Tweet
No doubt we have all heard the ruling by the California Supreme Court today that the defenders of Prop 8 have a right to defend the law in court.
Prop 8, for the uninitiated, is the ballot initiative which outlawed marriage equality in CA. It passed via a referendum in 2008 and was struck down in 2010.
And now those who are for it, after trying to make California government officials appeal this decision, are trying to defend Prop 8 themselves.
Today’s decision said that they can appeal the 2010 decision which overturned Prop 8.
And I am all for today’s decision. After all, we all remember why they lost last year.
Let me remind you.
They had no case. At the very best, their case was weak. Many of those pushing for the law demurred when it came to testifying as to why the law was needed. They only could get two witness. One, David Blankenhorn, under cross examination made the case against Prop 8. Also, during closing arguments, proponents of Prop 8 said that they didn’t need any evidence to prove their case.
So to me, all of the religious right folks rejoicing over today’s ruling is the equivalent of a football team celebrating their only touchdown in the closing seconds of a game in which the other team has already scored 20 touchdowns.
We all know how this is going to end. The final decision on Prop 8, and thus the final decision on marriage equality, is headed towards the Supreme Court.
I know it. You know it. And most of all, those defending Prop 8 knows it. The following comment was lodged by Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, an organization heavily involved in the passage of Prop 8:
“With this victory in hand, it is time for the Ninth Circuit to move the Prop 8 litigation forward to its eventual decision by the US Supreme Court,” Brown said. “We fully expect the Ninth Circuit, the most overturned court in America, to invalidate Prop 8, finding some phony right to same-sex marriage in the US constitution. However, once this case gets out of San Francisco and reaches the US Supreme Court, we fully expect to be victorious.”
Victorious you say, Brian? Not with the sorry defense your side has lodged thus far.
We are all anxious to see if you can do any better. And we doubt that you can.
6 Comments
I used to think that watching these clucks make fools of themselves was the best ongoing comedy since F Troop. But I have to confess I’m starting to feel a bit squeamish about it. Watching them wallow in their self-delusion is starting to take on a zoo-ish dimension for me. Pay your admission fee and leer at the dumb animals! It’s almost on an order with the way madhouses in England used to let the public come in to laugh at the “loonies.”
The problem isn’t that they embarrass themselves. They embarrass everyone else, and in a very unpleasant way. If they themselves had the ability to feel embarrassment, they’d just go away quietly and spare the rest of us the discomfort of watching them.
“to invalidate Prop 8, finding some phony right to same-sex marriage in the US constitution”
Maybe something like this?
” promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,”
The conservative types are fond of using the 14th Amendment to whine about “Obamacare”, why not use it for this too?
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. ”
Illinois required (may still require) high school students to pass a course about the Constitution in order to graduate. Apparently that wasn’t the case wherever this guy was from or he wouldn’t have graduated. He seems totally clueless about it even though he seems to have a decent education with degrees in history from good schools if this is to be believed.
http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/c.omL2KeN0LzH/b.7511259/k.71DB/Brian_Brown_President.htm
OK, under this repeal can they bring in new evidence and witnesses? Or are they locked in with the evidence and witnesses presented during the initial trial?
I admit, I would like to watch them squirm by being hamstrung by thier own evidence and both of thier witnesses who really seemed at time to be witnesses agianst Prop. 8. Some of thier testimony actually made me laugh at its amaturish nature.
I just found this and had to add it to the discussion. Brian, NOM, and their followers are the idiots this is addressed to, although I’m still thinking that this sort of logic is above the followers and we know why NOM does what they do.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/donnad/how-gay-rights-is-nothing-like-legalizing-beastali
The short answer, no. Any appeals are decided upon the record of the original case.
I’m sure that their primary argument on appeal will be that they don’t need any evidence and that everything prior to the appeal should be thrown out because otherwise people will say nasty things to them, a clear violation of their First Amendment rights, which only they have.