The demand to vote, was precisely because of an unfair advantage. And also after advancing the stereotype of gay people as threatening.

As what had to be proven in court:
what benefit has there been to society in promoting this discrimination.

and what evidence is there that this particular minority is harmed.

The answer clearly has been none to the former, to justify the discrimination.

And plenty of the latter to end it.

Bragging over and over about the power of the majority ‘the people have spoken’, while also claiming that gay people have political power and the ability to sway the voters is more of that two headed snake Maggie Gallagher is capable of being.

What is actually going on, and why it’s so important, is the exponential damage this kind of law does to the Constitution and Bill of Rights and the mission statement of both.

Neither of these documents is for the purpose of discrimination. And most definitely not against any citizen’s group exclusively.

And since marriage, children or whatever family ideal NOM thinks is out there, ISN’T protected by this amendment, it’s worthless to that purpose altogether.

So therefore, shouldn’t and needn’t be in place.

Most importantly though, another contradiction is the indictments on judges that the anti gay put forth.
That any rulings in favor of gay people are by ‘activist’ judges or ‘legislation from the bench’…
when actually it is THEY who want the judges and legislation to de facto enforce laws that do not exist to begin with.

Such as a morals test to qualify to marry. A fitness or fertility and fecundity and biological relationship test to qualify to parent or marry.

A religious enforcement standard against a group in a country that has no religious enforcement whatsoever.

And non protection of a minority from the tyranny of a majority, even though that tyranny is well documented to what extent it damages a particular minority.

In every way, the anti gay want each and every law and protection guaranteed a citizen, to be denied gay people and without any cause, or reason that garners improvement for the efforts.

And they want historical context and societal improvements garnered by NON DISCRIMINATION against previously discriminated people, to be ignored and forgotten because they don’t think the category fits.

Strict scrutiny has been very necessary here and the anti gay’s logic doesn’t pass such scrutiny.
When it’s all said and done, how certain religious people in particular ARE scrutinized regarding this law, are proven to be extraordinarily, cruel, SELFISH, ignorant and liars.

The proof of which is extolling a predictable outcome as fair to whose lives are most affected by it.

Gays and lesbians are only the latest group to be flagrantly denied the freedom, justice and equitable treatment under the law that is supposed to be every American’s birthright, following a long line of other groups that has included blacks (slavery and segregation), Native Americans (ethnic cleansing and denial of citizenship), women (denial of suffrage and protection from rape and assault), Chinese (exclusion from immigration) and Japanese (internment).

I want equality as much as anyone, but let’s not pretend that oppression with the consent of the majority is anything new in this country.

When did voting on other people’s civil rights suddenly become a right unto itself?

Mags, I vote we take away your right to vote or speak. I bet I can find 7 million people who’d agree, would that make it fair enough for ya?

The United States hasn’t been the beacon of freedom and guarenteed rights for several decades, if ever.

Even if the majority of citizens voted for Prop 8, it still doesn’t excuse the political ‘leadership’ to be, uh, leaders and ensure equality for all citizens.

I just don’t understand your US referendums… even in a ‘democracy’, they are not structured to be democratic in the true sense of the word. The majorities voice rules? Yikes!!!!!

What she’s saying is that the opinion of 7,001,084 people is more important than the opinion of 6,401,482 people–but only because the slightly larger majority holds what she considers to be the right opinion.

So I think we’d agree that it’s fair to ask who made Maggie such an absolute authority that she gets to decide who matters more when it comes to granting or denying rights.

Sadly, it is quite common for the anti-gays to pervert the English language though.
Ex:

Pro-family = anti-family for gays
Pro-marriage = anti-marriage for gays
Religious freedom = against freedom of religion for tolerant churches
Love = hate

It’s like in football. You can talk forever about rushing yards, passing yards, sacks, turnovers, penalties, yada yada yada, but the only statistic that matters is the one that’s on the scoreboard at the end of the game.

Don’t worry, I loathe Maggie and NOM as much as anyone, and I find it obscene that in this country that is supposed to be the beacon of freedom and guaranteed rights that we even entertain the idea of putting people’s rights up for a vote.

But your argument is useless.