Prop 8 Repeal Ballot Initiative Clear...

Prop 8 Repeal Ballot Initiative Cleared For Signature Gathering

There are 25 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Dec 17, 2011, titled Prop 8 Repeal Ballot Initiative Cleared For Signature Gathering . In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

And now. . .California's ban on same-sex marriage could be facing the ballot again, but this time in an effort to repeal the legislation that took away the rights of many a lesbian and gay man.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#1 Dec 17, 2011
Having gotten married within Gavin Newson's 'window' in 2004, and then again in 2008, I am as involved as most, yet there are a lot of things I don't understand about all of this. First of all, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is hardly considering the case "right now" -- they've been sitting on it for months and keep passing he buck. Our legal system at work :(

Secondly, why oh why do we have an Equality ... AND a Courage Campaign ... AND now this "Love ..."-thing?? We can't we all pull together in this, even just in California? I have stopped giving money to all of them, because I don't know which is the 'real' defender of our cause -- they all seem to pull in different directions, diluting our contributions. Our community has become a mirror image of the muscle-bound Washington farce that we call Congress. Should we have an election among ourselves to vote for ONE organization?

If anyone is better informed than I am, please help me out here. I'm throwing up my arms ... but I'm still open to correction if your explanation is credible.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#2 Dec 17, 2011
All I have to say is Good Luck to Love, Honor and Cherish!!!

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#3 Dec 17, 2011
Umninimuzi wrote:
Having gotten married within Gavin Newson's 'window' in 2004, and then again in 2008, I am as involved as most, yet there are a lot of things I don't understand about all of this. First of all, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is hardly considering the case "right now" -- they've been sitting on it for months and keep passing he buck. Our legal system at work :(
Secondly, why oh why do we have an Equality ... AND a Courage Campaign ... AND now this "Love ..."-thing?? We can't we all pull together in this, even just in California? I have stopped giving money to all of them, because I don't know which is the 'real' defender of our cause -- they all seem to pull in different directions, diluting our contributions. Our community has become a mirror image of the muscle-bound Washington farce that we call Congress. Should we have an election among ourselves to vote for ONE organization?
If anyone is better informed than I am, please help me out here. I'm throwing up my arms ... but I'm still open to correction if your explanation is credible.
First let me say that I am sorry for you and your husband with the Gavin Newsome issue.

Secondly......Congratulations are being legally married in 2008. My wife and I are in that same time frame.....always nice to see another couple in the fight.

Thirdly......I totally agree with you and the confusion that these organisations are causing. I believe that they don't want to really take a stand because that would mean that a large amount of donations would end for them. I believe that Love, Honor and Cherish is trying to do something for the right reasons, but just don't have the same backing as EQCA or Courage Campaign. If they all pulled their resources together, they might have better luck in seriously accomplishing something positive in our favor!!!

Frankly, I'm not sure I understand why they are attempting this again.....they have like 5 months to try and get over 810,000 thousand signatures......they have failed before.

The 9th will make a ruling and I believe it will be to uphold Judge Walker's decision on it's merits, they will also make it narrowly confined to California.....and they will make sure that all of the i's are dotted and the t's are crossed!!!

JMPO!!!

Since: Feb 09

Southern California

#4 Dec 17, 2011
Here we go again folks...
unimpressed

Coachella, CA

#5 Dec 17, 2011
Better be prepared to answer this:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi...
You know they blame the gays.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#6 Dec 17, 2011
This is premature and a waste of critical resources. We should wait for prop 8 to work its way through the courts. A supreme court ruling upholding the repeal would do far more for our rights than a repeal through the ballot box. But a repeal by vote will make prop 8 moot. We may lose a great chance to have marriage discrimination declared unconstitutional.

"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections." (SCOTUS)

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#7 Dec 17, 2011
For once I have to agree with everyone else. At this point we might as well save our resources and see what the court does. If we win obviously it's unnecessary, and if the court somehow upholds Prop 8, then we know what has to be done in 2016.

“WOOF !”

Since: Jul 11

Libertarian

#8 Dec 17, 2011
I'm AGAINST THIS !(Start throwing the bricks !)

CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS are NOT subject to a public referendum. That it is what our fight is about at it's most basic level.

Ergo... As we are JUSTLY claiming that Prop 8 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE it strips us of our basic CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, then LOGICALLY, one cannot establish those RIGHTS by the same method.

Doing this UNDERCUTS our basic constitutional argument.

Since these are CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, they are PROTECTED BY (NOT GIVEN BY) the constitution.

Therfore, they can neither be given, nor taken awy, by a ballot referundum which is obviously decided by popular vote.

USE LOGIC FOR A CHANGE !!!

(and as ALWAYS, I have been Fair. And Balanced.:))

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#9 Dec 18, 2011
The only downside is if we somehow lose at the courts, then we'll have to wait till 2016 to have the best shot at repealing Prop 8 at the ballot box.

“WOOF !”

Since: Jul 11

Libertarian

#10 Dec 18, 2011
WeTheSheeple wrote:
The only downside is if we somehow lose at the courts, then we'll have to wait till 2016 to have the best shot at repealing Prop 8 at the ballot box.
Well, since you insist on subjecting an individual's constitutioanl rights to a popular vote at the ballot box, how about after that vote, we put a proposition on the ballot to strip African-Americans of their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ???

BOTH propositions are EQUALLY nonsensical, unconstitutional, and immoral.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#11 Dec 18, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, since you insist on subjecting an individual's constitutioanl rights to a popular vote at the ballot box, how about after that vote, we put a proposition on the ballot to strip African-Americans of their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ???
BOTH propositions are EQUALLY nonsensical, unconstitutional, and immoral.
NO ONE is advocating that rights be voted on at the ballot box....so either learn to comprehend what is being stated or STFU Daniel P!!!

“WOOF !”

Since: Jul 11

Libertarian

#12 Dec 18, 2011
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
NO ONE is advocating that rights be voted on at the ballot box....so either learn to comprehend what is being stated or STFU Daniel P!!!
You are.

And my name isn't Daniel P.:)

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#13 Dec 18, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
You are.
And my name isn't Daniel P.:)
Sorry, NO I'M NOT......and I seriously oppose going back to the ballot box here in California on this issue.....and have stated so many many times!!!

And, you can claim not to be Daniel P. from Long Island......but your posts and profile are EXACTLY the same as his.....so, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck.....THEN a duck is what it is!!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#14 Dec 18, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, since you insist on subjecting an individual's constitutioanl rights to a popular vote at the ballot box, how about after that vote, we put a proposition on the ballot to strip African-Americans of their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ???
BOTH propositions are EQUALLY nonsensical, unconstitutional, and immoral.
In this case we are voting to REMOVE an EXISTING restriction on our rights, but our rights are being voted on one way or another- whether it is the judiciary, the legislature, or the people is irrelevant.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#15 Dec 18, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
I'm AGAINST THIS !(Start throwing the bricks !)
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS are NOT subject to a public referendum. That it is what our fight is about at it's most basic level.
Ergo... As we are JUSTLY claiming that Prop 8 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE it strips us of our basic CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, then LOGICALLY, one cannot establish those RIGHTS by the same method.
Doing this UNDERCUTS our basic constitutional argument.
Since these are CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, they are PROTECTED BY (NOT GIVEN BY) the constitution.
Therfore, they can neither be given, nor taken awy, by a ballot referundum which is obviously decided by popular vote.
USE LOGIC FOR A CHANGE !!!
(and as ALWAYS, I have been Fair. And Balanced.:))
What's the difference between a ballot referendum and a legislature passing a state law on marriage equality? According to your logic, neither should be passing laws on basic constitutional rights.

What's the difference between a ballot referendum and state legislatures voting on a constitutional amendment? According to your logic neither should be passing amendments which attempt to grant or restrict basic constitutional rights.

If constitutional rights can neither be granted nor taken away, then we should get rid of the federal & state legislatures and all ballot referendum law and just let the courts decide everything. In addition we'd have to restrict constitutional amendments to just procedural issues which don't impact individual rights, e.g. presidential term limit, size of Congress, budget, treaties, etc.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#16 Dec 18, 2011
WeTheSheeple wrote:
The only downside is if we somehow lose at the courts, then we'll have to wait till 2016 to have the best shot at repealing Prop 8 at the ballot box.
Or maybe 2014, depending on when the Supremes rule.

(And the Supremes rule! So when it comes to marriage discrimination; Stop! In the name of love.)

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#17 Dec 18, 2011
Fred ABQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, since you insist on subjecting an individual's constitutioanl rights to a popular vote at the ballot box, how about after that vote, we put a proposition on the ballot to strip African-Americans of their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ???
BOTH propositions are EQUALLY nonsensical, unconstitutional, and immoral.
While I agree equal rights should never depend on any vote, if we lose at the Supreme Court the only option left is to return to the ballot box. But I don't believe we would lose at the Supreme court with the case and the legal team we now have. This vote however, could erase that opportunity.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#18 Dec 18, 2011
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Or maybe 2014, depending on when the Supremes rule.
(And the Supremes rule! So when it comes to marriage discrimination; Stop! In the name of love.)
2014 is not an option, since turnout in midterm elections is half of a presidential election year AND is mostly old people. If we want the best chance of winning a popular vote, it'll have to be 2016.

“II Samuel 1:26”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#19 Dec 18, 2011
I echo the other voices on the thread that we should wait for the courts to rule on the Perry case first before going back to the ballot. Perhaps it won't be necessary.

Since: Jun 08

Redlands, CA

#20 Dec 18, 2011
this is VERY BAD move by LHC They decided this within a week after EQCA dropped 2012. LHC didn't reached out to LGBT community to discuss about going back to the ballot in 2012. They decided it on their own. That's a bad idea. Also, I heard that LHC has no faith in Prop 8 case whatsoever, especially by USSC.. They have no idea how this signature collection will hurt the case IF it gets on the ballot because I feel that some to most LGBT community feels that Prop 8 case will be successful than voting ON OUR RIGHTS. I have been reading all comments on LHC and most say its a bad idea....

NOBODY HAS A RIGHT TO VOTE ON OTHER PEOPLE'S CIVIL RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Op-ed: Cakes, gay rights and the American flag 8 min DR SOS 2
News Senate GOP on track to OK judicial pick rated n... 14 min RalphB 10
News All bets are off at the Supreme Court 19 min RalphB 22
News Pentagon says it will allow transgender people ... 24 min Big Al 15
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr Bruddah Z 58,404
News Calls for updated sex education after Australia... 2 hr Bruddah Z 6
News Manchester Police Create LGBTQ Liaison 2 hr not special 1
News Former OKC Mayor blames homosexuality for moral... 6 hr javawhey 109
Roy Moore.....Just Another Hypocrite 8 hr Pilots nail drivi... 407
News Ten Commandments judge faces runoff in Alabama ... 9 hr The Duke 317
The Spectrum Cafe (Dec '07) 14 hr GodSmacked 26,913
More from around the web