Originally Posted by cnredd

Not necessarily...
A state doesn't doesn't have to "strike down" something that doesn't even GET to the ballots when people are smart enough NOT to propose something being on the ballot in the first place because of inevitable court challenges...
I don't think they'll ever be a list of that, but it wouldn't surprise me if that happens a lot...

Originally Posted by cnredd

I'm not talking about a legal requirement...I'm talking about a rational conclusion...
You don't think someone ever said "I want to get something on the ballot...and I KNOW it would pass on the public's vote...but I'm NOT going to propose it because opponents would lawyer-fee us to death in the court system and this would be tied up for years...not worth it."
I would think that happens all of the time...And all of that going on in someone's head...It doesn't even NEED to be said out loud, so "legal requirement" doesn't apply here...

Originally Posted by foundit66

Remember the Terry Schiavo case?
There was a legislative action to SPECIFICALLY legislate what was going to happen in HER case.
Which is expressly unconstitutional...

I saw video-clips of the legislature ACKNOWLEDGING the courts would overturn this, because they WERE DOING something that was unconstitutional.

And then the courts overturned the legislation.

Colorado enacted their "amendment 2" which actually did a lot more than the anti-gay proponents wanted to admit.
And it was unconstitutional, and struck down by the courts.

There are a lot of anti-gay legislation out there that goes well beyond "marriage is just one man and one woman" into the land of FORBIDDING the government, corporations (at least it has been applied as such), and other potential entities from giving benefits to gay couples when those benefits are also given to married couples.
And a strong argument can be made (IMO) that going that extra mile is unconstitutional in a similar regard that the Colorado Amendment 2 was unconstitutional.



I think the key word in your explanation is RATIONAL.
Take the second amendment fights that are going on now.
Obviously would qualify as something your quoted statement would apply to, yet those laws against the second amendment exist anyways.

%@#$ Berkeley in their fight against the marines is another example.

I would propose that the main reason that the scenario you describe does not happen in some cases, is because people aren't acting "rationally".

Originally Posted by mlurp

I think the battle over this is already begun. There is something on the Nov. ballot about changing it back. The whole story is at the link this was about half way doen the page.

Next step: amend the state constitution: California Court Creates Right to Same-Sex Marriage -- 05/16/2008

Conservative organizations, meanwhile, have turned in petitions with more than 1 million signatures in an attempt to get an initiative on the November ballot to amend the state Constitution to define marriage as being between one man and one woman.

If the petitions pass muster, the measure would go on the November ballot. If approved by voters, the amendment would override any court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage.

Originally Posted by cnredd

So much for the will of the people...

Originally Posted by crazyflamingos

Originally Posted by Dr House

"the will of the people" means shit. Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.

Individual rights are more important.

-Dr House

Originally Posted by mlurp

Not meant to show ant die-respect but we are a nation of laws and the idea of majority rules still prevails in most cases. I respect your right to your ideas. But I put mine aside for the majortity rules. I read your intro and some posts. But what about the boom boxes in cars. Just to make a point.

I didn't fight for this country so others could say screw me your rights come behind mine!
Having manners and being respectful of others rights should be the rule don't you think?
And if you realize it or not that is what your supporting, even if you respect others rights. There are to many that don't.
Another reason we have the highest ratio of people in jails/prisons and on some form of probation.

Originally Posted by Yagmi

Just because it is the "majority" doesn't make it right.

I also fought for this country and you are going to sit there and tell me, "screw you and your rights" because I am gay... What a hypocrite!!

Respect others rights? In your book it seems to be your rights only and fuck mine for being gay. Hell no, that doesn't work.

Originally Posted by mlurp

Wait a minute I took no sides nor even implied a thing your saying. I respect your rights, all of them. I wa spointing out the law of the land is majority rules. Th ereason I respect you rights and try not to force mine upon you!
Thanks for
takin git out of context and adding that I'm a hypocrite. You feel better now?
I guess your rights are more important than others.

I just posted a news release. Right now it is California. I'm in KS. and reallly I have no side in th eissue. I have had 2 good friends a sI posted in th epast about that were fro the same sex and w egot along fine. My wifes x husband was bi and uesd drugs and beer to seduce his child which torn my wife up. The boy wanted to cut her open and run his hands through her guts. We had to put him in a private school. But I don't blame any gay people just one sick one who put his own desire before his own son!

Thank you for the chance at reasonable discussion! My position has been stated a while ago and you read it. And more than once I have stated I believe in Free Will Of Choice. I guess you forgot that too. I hope your day goes well. Mine well I will try to get over it.

Originally Posted by mlurp

I didn't fight for this country so others could say screw me your rights come behind mine!

Originally Posted by mlurp

And more than once I have stated I believe in Free Will Of Choice