An Irish woman with big brass ones calls out Obama

[Dugout Dad]

The scary thing about the Prop 8 ruling is the possible ramifications on initiatives in general. If the government chooses to not defend an initiative, like CA did with Prop 8, it seems the opponents just need any court to overturn it and there's nothing anyone else can do about it. The government should defend anything that is passed. If they don't like the initiative, they should pass legislation to undo it.

Governor Brown and Attorney General Harris did not do their job in upholding the law and will of the people because they personally did not like proposition 8. The judge that blocked prop 8 is gay... So 3 people, the gov, the AG, and the gay judge overruled the law of the land and the SCOTUS said to the CA voters we can do nothing about it......welcome to the Banana Republic of California

Actually, it goes back to Gov. Schwarzenegger and AG Jerry Brown...

Backers of Proposition 8 -- ProtectMarriage.com -- appealed to the 9th Circuit, because then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and then-Attorney General Jerry Brown declined to do so. The appellate court heard arguments in 2011 but put a decision on hold while it awaited a state Supreme Court ruling on the ability of Prop. 8 backers to press the case forward despite the state's refusal to appeal.

Once the state Supreme Court decided that Prop. 8 supporters had legal standing, the 9th Circuit moved ahead with its consideration of the case, hearing more arguments on a motion by Prop. 8 backers asking that Walker's ruling be thrown out because the judge was in a long-term same-sex relationship that he had not disclosed.

Yeah, true, stand corrected - all the same though

[blackwidow]

Thank you OTB for the thoughtful response to my question.

WIth regards to DOMA..
Marriage is nothing but a contract. Why does anyone over the age of consent need permission from the government to enter into a private contract?

What about getting the "State" out of marriage altogether?
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... -john-fund

Asking permission from our nanny government to get married?? It's just another example of how unfree we really are.

PEACE

[ontheblack]

The scary thing about the Prop 8 ruling is the possible ramifications on initiatives in general. If the government chooses to not defend an initiative, like CA did with Prop 8, it seems the opponents just need any court to overturn it and there's nothing anyone else can do about it. The government should defend anything that is passed. If they don't like the initiative, they should pass legislation to undo it.

Governor Brown and Attorney General Harris did not do their job in upholding the law and will of the people because they personally did not like proposition 8. The judge that blocked prop 8 is gay... So 3 people, the gov, the AG, and the gay judge overruled the law of the land and the SCOTUS said to the CA voters we can do nothing about it......welcome to the Banana Republic of California

While the State didnt follow through on this, even Conservative legal experts said that the team defending prop 8 was ill-prepared and got routed by Boies, et al.

Btw, the judge was a Bush appointee.

It was not the place of the team defending prop 8 to argue this case, it should have been the state government of CA standing in front of SCOTUS representing the state.

Agreed. The problem with that is frequently the State and our Props are at odds with each other. Can you imagine the State of California defending this section of Prop 13 in court, when they are the ones violating it:

Section 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed one percent (1%) of the full cash value of such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.