Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
I really have no problem with it. I have problems with the attitudes like the ones I quoted above.
I also don't think you take something a majority voted for and throw darts and trying to find the law's "unconstitutionality".
I would like to know since the state Supreme Court found it constitutional under Cali. law, then what is the argument they take before the US Court? What part of the US Constitution does it violate?
If you are just taking it to the court because you don't like the result and you feel the majority are just a bunch of idiots and you know better.... then maybe you should reexamine what you truly are wanting and why.
I think courts should be the very last thing you attempt. The first is educating the voters and trying to get a new prop voted. Going to the courts first and expecting them to overturn because you know they will agree with you because the majority is ignorant and wrong... is nothing more than self righteous bullshit.
See, the difference between a true patriotic believer in the system and freedom OF ALL PEOPLE and the people claiming they want freedom but only on their terms, is the belief that, yes, the majority may make some mistakes when voting but education, determination and hard work showing the voters respect all the way through. Those that believe only they know what is best will go to courts and surrender rights and disregard the majority's will as that of ignorance and stupidity and so on.
True freedom means accepting others beliefs, rights and their opinions.
Again, 10-20-30 years ago Prop 8 never would have existed.... getting it on the ballot is an advance in the right direction. Taking it to court and disrespecting the majority because they didn't vote your way.... is the wrong way to try to advance further. Educate, respect and do the footwork and maybe in 1,2, 3 years you'll get the votes you need to overturn it.
|
This is so filled with silly contradictions I am not going to waste time going point by point ("true freedom means accepts others beliefs" but not accepting gay marriage?)
But are you really arguing that people should not be allowed to bring their case in front of a federal court to determine the constitutionality of the issue? That going to court to debate a law's constitutionality is "self righteous bullshit?"
---------- Post added at 09:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahl
Not really sure what this means. But in our country we have a representative democracy at the federal level. The peoples wishes are carried out by the elected representative of a district. If the people aren't happy with said representative they can vote in one who will carry out their wishes. On a more local level there are ballot initiatives, which is what prop 8 was. The will of the people of California was carried out. I don't agree with their decision, but I don't live in California so I can't do anything about it. That's my only point. I'm not arguing against Gay marriage, only against your premise that the will of the people is irrelevant.
|
This country also has a system of federal courts that can determine the constitutionality of a law, and people have rights to question the constitutionality of laws in front of these courts. I really don't get people who claim that those affected should have no right to question the law in court.
By the way, gay marriage was first deemed legal by the Maine legislature, then overturned by vote, so the people elsewhere voted in people who would carry their wishes. What is the true "people"?