News:

"Forbidden Fruit [L-H]"
Congratulations Mellific & Swashbuckler for completing your RP!

Main Menu

Prop 8 struck down.

Started by Revolverman, August 04, 2010, 05:55:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Beguile's Mistress

The fight will continue, hopefully to the Supreme Court and a favorable ruling for same-sex marriage.

Callie Del Noire

I'm conflicted on this one.
On one hand I'm glad for folks who want to pursue a life together BUT I worry that it's going about it the wrong way. This WAS passed by a majority, and I worry that it's setting a precedent that it's okay to push laws you don't like into court and get them overturned by picking the right venue for it.

I think it's going to be a problem, and I wonder if we're looking at the next prohibition blow out.

I'm glad for those that Prop 8 cut off, BUT I'm worried about the precedent.

Trieste

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on August 04, 2010, 06:02:00 PM
On one hand I'm glad for folks who want to pursue a life together BUT I worry that it's going about it the wrong way. This WAS passed by a majority, and I worry that it's setting a precedent that it's okay to push laws you don't like into court and get them overturned by picking the right venue for it.

Setting? That's the way the law works, Callie; laws are tested in the courts when someone has an objection to them, and how the laws are applied is the basis of just about every criminal trial ever. :P

Caeli

I think this is excellent news, frankly. I was incensed when Proposition 8 passed; it made absolutely no sense (to me), and I've been pretty vocal about it whenever it comes up in conversation - discussions about gay rights, same-sex marriages, and so on.

It's my hope that California eventually joins the ranks of Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire and Washington, D.C.
ʙᴜᴛᴛᴇʀғʟɪᴇs ᴀʀᴇ ɢᴏᴅ's ᴘʀᴏᴏғ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ᴡᴇ ᴄᴀɴ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴀ sᴇᴄᴏɴᴅ ᴄʜᴀɴᴄᴇ ᴀᴛ ʟɪғᴇ
ᴠᴇʀʏ sᴇʟᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇʟʏ ᴀᴠᴀɪʟᴀʙʟᴇ ғᴏʀ ɴᴇᴡ ʀᴏʟᴇᴘʟᴀʏs

ᴄʜᴇᴄᴋ ❋ ғᴏʀ ɪᴅᴇᴀs; 'ø' ғᴏʀ ᴏɴs&ᴏғғs, ᴏʀ ᴘᴍ ᴍᴇ.
{ø 𝕨 
  𝕒 }
»  ᴇʟʟɪᴡʀɪᴍᴏ
»  ᴄʜᴏᴏsᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴏᴡɴ ᴀᴅᴠᴇɴᴛᴜʀᴇ: ᴛʜᴇ ғɪғᴛʜ sᴄʜᴏʟᴀʀʟʏ ᴀʀᴛ
»  ひらひらと舞い散る桜に 手を伸ばすよ
»  ᴘʟᴏᴛ ʙᴜɴɴɪᴇs × sᴛᴏʀʏ sᴇᴇᴅs × ᴄʜᴀʀᴀᴄᴛᴇʀ ɪɴsᴘɪʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴs

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Trieste on August 04, 2010, 06:09:34 PM
Setting? That's the way the law works, Callie; laws are tested in the courts when someone has an objection to them, and how the laws are applied is the basis of just about every criminal trial ever. :P

I think that the speed with which Prop 8 was struck down means that it was pitched to the right judge, at the right time. I worry that it's going to be positioned all the way through and the last thing we need is a firefight.

This is an issue that needs to be mediated and negotiated. There are a LOT of folks who aren't ready for change and shoving it down their throats instead of trying to show that it's not a threat to them will cause a backlash.

Remember Prohibition? A small group of people shoved a radical change down the throats of the country. Backlash included a MASSIVE growth in organized crime.

We don't need laws, we don't need confrontation. We need someone to step up and mediate and negotiate, do it in a more civilized manner. We need leadership to education and teach not legislation to dictate. And when this gets slapped down like this.. it tells voters their votes don't count.

Revolverman

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on August 04, 2010, 06:16:48 PM

Remember Prohibition? A small group of people shoved a radical change down the throats of the country. Backlash included a MASSIVE growth in organized crime.


Prohibition restricted rights though, just like Prop 8. It really doesn't matter if a majority of people want something if it infringes on the rights of others. Look at the Civil Rights movement. What would it be in the south if the Jim Crow laws still existed because most (white) people wanted them to be enforced?

MasterMischief

Quote from: Revolverman on August 04, 2010, 06:20:47 PMLook at the Civil Rights movement.

Exactly.  Civil Rights had to be 'shoved down people's throats' because they did not want change either.

Beguile's Mistress

From what I see the judge's ruling only states that it's unconstitutional for the populace to vote to infringe on another person's civil rights.  No majority of voters should be allowed to take away my right to do something that has been given to me by law.

But that's why we have these courts.  To test things like this.  It's what our country was founded on.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Revolverman on August 04, 2010, 06:20:47 PM

Prohibition restricted rights though, just like Prop 8. It really doesn't matter if a majority of people want something if it infringes on the rights of others. Look at the Civil Rights movement. What would it be in the south if the Jim Crow laws still existed because most (white) people wanted them to be enforced?

It took efforts of people like Rosa Parks and Rev King to change the attitudes. We need to educate..not legislate. If you're trying to change a society you need to work on eductating. I worry that the desire to do so has left the reformers. They, both sides, think that all you have to do is write a law or strike one down.

Change comes with interaction. Neither side seems intent on discussion or mediation.

Trieste

#10
Yes, change comes with education, but you also had the courts ordering the desegregation of schools and whatnot. Sometimes, people have to be forced to take the first step towards acceptance.

The "I've got nothing against black people, I just don't think black people and white people should socialize" attitude is only dying off because the people raised that way are dying, and the newer generations grew up with desegregation and affirmative action (for better or for worse).

MasterMischief

Try to educate and get shut down because it is a 'gay agenda'.

This overturning is not just about allowing same sex marriage.  It is about overturning a law that was obviously directed at a minority group.

Revolverman

Quote from: MasterMischief on August 04, 2010, 06:59:22 PM
This overturning is not just about allowing same sex marriage.  It is about overturning a law that was obviously directed at a minority group.

Exactly. A Crime under US, AND International law.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Trieste on August 04, 2010, 06:57:30 PM
The "I've got nothing against black people, I just don't think black people and white people should socialize" attitude is only dying off because the people raised that way are dying, and the newer generations grew up with desegregation and affirmative action (for better or for worse).


Don't forget people of that generation willing to accept and stand up for those things. Not everything is cut and dried. It was a hard time, but it seems to me the trend these days is to push your attitude down your rivals throats. No middle ground. I favor small government and tolerance and because of ONE issue I was told by folks back home that I wasn't a republican. (I favor pro-choice.)

These aren't issues that can be resolved today. Change takes time. Change takes work and effort, education. I see little of that one either side.

That is what worries me.

In the end I would like the words 'compromise' and 'cooperation' to come back into politics but issues like this are being used as hammers to keep us divided.

Neither party represents the true interests of the public at large. Anyone that tells you that is delusional. Only through cooperation and working together to BUILD this country and fix problems like this will we keep ourselves vital and growing.

In case you're wondering and I'm not clear. I don't like the use of a referendum like Prop 8 to enforce one side anymore than I like use of the state supreme court to overturn it.


MasterMischief

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on August 04, 2010, 07:05:05 PM
Change takes work and effort, education. I see little of that one either side.

And what exactly would you call the lawsuit brought forward then?  I believe the gay community is trying to educate.  But that is only going so far.

PandaPuff

I wish I didn't have strep throat or i'd take my butt to downtown sacramento and celebrate.

Jude

This won't change minds, just laws.  And showing disdain for the opinion of the majority in the process is a dangerous gamble even if the short-term outcome is desirable.

Host of Seraphim

Tentatively trying to get back into RPing...

:: O/O :: A/A (updated 3/2 -- please read) ::

Beguile's Mistress

Quote from: Revolverman on August 04, 2010, 07:01:21 PM
Exactly. A Crime under US, AND International law.

Allowing it to stand could set a precedent for other laws of the same nature.

MasterMischief

Quote from: Jude on August 04, 2010, 07:08:46 PM
This won't change minds, just laws.  And showing disdain for the opinion of the majority in the process is a dangerous gamble even if the short-term outcome is desirable.

And doing nothing is going to change minds?  And we are talking about a 52% majority.

Jude

#20
Quote from: MasterMischief on August 04, 2010, 07:11:35 PMAnd doing nothing is going to change minds?  And we are talking about a 52% majority.
False choice fallacy; "doing nothing" and putting forth court proceedings to strike down Prop B are not the only options.

EDIT 1:  You also forget that 52% of people were comfortable denying other people the ability to marry people of the same sex, meaning 48% were not.  You don't know what the breakdown of that 48% is, and how many of them were libertarians who don't necessarily agree with the lifestyle but do disagree philosophically with the law.  Judicial mandate isn't really the best way to win over the people on the fence.

EDIT 2:  And you have to think of the larger implications.  52% may have disapproved in California, but the numbers are larger elsewhere in the country.  I really doubt this is going to help the trend.

Revolverman

Quote from: Jude on August 04, 2010, 07:12:41 PM
False choice fallacy; "doing nothing" and putting forth court proceedings to strike down Prop B are not the only options.

And the other choices were?

Jude

Quote from: Revolverman on August 04, 2010, 07:14:01 PM
And the other choices were?
Campaigning to see it removed by democratic means in the next election cycle?

Revolverman

Quote from: Jude on August 04, 2010, 07:15:08 PM
Campaigning to see it removed by democratic means in the next election cycle?

I didn't think that was possible, because it was a referendum.

MasterMischief

Talking did not seem to be changing any minds.  I think everyone has pretty much chosen their side and are unwilling to budge.  If a majority of people suddenly feel it is perfectly o.k. to treat you as less than a person, are you going to wait hopefully for change and compromise?