Comments on: LA Times Editorial: Oppose Proposition 8 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/08/08/2548 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:05:29 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Priya Lynn http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/08/08/2548/comment-page-1#comment-19073 Priya Lynn Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:52:37 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=2548#comment-19073 James prop 8 is about eliminating the right of same sex couples to marry. The Supreme court judges being highly trained experts most certainly are smarter than the majority of Californians. The law makers did not create a law, they struck down a law that denied same sex couples the right to equal marriage. You ask why gays should have a right to marry. Because people should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as it does not harm others and we should treat all equally before the law. If you have the right to marry the one you love most gays deserve the same right you have.' James said "No Democratic government would ever change a law against precedence and especially against the majority of the people.". Wrong. Its happened plenty of times. Of particular note in 1967 at the time the Supreme Court lifted the ban on interracial marriage, 71% of the electorate was against lifting the ban. Do you consider that an abuse? Do you think interracial marriage should have been put to a vote? James prop 8 is about eliminating the right of same sex couples to marry. The Supreme court judges being highly trained experts most certainly are smarter than the majority of Californians. The law makers did not create a law, they struck down a law that denied same sex couples the right to equal marriage.

You ask why gays should have a right to marry. Because people should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as it does not harm others and we should treat all equally before the law. If you have the right to marry the one you love most gays deserve the same right you have.’

James said “No Democratic government would ever change a law against precedence and especially against the majority of the people.”.

Wrong. Its happened plenty of times. Of particular note in 1967 at the time the Supreme Court lifted the ban on interracial marriage, 71% of the electorate was against lifting the ban. Do you consider that an abuse? Do you think interracial marriage should have been put to a vote?

]]> By: James Jackson http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/08/08/2548/comment-page-1#comment-19071 James Jackson Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:20:24 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=2548#comment-19071 Prop 8 is not about Gay Marriage, that battle was settled in 2000 with prop 22 when the Majority of Californians proved that they wanted marriage to be only between a man and a woman. Prop 8 is about 4 judges who believe they are smarter than the majority of Californians and above the law. What the California Supreme Court did was not lawful in two ways. First they told the Majority of Californians they are stupid and not smart enough to establish their own laws, changes the concept of "We the People in order.." to, "We the 4 judges in order.." Secondly they pushed a side precedence and established a law of gay marriage which did not exist before June of this year. The Judicial system is not the law makers yet they made a law. It was not a law before June Gay were never able to marry even before prop 22 why should they have a right to now. The proper way of allowing gays to marry is to put to the vote of the people and if the majority says yes then you change the law. No Democratic government would ever change a law against precedence and especially against the majority of the people. It is time we stop this abuse. Prop 8 is not about Gay Marriage, that battle was settled in 2000 with prop 22 when the Majority of Californians proved that they wanted marriage to be only between a man and a woman. Prop 8 is about 4 judges who believe they are smarter than the majority of Californians and above the law. What the California Supreme Court did was not lawful in two ways. First they told the Majority of Californians they are stupid and not smart enough to establish their own laws, changes the concept of “We the People in order..” to, “We the 4 judges in order..” Secondly they pushed a side precedence and established a law of gay marriage which did not exist before June of this year. The Judicial system is not the law makers yet they made a law. It was not a law before June Gay were never able to marry even before prop 22 why should they have a right to now. The proper way of allowing gays to marry is to put to the vote of the people and if the majority says yes then you change the law. No Democratic government would ever change a law against precedence and especially against the majority of the people. It is time we stop this abuse.

]]> By: Chino Blanco http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/08/08/2548/comment-page-1#comment-15452 Chino Blanco Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:57:14 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=2548#comment-15452 Considering that ProtectMarriage.com has decided NOT to appeal the ballot language, what chance do you really see for Prop 8 to pass? I just don’t see a majority of Californians voting YES on a proposition titled ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. Once the churches realize that Prop 8 is an almost guaranteed loser, are they going to do the right thing and let their members know? If not, what happens after Prop 8 loses 40-60 (or worse), and then the members find out that the churches were privy all along to internal polling that predicted a crushing defeat? Do the members get their money back? Or do they get stuck paying for ads that were run by a campaign that knew it was going to lose but ran them anyway! Considering that ProtectMarriage.com has decided NOT to appeal the ballot language, what chance do you really see for Prop 8 to pass? I just don’t see a majority of Californians voting YES on a proposition titled ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY.

Once the churches realize that Prop 8 is an almost guaranteed loser, are they going to do the right thing and let their members know?

If not, what happens after Prop 8 loses 40-60 (or worse), and then the members find out that the churches were privy all along to internal polling that predicted a crushing defeat? Do the members get their money back?

Or do they get stuck paying for ads that were run by a campaign that knew it was going to lose but ran them anyway!

]]> By: Garrett O'Neal http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/08/08/2548/comment-page-1#comment-15392 Garrett O'Neal Mon, 11 Aug 2008 14:19:15 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=2548#comment-15392 Right on! Right on!

]]>