Why bother voting? The judges will just come along and say “YOU CAN’T DECIDE THE LAWS!! WE DECIDE THE LAWS! WE ARE THE GODS OF THIS COUNTRY!”
In related news, the California Supreme Court ruled that puce was a primary color, and the square root of 20 is 8201.
"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
And so God raises up Islam to incite violence to bring back some sense of morality.
'That don't make it a good idea'(as Chris Rock might say), and that doesn't make it something our public would choose to recognize/honor as 'marriage'. And defining all or none of these behaviors as marriage is a 'public policy question' for citizens and legislatures, not a 'constitutional, civil rights question' for courts.
Re the 'public policy question' of calling any of these behaviors 'marriage' and according them public benefits, the reason we haven't is that most of us don't believe these behaviors do any good, much less serve the traditional purposes/function of natural marriage.
For a rough analogy, a group's demonstrated enthusiasm for setting fire to items of their own property isn't likely to earn them a public standing as licensed firemen.
I kind of expect the 9th Circus to take it up at some point and try to force the abomination on the entire country at the same time it “strikes down” the California marriage amendment when it passes or even before it pases.
Isn’t there any way to vote out these liberal activist judges? They are deliberately trying to destroy the traditional family unit.
I guess you could say “the honeymoon’s over.”
I think Ms. Gallagher is being charitable in the extreme by calling the pronouncements of the gay-marriage media "surprisingly open." I would call them swaggering, saber-rattling, and gloating.
It is a law of nature that "pride goes before destruction." And that is a very good thing.
Maggie Gallagher and her razor-sharp message need to be showcased in every major periodical, blog, or television production that will have her from now until the November election. The things she reveals, if allowed to be disseminated, will sweep the homo-activists' agenda back a few years.
This comment needs to be trumpeted by the folks pushing for the amendment in CA. Voters need to know just why they're being asked to deny 'marriage' to homosexual. Homosexual activists are not looking for legal marriage, in the sense of everyone else's idea of the institution, which implies spouses' fidelity to each other, they're looking for societal approval of their sex obsessed lifestyle.