If the issue of religion is as relevant here in Puerto Rico(US territory) as it is in California then, convincing other people in california of same sex marriage will undoubtedly mean that you need to address religion. Targetting large concentrations of republicans also has to be on the list. It was more than clear through the pollings that THEY(the republicans, in unison with afro-americans) are the ones responsible for the passing of the amendments.

We need to think of some ways to target the literal interpretation, through faith, that demeans/forbids the rights of gays and lesbians.

Albeit this is not the only reason, as there is bigotry, tradition and simple repulsion, to homosexuals, once religion embraces gays and lesbians… it can be a very valuable asset to progress gay rights. Although, i don’t see this happening anytime soon…

Ostiarius blathered: If Ron George and the other members of the court who imposed gay marriage on CA entertain the idea of putting themselves above what is clearly now part of the CA constitution, then they will be recalled as surely as Rose Bird was recalled in the 80’s.

Fine. Bring it on…. ’cause we’re never going away.

Like all religious bigots, you take that passage out of context.”

No amount of surrounding text changes the fact that Jesus leaves no room for gay marriages.

If Ron George and the other members of the court who imposed gay marriage on CA entertain the idea of putting themselves above what is clearly now part of the CA constitution, then they will be recalled as surely as Rose Bird was recalled in the 80′s.

Like all religious bigots, you take that passage out of context. The context of Jesus’s saying comes from the Pharisee’s asking a specific question. They asked “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.” But Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote this commandment for you.

Then Jesus goes on to teach that a bond made before God must be taken seriously and for life…something which a vast number of Evangelicals ignore.

But Jesus doesn’t preclude the bond made by same-sex couples in this passage (found in all 3 synoptic Gospels). He simply answers the question that was posed to him.

By the way, William, Jesus was on the side of the persecuted. Do you really think you are living by his example when you come here to gloat over the inequality of others. People like you and Frank Shubert have to repeat over and over that this “isn’t about hate”, but that’s simply you attempting to forgive yourselves. It is not up to you to forgive yourselves, it is up to us and God to forgive you. And you can’t coerce that forgiveness no matter how you hard you claim you are only persecuting the lesbian and gay community out of “love”.

What’s more, you put your interpretation of the Scripture above the rights of other Americans. That is simply treason to the American ideal of Equality and Justice.

I assure you I am not crazy.

You can only properly use the courts when there is a statutory or constitutional principle at issue. The question of same-sex marriage is one of what marriage properly means and is. This is an ethical decision that belongs to the legislature or the people.

For people who oppose same-sex marriage the marital relationship is both the proper social norm for responsible procreation and a symbol of the mutually arising nature of male and female. (The latter is classic mythic thinking; when people go on about their religion’s view of marriage they are engaged in mythic thinking, albeit stereotyped by the forms of their own cult.)

Proponents of same-sex marriage view marriage differently, of course.

Such conflicts are, in a democratic nation, properly by convincing your fellow citizens.

The 14th amendment cases you mention do not bear on this issue; the 14th amendment is about not making arbitrary distinctions between individuals. It says nothing about making distinctions concerning actions.

“The people who have been complaining about “judicial activists” simply don’t like particular decisions and either don’t understand or don’t care to understand the way our system of government works.”

This is simply wrong.

B. Daniel Blatt (aka Gay Patriot West) who blogs at http://www.gaypatriot.net asked a commenter with a similar view if he thought that the Dred Scott decision never happened.

I can similarly ask if you hadn’t noticed the arguments over Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, the Miranda decision …. I could go on all day.

Concern about courts overreaching their authority is not new and not confined to the concerns of the Christian Right.

Stop assuming — without evidence — that there are no intelligent, informed, and sincere believers in judicial restraint.

And I was totally serious about starting a campaign to have San Francisco become the 51st state, and maybe have Marin County join in, too.

If not that, then maybe try working to mandate comprehensive sex-ed in all schools and overturn the opt-out clause. Might as well make the Prop. 8 people’s nightmares come true, despite their best efforts.

just read scripture about marriage that should be fairly educational

Oh, sure, that’ll work! Let me know how that goes … forty years from now. What? No equal marriage yet? Oh, just do some more outreach. Yes, that’ll work wonders!

It’s a never-ending culture war. Even if you think you’ve won, you’ll always be in danger of having everything taken away again. Conduct yourselves accordingly. Litigate! Litigate! Litigate!

And we’re the “bad” people of California?