Yes on Prop 8 in CA appears to be winning

Early poll results Tuesday night showed California voters leaning toward overturning same-sex marriage in the state in a decision that could impact how the issue plays out elsewhere in the nation.

Approval of Proposition 8 would be a stunning upset in a $70-million campaign that just weeks ago looked to be running in favor of preserving gay marriage rights.

By 12:34 a.m. in California, 53.1% of voters favored passing Prop 8, as the measure is known, and 46.9% were against it, with 60% of precincts voting, according to the Secretary of State. However, both sides cautioned the vote could be very close and that it might still be early to declare a winner.

Source: online.wsj.com...

If this Proposition passes, I hope it's a message to the rest of the state judges in America that you cannot just decide to override the will of the people and change the law as you see fit.

What really bothers me, and all of the people I know, both liberal and conservative, who voted against prop 8, was the fact that voting yes restricts the rights of some people, while voting no hurts *nobody*

I will be saddened if 8 passes.

I find it so sad that some losers are THAT insecure in their own sexuality, that something making no difference to them in their personal lives what-so-ever becomes such an issue.

Why deny others a freedom that makes them so happy? Does it stroke your own ego when able to strike down a complete strangers' hopes and dreams? Does it just feel powerful to deny rights to someone else when it affects you not one bit?

People need to work on their own problems and their own lives and stop judging others.

My opinion, and OP, this is NOT directed at you !!!!!! Just my rant on the issue.
I hope freedom for ALL prevails, not just 'most', or some, of the people.

reply to post by Inannamute


Awesome, you posted before I did, and worded it so much better in so few words, than I could in all of my post.

Originally posted by sos37
If this Proposition passes, I hope it's a message to the rest of the state judges in America that you cannot just decide to override the will of the people and change the law as you see fit.

In fact, I think the Judges might instead say:

"We didn't change the law as we saw fit. We decided based on how the US Constitution saw fit! All men created equal, with the equal rights to pursue liberty and happiness. We are here to protect the minority from the majority."


This just in: California tells the gays to sit in the back of the bus.

Intolerance - 1 Compassion - 0

History repeats...



[edit on 5-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Prop 8 doesn't say that anyone isn't created equal. All it's doing is defining a family value system based on traditional values. You and others may see those values as being out of date, but apparently in California, Florida and Arizona, the majority do not agree with you.

A cause to celebrate the nature of American Democracy and it's constitutional foundations. These states have spoken and the tyranny of the minority, which lesser democracies often submit to, is again tempered.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by sos37
If this Proposition passes, I hope it's a message to the rest of the state judges in America that you cannot just decide to override the will of the people and change the law as you see fit.

In fact, I think the Judges might instead say:

"We didn't change the law as we saw fit. We decided based on how the US Constitution saw fit! All men created equal, with the equal rights to pursue liberty and happiness. We are here to protect the minority from the majority."

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

But this country is based on majority rule. That's why we have elections. Judges grossly overstep their authority by "legislating from the bench".

Let's see how liberals like it, for example, when they pass the so-called "fairness doctrine" and some conservative judge (correctly) declares it unconstitutional as a violation of free speech.

It can and will work both ways, so be really careful what you wish for ...

Originally posted by Supercertari
A cause to celebrate the nature of American Democracy and it's constitutional foundations. These states have spoken and the tyranny of the minority, which lesser democracies often submit to, is again tempered.

Related to the previous post.

So, if judges legislate from the bench to put the views of a minority ahead of the majority, isn't THAT an example of "tyranny of the minority" that you seem to be against? Think it through ...

[edit on 11/5/2008 by centurion1211]

So the religous bigots win again. OK but we'll be back!

Funny all this talk about states rights and you have the Mormon Church of Utah as one of the primary sponsors of Prop 8. Didn't we create Utah out of intolerance and hate?

I posted this link on another thread. Check it out!

I was glad to see ATS got some "NO ON 8/HATE" advertising dollars!

There was a great article in The Daily Beast by Max Blumenthal. It is called The Man Behind Proposition 8.That man is Howard F. Ahmanson ...one strange cat!

The campaign for Prop 8 has reaped massive funding from conservative backers across the country. Much of it comes from prominent donors like the Utah-based Church of Latter Day Saints and the Catholic conservative group, Knights of Columbus. Prop 8 has also received a boost from Elsa Broekhuizen, the widow of Michigan-based Christian backer Edgard Prince and the mother of Erik Prince, founder of the controversial mercenary firm, Blackwater.

...While Ahmanson once resided in a mental institution in Kansas, he now occupies a position among the Christian right’s power pantheon as one of the movement’s most influential donors. During a 1985 interview with the Orange County Register, Ahmanson summarized his political agenda: “My goal is the total integration of biblical law into our lives.”

The campaign to teach “intelligent design” in public school classrooms, the Republican takeover of the California Assembly, and the rollback of affirmative action in California—Ahmanson has been behind them all. He has also taken a special interest in anti-gay crusades. Ahmanson’s most controversial episode related to his funding of the religious empire of Rousas John Rushdoony, a radical evangelical theologian who advocated placing the United States under the control of a Christian theocracy that would mandate the stoning to death of homosexuals.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Leo Strauss]

It's about control. Some people, aka control freaks, feel they have the right to force their beliefs on others.

Besides, as far as I can see, it's not as if heterosexuals on the whole have shown the institution of marriage all that much respect, given the current divorce rates, etc.

Control freaks should mind their own business... maybe not throw stones.

Originally posted by kattraxx
It's about control. Some people, aka control freaks, feel they have the right to force their beliefs on others.

You must be referring to the liberal judges in CA and other states that use their judicial power to force their beliefs on people that have repeatedly told them how they feel about this issue by passing the ballot initiatives over and over again. The majority is supposed to rule in this country.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by kattraxx
It's about control. Some people, aka control freaks, feel they have the right to force their beliefs on others.

You must be referring to the liberal judges in CA and other states that use their judicial power to force their beliefs on people that have repeatedly told them how they feel about this issue by passing the ballot initiatives over and over again. The majority is supposed to rule in this country.

Funny. That's EXACTLY what I was thinking. Like so many Obama supporters have been posting, I'll throw this back into the faces of those against Prop 8 - suck it up, whiners. The majority has spoken.

What does gay marriage have to do with being equal??? I have nothing against gays, I agree all men are created equal (human rights) but when they start applying their values as a norm I'm sorry but I don't agree. There is a difference, that's like saying that I should accept Islam's values, or other religions out there? When will we draw the line?