Comments on: Foolish Anti-Marriage Activists http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:59:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Bill Ware http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136/comment-page-1#comment-11688 Bill Ware Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:49:19 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136#comment-11688 Wow, Timothy, you're right. Shame on my cynical heart. Seems like the California Court is not as tolerant of unmitigated nonsense as I thought. Pam posts a copy of the actual <a href="http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5660" rel="nofollow"> Court document</a>. I had to see it to believe it. Bill Wow, Timothy, you’re right. Shame on my cynical heart. Seems like the California Court is not as tolerant of unmitigated nonsense as I thought. Pam posts a copy of the actual Court document. I had to see it to believe it.

Bill

]]> By: Timothy Kincaid http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136/comment-page-1#comment-11595 Timothy Kincaid Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:17:26 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136#comment-11595 Bill, We'll know in a few weeks, but I doubt a stay will be granted. The official defendant in the case, the State of California, is opposed to the stay. Bill,

We’ll know in a few weeks, but I doubt a stay will be granted. The official defendant in the case, the State of California, is opposed to the stay.

]]> By: Duncan http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136/comment-page-1#comment-11590 Duncan Mon, 02 Jun 2008 10:06:55 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136#comment-11590 If any state in the Union will vote against such an amendment, it is surely California. Last week's Economist had a good article detailing how gays in the state do not live in gettos like San Francisco, they live among, and like, ordinary people. And remember that "getting the voters fired up" works both ways. If any state in the Union will vote against such an amendment, it is surely California. Last week’s Economist had a good article detailing how gays in the state do not live in gettos like San Francisco, they live among, and like, ordinary people. And remember that “getting the voters fired up” works both ways.

]]> By: Ephilei http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136/comment-page-1#comment-11587 Ephilei Mon, 02 Jun 2008 03:26:36 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136#comment-11587 What legal problems would ensue? The worst would be that a couple has a license that says "marriage" but paperwork later they'd fill out "civil union." After reading about marriage amendments in other states, I'm more worried about the CA amendment. Marriage amendments significantly get out the vote, so even if only 42% of CA doesn't want same-sex marriage, the number follow the same trends in other states and likely rise 5-10% at the actual vote. What legal problems would ensue? The worst would be that a couple has a license that says “marriage” but paperwork later they’d fill out “civil union.”

After reading about marriage amendments in other states, I’m more worried about the CA amendment. Marriage amendments significantly get out the vote, so even if only 42% of CA doesn’t want same-sex marriage, the number follow the same trends in other states and likely rise 5-10% at the actual vote.

]]> By: Bill Ware http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136/comment-page-1#comment-11585 Bill Ware Mon, 02 Jun 2008 01:07:12 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136#comment-11585 I imagine a temporary stay through say June 23, 2008 is a possibility. If the initiative fails to make the ballot, then the petitioners have no justification for a further stay and gay weddings would begin after a mere one week delay. If the petition makes the ballot, my gut feeling is that the stay will be extended through the November election. Courts, I note, want to appear as reasonable and accommodating as the situation will allow. Rather than appear to be forcing their decision prematurely, they will provide the petitioners every benefit of the doubt. Bill I imagine a temporary stay through say June 23, 2008 is a possibility.

If the initiative fails to make the ballot, then the petitioners have no justification for a further stay and gay weddings would begin after a mere one week delay.

If the petition makes the ballot, my gut feeling is that the stay will be extended through the November election. Courts, I note, want to appear as reasonable and accommodating as the situation will allow. Rather than appear to be forcing their decision prematurely, they will provide the petitioners every benefit of the doubt.

Bill

]]> By: Robguy http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136/comment-page-1#comment-11581 Robguy Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:03:51 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/06/01/2136#comment-11581 "Now it may be that ADF is comprised of particularly weak legal minds." I think you hit the nail on the head. These people thrive on fear and loathing, not logic or ethics. “Now it may be that ADF is comprised of particularly weak legal minds.”

I think you hit the nail on the head. These people thrive on fear and loathing, not logic or ethics.

]]>