Voters approve Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriages

The Los Angeles Times ^ | November 5, 2008 | Jessica Garrison, Cara Mia DiMassa and Richard C. Paddock

[Smogger]

UPDATE: Voters approve Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriages. With more than 95% of the vote counted, the measure leads 52.1% to 47.9%.

A measure to once again ban gay marriage in California led Tuesday, throwing into doubt the unions of an estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who wed during the last 4 1/2 months.

As the measure, the most divisive and emotionally fraught on the state ballot this year, took a lead in early returns, supporters gathered at a hotel ballroom in Sacramento and cheered.

"We caused Californians to rethink this issue," Proposition 8 strategist Jeff Flint said.

Early in the campaign, he noted, polls showed the measure trailing by 17 points.

"I think the voters were thinking, well, if it makes them happy, why shouldn't we let gay couples get married. And I think we made them realize that there are broader implications to society and particularly the children when you make that fundamental change that's at the core of how society is organized, which is marriage," he said.

But in San Francisco at the packed headquarters of the No on 8 campaign party in the Westin St. Francis Hotel, supporters of same-sex marriage refused to despair, saying that they were holding out hope for victory.

"You decided to live your life out loud. You fell in love and you said 'I do.' Tonight, we await a verdict," San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said, speaking to a roaring crowd. "I'm crossing my fingers."

Elsewhere in the country, two other gay marriage bans, in Florida and Arizona, were well ahead. In both states, laws already defined marriage as a heterosexual institution. But backers pushed to amend the state constitutions, saying that doing so would protect the institution from legal challenges.

[Jack Hammer]

Whatever; don’t bet the farm it’ll be allowed to stand.

[goldstategop]

The biased wording of the ballot summary prepared by Attorney General Brown made it as close as it was. Few people want to vote to take away a "right." Despite the manifest tampering, its remarkable in the face of an adverse climate in the most liberal state in the country, that it passed.

"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

[Smogger]

I think Algore opened a door that destroyed civility in our country. The Left learned it could undermine a popular majority whenever that served its end. As it stands, the precedent is going to come back to haunt them. What comes around, goes around.

Yep. Fired my gardner today. Told him I couldn't afford him because of Obama's tax increases.

Unemployment was up 79% year over year this month. Obama's fault.

There was an accident on the freeway, and I was late. Obama's fault.

And so forth.. I for one look forward to blaming Obama and the Democrats for everything from the price of gas to a hangnail.

[rivercat]

I do have similar fears, but I feel that this one has the potential for some pretty violent civil unrest.

[444Flyer]

“...Stupidity is rampant in California.”

And the whole USA just became California. Look at how the Liberals have run one of the most resource rich and aesthetically beautiful states into the ground and you will see what Obama will do nationally. Welcome to California everyone!

And Obama will do what the California Supreme Court did with The People's will on Prop. 22...Overturn it by force. Gay “marriage” is coming to America via Obama & Co.

[goldstategop]

The Culture Wars will never end because the Left cannot get us to consent to surrender our values. We will never submit on our deepest convictions. As long as they fight us, we will fight back.

"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

[Gay State Conservative]

Not even *California* would pass it.It wasn’t even close.But that’s not surprising.However,the pervs and perv sympathizers in Massachusetts have *done their best* to keep the issue off the ballot and have succeeded.They’ve done it because they know that poll after poll says that it would be defeated....SOUNDLY....here.

[lady lawyer]

The inmates are taking over the asylum. They lost this one — narrowly — but they will be back. Twenty years ago, the term “gay marriage” would have evoked laughter from 90 percent of the people in this country.

We have now reached the point in this “Emperor’s New Clothes” country where a huge percentage of the population thinks that biological fact is irrelevant.

Sex and sexual attraction have an obvious biological purpose. Men and women have complementary parts for a reason. The things that homosexuals and lesbians do to simulate actual intercourse range from the ridiculous to the disgusting. Homosexuals had a shortened life span even before AIDS. That is, in part, because the rectum has a delicate lining and is not made for the kind of use to which homosexuals put it. Fecal material is forced through tiny tear into the blood stream, causing terrible infections.

Same sex attraction is an obvious dysfunction. It is as if a person had a pathological urge to eat by stuffing his food in his ears. There is no reason to act as if any combination of persons or other organisms who are willing to mutually apply friction to genitals is somehow a “relationship” which society must honor. There is no reason to treat homosexuality as “normal,” or to give it any kind of societal imprimatur.

This is complete insanity.

[sixthousandrpm]

You folks are delusional if you think this was more important that losing the presidency — Dems are going to vastly change this country with their new found majorities.

[P-Marlowe]

I’m guessing it will focus somehow on Scotus’ right to privacy for homosexuals. What do you all think?

Not a chance in Hell.

But I've been wrong before.

Welcome to Hell.

[scory]

I keep thinking about Biden going on about not denying “constitutional rights” to anyone when asked about this subject. And Mrs. Hussein has stated quite openly that full “rights” for homosexuals is a top priority (she has spokent o homosexual “rights” groups on more than once occasion and said this). And Mr. Hussein, while professing support for the traditional definition of marriage, has expressed opposition to Prop. 8.

I agree that the most likely avenue for the left to have homosexual “marriage” become the law of the land is through the courts. But they just might try and enact some kind of federal “domestic partner” legislation as a step towards legalization of homosexual “marriage” at the federal level. I do not believe that the left is much concerned about the prerogatives of the individual states and besides, if it is a “human right” they can intrude the national government in any time they want. Who is going to stop them?

[Smogger]

Despite the manifest tampering, its remarkable in the face of an adverse climate in the most liberal state in the country, that it passed.

Testimony to a very well organized, and well run campaign, the LDS, Catholic Church, and many other churches and religious leaders.

There were no less than five or six Pro Prop 8 rallies where I live!

McCain and the Republican party could learn a lot by looking at the organazation put together to ban gay marriage in a liberal state like California.

[Gay State Conservative]

Do you really think the USSC would make gay marriage legal in the entire USA?

Depending on the makeup of the SCOTUS at the time the case is heard it could happen.Do you have any doubt that President Hussein would nominate clowns that would make the confirmed bachelor,Soutter,look like a damn centrist by comparison? Just imagine this.....in 2 years.....4 of the Justices of the SCOTUS got there via the 9th Circus Court of Appeals.

[dbz77]

I was concerned, too. A change in administrations is something that happens every four years - we’ll kick and argue and fight, but we’ll get through it - but a change in the basic structure of our society is something that is fundamental and, in this case, wrong. Congress recognized this back in the 19th century, when a bunch of people living in the Utah territory decided to have their own version of "marriage". They took extremely harsh measures such as jailing and fining practitioners, forbidding people who simply professed a BELIEF in their own version of "marriage" from voting, holding office, or serving on a jury. And the courts then upheld it.

[dbz77]

Pointless. It’ll just be reversed/overturned by the Ninth Circuit, legislating from the bench. Again. They would have to ignore precedents and opinions set forth in Reynolds vs. the United States and The Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints vs. the United States

[blue state conservative]

I have heard in the past that removing an amendment from the California Constitution requires a 2/3 vote, as opposed to a simple majority to add an amendment, like Prop 8. So when you say overturning this vote is only a matter of time it may be a long time, God willing.

Is there anyone out there who can weight in on this?

[longtermmemmory]

respectfully there is a path on this.

It is via full faith and credit.

The simple way is to forum shop a judge who is a devote of ABA style left wing legal thought. (ala obama)

Then you simple declare the 1996 DMA either non applicable or unconstitutional to the commerce clause (cross border marriage industry) or federally trumped due to some treaty approved by the senate. (ala sailor arbitration clauses)

Then while no marriages can be performed in “that” state, “that” state will have to accept homosexual marriages manufactured in other states.

Obama will likely be appointing TWO of the next USSC justices. IOW replace two liberals with two liberals.

however lets not forget the federal lower courts. the McCain no litmust test shall be trumped by the radical left litmus TESTS (plural)

[Smogger]

Dems are going to vastly change this country with their new found majorities.

They are going to try, but they will only succeed if we let them FRiend.

[ichabod1]

Faggot and Fascist from the same Latin term.

[ichabod1]

It’s not a proposition it’s a constitutional amendment. A judge can’t put a stay on an amendment to the document that gives it it’s jurisdiction. Take the fedgov. The SC can rule a law made by congress is unconstitutional, but it can’t deny an amendment to said constitution. Now, it can try to twist and interpret it out of existence, but that’s kind of hard to do with a newly minted amendment specifically designed to combat an evil.