Top Lawyer Urges Voiding California Proposition 8

New York Times ^ | December 19, 2008 | Jesse McKinley

[ALPAPilot]

Translation: Jerry Brown advocates an end to the rule of law.

[WaterBoard]

Another F-ing lawyer, Jerry Brown, trying to void the will of the people. How can you take away the “Constitutional Rights” of gay people to get married when marriage is not a right in any state but a privilege?

Marriage is not in the Constitution. Did the Democrat Lawyer even bother to study the Constitution in college?

[olezip]

“Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification,” Mr. Brown said in a statement.

Mr. Brown's assertions are unjustifiable. He is clearly incompetent. His argument is unnatural and against the laws of nature. How does he tie marriage between males or between females to constitutional rights? Does an orange have the constitutional right to be an apple? Maybe an orange covets the apple because it can never be an apple. The insane covet what they cannot have.

To me and anyone else with common sense, it is clearly not a constitutional right to be granted that which can never be. What compelling justification does one need to show that a man is not a woman, that a marriage between a man and a man cannot produce children, or a marriage between a woman and a woman cannot produce children? To pretend otherwise is to mock and degrade what marriage is, a union between a man and a woman.

What fundamental constitutional rights is he talking about? There are no dots to connect in this false relationship.

[bone52]

I don’t think the backlash hurt mormons at all - if anything, it showed mormons (myself included) what kind of fight we are in. Additionally, the fact that we supported Prop. 8 so strongly and received so much attention for it, if anything, led to greater acceptance of mormons (as people) among different Christian denominations (afterall, we are all in the same fight).

Generally (speaking on my behalf and not that of the LDS Church) >mormons do not care what people think about us, especially if they hold those feelings because they despise our values. We are the descendants of people who left their homes in Europe, and across America for the beliefs that we have. A couple of protests and threats will not convince us to leave those values.

I don’t know what other churches will do, but this mormon, and every other mormon I know has only been fired-up and convinced that we must win this fight.

[bone52]

Amen to this being the end of the rule of law. If the CA Supremes do this, then every court will be able to void any act by the people. If they void this amendment, without having very solid reasoning and precedent, it will be the day that America dies. If that happens, we need to take a long hard look at the Declaration of Independence and think about whether freedom means as much to us now as it did to our forefathers, and then find some way of reviving that freedom.

[BnBlFlag]

How can an Ammendment to the California State Constitution be “Unconstitutional”? If this is so, then ths USSC could declare any Ammendment to the U.S. Constitution “Unconstitutional”. Say the First and Second Ammendments?

[Fiji Hill]

In 2006, “conservative” talk show host Michael Savage donated $5,000—the maximum allowable contribution—to Jerry Brown’s campaign. I hope he’s satisfied with what he got.

[Nip]

Once again the mental disorder called liberalism strikes.

This is the second time that the majority of the voting population of California have rejected same sex marriage, or what ever term you want to use. What are the liberals going to do when it is rejected the third time? The fourth time?

Some quick observations:

Liberals and lawyers (I am not certain there is a significant difference between the two) fail to realize that laws come from people. Without people there would be no laws. Our founding fathers knew this and that is why the phrase “We, the People,” are the largest words in our Constitution.

Laws by themselves are meaningless. Witness the innumerable gun laws that are totally ineffective. No gun law has ever prevented a crime using a gun.

Finally, there is one natural law that neither lawyers, liberals, or homosexual activists can ignore, go around, or appeal. The law of nature. Homosexuality is a biological “sport” - it can not and does not reproduce by itself. And this, IMHO, is what the root cause of all the problems. The activists are crying that they can not change nature and demand that we support them in this greatest of all follies.

I hope, in the near future, that the majority will grow up and tell the childish minority to either grow up and accept things or take their toys elsewhere. I am tried of the of the minority (bolsheviks) terrorizing the majority.

[goldstategop]

Of course, you're right. Legally, Jerry Brown's arguments don't hold a drop of water. As I observed, his gallery is not the people of California. Its the radical gay lobby and he needs the support of the extreme Left to win the Democratic gubernatorial primary in 2010. His position is way to the Left of where Californians are. This is the guy who wrote the hostile and biased ballot summary title and language to try to defeat Proposition 8. He almost succeeded. Does a leopard change its stripes? You don't need to ask. There's no legal and moral argument for same sex marriage.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[plangent]

Jerry Brown is fundamentally flawed, as is his argument.

The California State Constitution is a grant of power from the People to State government to perform certain duties on behalf of all. The People spoke last month to curb the unconstitutional action of the legislature.

Sorry Jerry, The People rule...not spifs in Sacramento.