RSSProp 8: R.I.P.?
Gene Lalor | February 5, 2010
Notwithstanding an impassioned defense of the defenders of California’s Proposition 8 by the Family Research Institute, the plaintiffs are set to eventually win Perry vs Scharzenegger if not in federal district court in San Francisco then in the Supreme Court of the United States.
To get readers up to snuff on the trial in question, please see “The Gay Battle against the Will of the People,” Parts One and Two.
At issue is whether Prop 8, a part of California’s constitution since it was passed by voters on November 4th, 2008, is constitutional. More fundamental is the question of whether citizens of any state in the union are entitled to amend the document that defines the “nature, functions and limits” of a governing body.
In California they are so legally entitled and a majority of Californians decided that what constitutes a marriage in that state can be reduced to 14 words, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Surprised that the measure had passed in one of the most liberal states in the nation, the gay lobby first demonstrated in protest then mobilized its formidable forces to attempt to get a court to override the will of the people, alleging that the people had unfairly infringed on homosexual rights.
David Boie, co-principal counsel for the homosexual plaintiffs with Ted Olson, has linked that infringement to the Catholic Church specifically and generally to Christianity which made this just-concluded trial one in which basic precepts of Christianity are called into question: http://bit.ly/9eT4F7
As Ed Meese, former attorney general under Ronald Reagan, wrote in the New York Times, the deck was stacked from the outset in favor of the gays against the defenders of traditional, dare I say normal, marriage. The effect was to put the sponsors and defenders of Proposition 8 on trial: http://nyti.ms/4wAKVC
The stacking actually began with the venue when the suit was filed in San Francisco which had voted 3 to 1 to oppose Prop 8.
When neither Governor Scharzenegger nor AG Jerry Brown chose to defend the state it was made vividly clear how the top state honchos felt about who should determine California’s law, the meek majority or a vociferous minority.
Astute politicians know who butters their bread and who sways elections. The meek may inherit the Earth but the assertive get out the vote.
Judge Vaughn R. Walker heard the case without a jury but tipped his hand any number of times as to how he would find, most notably when he decreed the proceedings could be shown on YouTube, thereby subjecting anti-same sex marriage witnesses to organized homosexual agitation.
Not to impugn Judge Walker’s integrity, but few heterosexuals would have paid any attention to the YouTube videos.
Now begins the decision process where Judge Walker weighs the evidence, mulls over the implications for the State of California, for the United States–and for Judge Walker’s future–and takes weeks to perform all that weighing and mulling before he finally renders his ruling–in favor of the assertive.
His ruling will begin yet another process, appeals to SCOTUS, which will make the ultimate determination on who determines law, the majority of the people or that assertive minority.
Contributor's website: http://www.genelalor.com/
Content posted by users from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use and each author is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or its owner.
Leave a Reply
Loading ...Recommended Reading:
