[Political Junkie Too]

If this is successful, will we disqualify elections where black candidates lose because the voters were racists? Will we disqualify electios where gay candidates lose because the voters were homophobic? Will we disqualify elections where hispanic candidates lose because the voters were against (illegal) immigration?

Where do these "thought trials" end?

-PJ

[driftdiver]

How do they even get this into trial?

[driftdiver]

“Where do these “thought trials” end?”

at the grave if we look to history as a teacher.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Exactly! I have been troubled by this trial, for all these reasons. I am concerned about the precedents that could be set, far beyond court orders in favor of homosexual marriage. Their goal is to restrict what or who we can vote for. If any policy can be construed as being driven by “animosity” towards a politically correct group or cause, then, such election will be declared illegal.

This is clearly not just about marriage. Prop. 8 simply restored the previous definition of marriage, AND, BROUGHT THAT DEFINITION BACK IN LINE WITH FEDERAL LAW. Since it brought the definition of marriage back in line with federal law, why exactly do we see a federal lawsuit on the subject of marriage definitions in this case? Clearly there is another agenda behind this lawsuit.

[arthurus]

Will we disqualify electios where gay candidates lose because the voters were homophobic? Will we disqualify elections where hispanic candidates lose because the voters were against (illegal) immigration< P>I think this is the precedent desired.