreme Court

overruled ALL Legislation regarding corporate spending on elections

[NMMNG]

8. He probably didn't react that way

When the court selected Bush over Gore. But that's different, of course.

[QC]

9. I've lived in places where a simple majority would likely vote to revive slavery.

I'm glad this man's novel legal theory hasn't been tried out in those places.

[Ozymanithrax]

10. The tyranny of the majority can not be tollerated...

The state should not pay to defend an unconstitutional law passed by an ignorant and bigoted majority whipped to a frenzy by religious fanatics.