Emotional Board of Supervisors backs Prop. 8 challenge*

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted this afternoon to join a lawsuit filed by the City of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Santa Clara County challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the anti-gay marriage initiative voters passed by a narrow margin this month.

The vote was carried by the board’s three Democrats: Supervisors Gloria Molina and Zev Yaroslavsky, who proposed the board join the lawsuit, and Supervisor Yvonne B. Burke, who voted in support.

Of the two Republicans, Supervisor Michael Antonovich was out of town, and Supervisor Don Knabe left the meeting just as speakers began.

More than a dozen speakers appeared in support of the board’s vote and opposition to Proposition 8, including Los Angeles City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo, San Francisco City Atty. Dennis Herrera and several gay couples. Both Molina and Yaroslavsky, who have officiated at same-sex wedding ceremonies since California legalized them in June, said they acted out of a sense of duty and personal responsibility.

Yaroslavsky pointed out a couple he married who were among those speaking in support of the vote.

“Some of us may ask why the county supervisors would be involved and get so involved in this issue,” Molina said, citing the board's responsibility to supply marriage license, uphold the law and “balance the enforcement of Proposition 8 with recognizing the constitutional right of all our citizens.” Molina added, “On a personal note, I am here to say that the passage of Prop. 8 saddened and angered me on various levels.”

Yarolslavsky noted that was “a close call” given how divided the state and county have been on the question of gay marriage. He said that he was not always a supporter of gay marriage (he supported civil unions instead) but said he “was persuaded” by colleagues and his children.

“It’s very important for the County of Los Angeles to be at the table on this,” he said. “It doesn’t hurt anybody. It doesn’t adversely affect anybody else.”

*Update: Antonovich had earlier said he would not support the legal challenge. His statement: "The appropriate time to have raised legal objections was prior to the election –- not after the people have once again voted on the issue. This move will disenfranchise voters who turned out in record numbers to participate in the process and have their voices heard.”

-- Molly Hennessy-Fiske

Photo: Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Richard Cortijo]

Thank You County Of Los Angeles!!!!!!

[noneck]

I believe in rights for all people. But the institution of marriage is religious based, and marriage is between a man in a woman. Give the gays civil unions with all the rights of marriage. The voters spoke, now you want to over turn the will of the people because they didn't vote the way you wanted them to. I hope the vote all you guys out of office!

[Kelly H]

I am absolutely disgusted at the thought of supervisers and legislators trying to overturn the vote of the people. The people voted and now the anti prop 8 people are trying to look for anyway to overturn the decision. I am also disgusted at the thought that are taxpaying money is going to these legislators and supervisors to spend time on this issue. They shouldn't even be involved and if I have the opportunity I will vote against each and every legislator who is even remotely connected to trying to overturn the will of the people. Let me say this again " people voted and the decision has been made".

[slashcom1]

I'm thrilled that the elected leaders of our state's most populated county have stepped up to the plate against this horrific affront to our state constitution.

I hope they also denounce Yes on 8's deceptive campaign tactics and outright lies they made to knowingly trick voters into eliminating the rights of others.

NO on 8!

[greg216]

Typical radical democrats.

The people have spoken via the election last week. Prop 8 was defeated. So fire a lawsuit to have the courts legislate from the bench against the will of the people.

Classic in every sense.

[Jack]

Good way to say screw you electorate...thanks for nothing County Supervisors.

Where was all this reaction to support Utah polygamists?

[Eric]

I am sure that there will be many, many hateful comments posted here, so I just want to say to all the bigots out there that liberty will always trump fear; and that the day will come when you will have to account to your God why you discriminated against His children in His name.

[Rod E]

I am happy to see our elected officials standing up against hate and a Prop. that puts everyone's constitutional rights at risk of being altered by a referendum. I hope the CA Supreme Court uses its power and finds Prop. 8 unconstitutional. We need these checks and balances. As a Californian I truly am afraid of which other rights may be voted on.

[Ed C.]

Don Knabe represents the district where I live. Good riddance that he did not want to dabble into an extremely divisive issue as gay marriage.

[Brad O.]

What the hell is wrong with our leaders that they do not respect the will of the people. This support for overturning the will of the voters is extremely offensive to me. What an absolute embarassment to the democratic process.

[Blake]

To say that Prop 8 doesn't hurt anyone is a matter of opinion. Those who voted for the proposition did so, not out of hate, but out of a feeling of moral obligation to the culture that their children will grow up in. Those who voted in support of Prop 8 feel that they don't want an environment of what they feel is immorality for their children to grow up in. It all comes down to whether one feels there is a right and a wrong here versus a matter of preference. Proponents feel it is a vote of right and wrong. What irks me the most is that people can openly tag the Mormon temple with hateful graffiti and banners in an illegal protest while news organizations and city officials stand by in support. If the proposition were to have gone the other way and someone did the same to a pro-gay institution, they would undoubtedly be prosecuted immediately. There should be no double standard here.

[Kimbo]

The passage of Prop. 8 saddened and angered me also because it is discrimination. I am not gay, I just want to have justice for all.

[Sara Luther]

California Musical Theater official Scott Eckern is on the verge of losing this job because he donated money to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign. Homosexual activists are demanding his termination for making a financial contribution to a cause he morally supports. What is truly outrageous is that this man could lose his job for expressing his religious and moral beliefs.

This is a hate crime against all of us who voiced our opinion in favor of prop 8

[Dictator Judges]

What people need to be angered about is four dictator judges who over-ruled what people had voted on Prop 22 eight years ago. That's what created Prop 8, it tells me that there's no democracy whatsoever in this country. The people in California had spoke twice, helloooo... twice! You know what this is like? It's like watching Yankees won the World Series in year of 2000, and take their championship title away eight years later.

[Jeff]

Given how divided the voters in Los Angeles County were on this issue, it
would have been easy for the Supervisors to take a pass.

They are to be commended for their courage in standing up for the Constitution
and for equal rights for gays and lesbians.

Prop 8 will be overturned in time, either by the Courts or by the voters.

[Thoughtful]

This was really, really not a good idea....

[Ester]

Gay marriage is wrong and oppose God's will. The true christian has never agree or support gay marriage. Who said that it will not hurt anybody? It wil hurt innocent kids with wrong teaching. It is totally wrong, false, and dangerous.

[Kevin]

Good for them! They are standing up for what they believe is an issue of EQUALITY.

[Bruce Mayhall]

Thank you, Supervisors! Taking away fundamental rights is a very shameful thing -- no matter what "reasons" are given.

[Robert]

Bravo!

[Kristen Gilmartin]

YAHHH!!!!! Thanks Board of Supervisors for standing up and doing the right thing. Thanks Burke, Molina and Yaroslavsky!!!!!!!!!

[Jake In LA]

I commend the City of Los Angeles, and others, for standing up for the voice of the minorities in their cities, to hopefully put an end this discriminatory proposition. Equality should be for all, as per the Constitution.

[Yeson8]

Why is the LA County Board of Supervisors getting involved? They are elected to carry out the wishes of We The People. Not to spend the People's taxes opposing the People's wishes.

If they wish to support No on 8 as private individuals that's fine.

Other wise it's time for them to consider resigning.

[Robert Kalonian]

Zev, Gloria, Yvonne: THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!

[Jon T]

Hurray. Another government body that wants to ignore the will of the people. The campaign was run, the vote was take, prop 8 passed. The total lack to regard for the majority vote is outrageous. The county, the govenor and every elected official should butt out. Let the private suits continue. Let the judges have their say. But to join in the fray officially is asinine.

[CS FORESTER]

And you are spending 52 percent of your constituents money how? Time to throw all the bums out. Remember this next election.

[adoptivefather]

It is just amazing how politicians cannot accept the recent vote.

One man one woman.

[JP]

You say, ". . . Proposition 8, the anti-gay marriage initiative voters passed by a narrow margin this month."

Proposition 8 passed in California with nearly the same margin of victory that Obama received in the national popular vote. Is Obama being described in your paper as "the candidate voters elected President by a narrow margin this month"? Let's keep it honest, LAT.

[Paul]

I'm glad the Board decided to do the right thing.

[john]

No surprise here...it's always the democrats who support the Godless agenda.

[A. Lopez]

I don't understand why gays are still fighting this issue, we the people have spoken and on election day we voted and we chose YES on 8, what part of
"YES ON 8" don't they understand? Whats next? Child molesters and rapist will also demand we respect and allow their sick sexual orientation .
All these people are sick.

[Shannon]

How wonderful to hear - some true California leadership on this important issue of civil rights! Remember to join the nationwide Prop 8 protests at a City Hall near you THIS SATURDAY at 1:30 p.m. - head to www.jointheimpact.com to see where there'll be a location near you! Let's fight for equality together! <3

[L.A. Resident]

The state constitution is unconstitutional? How can a lawfully approved constitutional amendment be unconstitutional?

The real danger here is that people will no longer abide by the constitution! The people have spoken clearly on this issue TWICE. Just because someone's feelings are hurt does not mean that you can violate the constitution.

We will end up in anarchy if this bone headed protests succeed. What's next? Overturning free speech?

We are headed to a new uncivilized and lawless dark ages.

[frank]

I feel like religion is being shoved down my throat. What is up with the Obsession? I challenge all heteros to chose gay for a week. The thought of partnering with the opposite sex is as repulsive to me as two boys kissing is to you. Repulsive not the best choice of word but affective

[Pam]

Either all of us are free Americans with all the same rights or we are not free at all. I applaud all the groups who have agreed that these rights should not be taken away. When I think of my gay friends, neighbors and co-workers who are the backbone of volunteer groups, human rights issues, animal rights issues, childrens' issues, it makes me very sad that anyone could dare think that their rights are superior to the gay people I know. I was so happy about our new president being elected, and that happiness was short-lived when I realized that the wonderful people I know are not accorded the same rights as everyone else. It broke my heart. Prop. 8 cannot stand.

[carmen]

I am outraged by those people protesting the passing of Prop. 8. This is an insult to the majority who had voted for it's passage. This only shows the true character of these people. It is already done. The people had spoken and they should respect that just as Obama was chosen as President. The people had chosen to keep morality thrive and I as a Christian wouldn't allow this society to rot more and infest the next generation. What would they want to pass too ? Bigamy,Polygamy, Incest ?

[Paul]

As I voted my convictions when I voted FOR Prop 8 I will do so again against every supervisor who is involved with this action. The prople of California have spoken loud and clear....TWICE!!!!!! When will homosexuals and those who support the lifestyle get it and accept the fact that the lifestyle they lead is is not the same as hetrosexuals and therefore should not be defined as marriage. This was never about "rights". It was and always will be about legitamacy. Putting a "marriage" stamp on a homosexual relationship validates it to society as a whole and a vast majority of Americans do not want to do that. Any by the opponents attempting to circumvent the will of the people AGAIN, they are not helping their cause.

[Michichael]

“It doesn’t hurt anybody. It doesn’t adversely effect anybody else.”

Agreed. Though shouldn't it be "adversely affect" anyone else? Effect is a result, affect is a stimuli - I think affect would be more appropriate in this case. Regardless, well written article.

[unclevito]

I love this. Now that Prop 8 has passed and there is nothing more to be done about that fact, politicians are coming out of the woodwork denouncing the passage.

What a safe position!. Denounce in public and yet realize that the decision has been made. I will bet many of these politicians actually voted yes. Now they can look 'good' to their constituents.

I am taking names and anyone deouncing the passage of Prop 8, will not get my vote or the votes of the groups I represent in any future election.

Vito

[A Times Non-Subscriber]

And here I thought the Supervisors had a sense of duty to the voters of Los Angeles County. Prop. 8 did pass in LA County...or haven't you heard.

>>>Both Molina and Yaroslavsky, who have officiated at same-sex wedding ceremonies since California legalized them in June, said they acted out of a sense of duty and personal responsibility.

The best politicians money can buy!

[Jason K]

So the will of the people doesn't matter? There was a vote, by a majority a prop was passed, now the court is supposed to have the final word. What am I missing here? I thought I lived in a democracy...THE DEMOCRACY of the world. Oh yeah, I forgot, it's called tyranny of the minority.

[Harvey Rosenberg]

If it was left to the American voter we would not have inter-racial marriage or inter-religious marriage. If it had been left to the voter before 1920, women would not have the vote. In the 19th C., Catholics were one of the last religions to be allowed to vote in England, if it had been left to those allowed to vote then, they may still not have the privilege. The same is true of the current opposition to Gay marriage. It brings out the worst in people whose prejudices are reinforced by bigoted religious leaders. I find it amazing, ironic and depressing that Blacks, who lived for centuries being humiliated and disenfranchised, have voted overwhelmingly against Gay marriage in California. As for Arkansas voting not to allow adoption by unmarried couples, both Straight and Gay, believing it better for a child to be housed in a loveless institution rather than a loving home demonstrates how little the Religious Right and Fundamental Ministers actually care about the welfare of children.

[Jeff]

The Board of Supervisors is to be commended for taking this courageous action, especially given the amount of anger that surrounds the issue of restoring gay marriage in California.

[Randy]

How much will the board of supervisors spend on this? With county services such as libraries, recreation, and family services sure to be affected by the state budget shortfall, what is the rationale? Does the county have money to spend on lawyers but not services to the citizens who will be suffering from the cuts? This is strictly for the benefit of the supervisors image. They are spending this money so they can cite their largesse in their reelection campaigns.

[G]

That's strange, what are they opposing?
This was something that was voted on by a majority of Californians
It was a fair vote, and a fair accounting of the election tally
Why is it that when the people vote to enact something that no one wants to adhere to the will of the people who voted?

We all saw the adds saying people should all be treated fairly, and I think the people that voted to enact this legislation should be treated fairly also. I don't have a problem with people who love each other getting benefits of hospital visits inheritance etc, but I do have a problem changing the definition of marriage. I don't care what you call it, (civil union, life partner, etc) but you can't call it marriage.

[Darrel Woodward]

I'm very glad tohear that the L.A.County board of Supervisors Is standing up for what is the right thing to do.

[jimsr]

Read the usatoday artcle on how Elton John feels about gay
"marriage". (posted today)

[FdS]

Hey, Superdummies -- L.A. County voted FOR Prop. 8. Why don't you try to honor the will of your constituents, rather than undermine it. It is outrageous that politicians would use the public's money to try to suppress a vote of the public.

Folks, whatever you think of gay marriage, this is an outrageous abuse of political power!

[Lane]

Yarolslavsky is wrong when he stated that, "it doesn’t adversely effect anybody else", because gay marriage will negatively affect everyone in American society. For most people, marriage signifies a physical, emotional, and (to some) spiritual relationship extending well beyond legal responsibilities. Marriage is the building block of families, biologically-compatible institutions naturally designed to effectively allow our children to grow and learn. Just because some married couples do not have children does not eliminate the primary, family-building purpose of marriage. Granted, some homosexual couples are great parents and are doing a good job of raising their children. The benefits of marriage will help them do a better job. However, we have to balance the benefits of homosexual couples and children with the negative effects gay marriage will have on marriage. Once marriage no longer signifies a deep commitment to family building, marriages lose some of their meaning. Less meaning will lead to less marriage and weaker marriages. On balance, I feel the detrimental effects of re-engineering the institution of marriage to allow same-sex marriages outweighs the benefits that homosexual couples with children will gain in marriage. Yarolslavsky is wrong because when marriage is weaker society is weaker, and we are all harmed by weak society.

[Santa Monica Joe]

I voted against prop 8 and think it is completely absurd and blantantly unfair. However, from a legal point of view, it seems pretty solid. Prop 22 attempted to ban gay marriage. Prop 22 passed, but was later said to violate the CA constitution. So what did the homophobes and religous nuts do? They decided to create another proposition which bans gay marriage by amending the constitution itself. This amendment passed. As much as it pains me to say, I think from a legal stanpoint it's valid. If we shoot down the amendment that prop 8 created (or creates?) then we are essentially saying that the voters have no right to amend the constitution by vote. Some are arguing prop 8 is unconstitutional, but how can it be if the proposition changed the constitution itself? The only way to change it back is to re-amend the constitution.

[Noemi]

What California needs to do is to ackknowledge gay couples by creating at system that would allow same-sex couples have "domestic partnership" and at the same time continue to preserve and legally recognized union of one man and one woman. I have nothing against gay people. I work with them, I have friends that are gay, and family members as well. Marraige between men? I do not think I am or will ever be ready to see marriage between same sex. I would not like to expose my children to a society that is accepable of something that we were once protected for "marriage between one man and one worman". No one is getting hurt now, but eventually everything has a consequence. When children see such behaviours they think it's o.k., and it is not when you have made a choice. I would vote yes on prop 8 once again. Gay couples are already recognized as gay couples. Why do they want to see this as unequal when in reality they are stepping into what has been sacred for hundreds of years.

[denise]

i voted NO on prop 8 because i believe that this is a HUMAN RIGHTS issue not a RELIGIOUS issue. no one should have the right to tell another person who they should marry and who they should not and a civil union is not the same as marriage. marriage is marriage and if someone wants to marry they should be able to and it is none of my business who anyone marries!!!!! SO I SAY TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALL IN EVERYONES BUSINESS IS GET YOUR OWN LIFE AND STAY OUT OF OTHER PEOPLES.

[PDuff]

Ok, Mike Antonovich, so you'd prefer to waggle your finger and lecture people about timing and worry more about potential disenfranchisement of a close vote versus stripping people of their rights?

Seriously, even you can't believe that crap. Does the fact that many Germans didn't step up against the holocaust (which I could argue was a form of voting) mean that killing Jews was fine, too? Just using your pretzel-like logic!

Extremely. Cowardly. Nakedly. Political.

You should be ashamed.

[Juan Buatista]

Three cheers for Molina, Yaroslavsky, and Burke!

[stewart]

It is said democracy is not the best form of government, butt it's the best form of government we have, and prop 8 has turned out to be that.
This is going to be interesting.

[saul c zelada]

these politicians do not seen to understand the meaning of democrasy . this in when your own personal views are put ahead of the will of millions of voters.
t

[WeThePeople]

Why would the county board of supervisors do this when the majority of people in LA County voted for the measure? Who are they representing?

[saul c zelada]

this happens when you elect liberal democrats to public office . they take forgranted the word DEMOCRASY and will take their own personal views to hange the definition of the foundation of sociaty.

[Flex]

That is wonderful news. Thank you for supporting our personal rights!

[nikki]

Get over it! You lost. The majority of the people voted YES & there is NO challenging that. Suck it up and realize that you are WRONG!!!!

[Peter Ahlstrom]

"The appropriate time to have raised legal objections was prior to the election—not after the people have once again voted on the issue. This move will disenfranchise voters who turned out in record numbers to participate in the process and have their voices heard.”

Exactly. The "revision" legal objection was already raised in July and the court declined to hear it then. If it was a valid objection, they should have ruled on it then, not now after the election. That the board of supervisors of LA is so against enfranchisement of the county's own citizens is shocking.

This is not about discrimination. It's about the definition of marriage already constitutionally affirmed by 29 other states in our great country. Each individual already has exactly the same marriage rights as every other individual. If they choose not to exercise those marriage rights and instead seek a relationship with someone to whom they cannot get married according to the constitutional definition, that is their business, and Californians have voted that it should remain their business and not be recognized by the state as marriage.

[Fred]

Interesting that our politicians could'nt take this stance in preventing this measure ever being allowed to be placed on the ballot in the first place since their views about this issue haven't changed pre to post voting (being that they understood it to be a discriminative issue from the onset). I wonder how many millions of dollars of the taxpayers money were wasted over this nonsense. Gay marriage is going to happen so the straights aught to just get over themselves and stop being so bigoted (yes bigoted - that is being obstinantly and intolerantly devoted to ones own thoughts and ideals). The issue of gay marriage isn't particularly about marriage but rather a whole host of other issues that domestic partnership does not cover. For example how about taking away the straights rights to child credits on their annual federal income tax returns. That is exactly what they are doing to a gay couple who happens to be raising a natural/adopted child. Straights are not only taking their views out on gay men/weomen but against children as well - just to name one issue. Personally, I feel this issue is going to have to be addressed by congress in order for it to be resolved as a national issue and not going from state -to-state as is occuring. There is only one way to fight discrimination and that is from the top down.

[CAP]

These militants are tyrants - they have no respect for the outcome of the vote. They lost and now they are going to just act like ill-bred rubes and harass everyone. The even assaulted an elderly woman who dared to step among them and hold a cross. Barbarians they are. The are disrupting traffic and the lives of their fellow citizens because they will not accept a democratic election outcome. How revolting. Shut up and go home. We've heard enough of you.

[Queer Thumbs Up]

Thanks LA COUNTY BOS for supporting our efforts! I feel better about being an LA County resident :) Thanks GMO! I'm glad that you are an advocate of equal rights...even if not for los pobrecito taco trucks!

[Brian Mutert]

Dear Supervisor Antonovich,
If you read into the matter, you will see that lawsuits were filed in advance of the vote to not allow it to go to the ballot; however, the court determined that the appropriate time to file such a lawsuit was *after* the election if the Proposition passed. I applaud the LA County Board of Supervisors for taking this forward looking action.

[A. Schotz]

If everything was determined by the will of the people, we'd still have segregation. It is unfair for the majority to determine the fate of the minority. Support LOVE in all its shapes & colors! NO ON PROP 8.

[Daniel Jackson]

And just will the anti-8 people do if the courts decide against them?

[Tracy]

Brad O:

What the hell is wrong with the people that they do not respect the idea of equality? Just 80+ years ago women couldnt vote. Just 50+ years ago African Americans couldnt vote. Their marriages aren't going to effect you in any way, shape, or form. And to think..its the straight people who have turned this country into a divorce-loving people.... Doesn't look like too many people even value the principles behind marriage, let alone should have an opinion on WHO can get married. People who voted YES on 8 are an embarassment to the human race. EVERYONE deserves equality, EVERYONE.

[Steve]

Prop 8 passed by the will of the people of the State of California. If you don't like it, too damn bad. It takes no rights away from anyone. I personally will vote any politician that tries to subvert the will of the voters. Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege. Name any other "right" that requires a license. There are none. Even buying a firearm, of which I own many, doesn't require a license. THAT is a RIGHT.
A Constitutional amendment is, by definition, Constitutional.

[Bayou Vol]

FYI - word is that a lawsuit is being prepared against the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center for their role encouraging and supporting hate crimes against the LDS and other churches

[Jeff]

Really!? I thought this was the United States of America where the people govern themselves. I don't understand why, after the voters enacted laws (TWICE) about this issue, the government fails to enact them. Because of personal preference?! If our representatives will not carry out the will of the people, they should be removed from office.

For or against gay marriage, this is destructive to our government and our freedom!

[Sandy Dandy]

Civil War!!! I'd pick the Yes on 8ers over the No's any day.

[Tired of This]

How dare you spend MY TAX DOLLARS on your personal position County Supervisors! I voted and spoke and now you want me to pay for the opposition!!! Your time will come to be voted on also!

[Bayou Vol]

I have yet to receive an answer to this question:

Please tell me one substantive right that was taken from gay couple following the passage of Prop. 8. Remember that the US Supreme Court has clarified that psychological benefit/harm is irrelevant in determining substantive rights.

[No On 8]

A Lopez - how can you compare Child molesters and rapists to those who have a preference for being with someone of the same sex? If you think it's sick then that's your problem, but it doesn't mean it's ok to discriminate. I think eating animals is sick, but i would never vote for a proposition that didn't allow other people to do it. your opinions on what's "sick" shouldn't have an affect of adults making their own decision of whom they prefer to marry.

[Bill]

If a group of neighbors took a vote to make you sell your house and leave a neighborhood you lived in because they didn't like you- would you do it? So it's the will of the people that I be denied my civil rights, because the person I love is another man? And this is legal because you took a vote to make it so? NO! You may NOT take my rights away with a majority vote, and hide yourself behind a kind of pseudo-moral pose, as if some right of yours had been infringed on!

[jchantgayguy]

Its too easy. All Americans should be able to have the full rights granted when a marriage license is issued. Call it a civil union and let the state issue the same license to all. If you want to go into a church and tie the knot and call it a "marriage", go for it..

But the union whatever you call it should be complete with all the same rights regardless of whats on the printed license.

[Mark In Irvine]

Prop 8 was a religious based provision that discriminates against people on the impermissible bases of religion (or absence of religion) and sexual orientation. Gay people pay taxes just as we straight people do, and they have just as much right to "marry" as the next person. I for one hope that the legal challenges succeed: the challenge is that Prop 8 operates to "revise" the state constitution and required a 2/3 vote of the legislature before being put to the voters. Passage of Prop 8 was a shameful exercise of the privilege of voting - the religious quasi-majority flexing their power to deny a minority the rights the majority enjoy. Disgraceful and un-American, just like in the bad-old-days of laws against marriage between Hispanics and Whites, between Asians and Whites, and between Blacks and Whites.

[Michael Singer]

Has anyone ever read the 14th Amendment? Voters cannot vote on the rights of other citizens. They can vote *for* citizens when they run for office, and can vote *for* initiatives that take money from one project and put it toward another, which means that it adversely affects one interest group while priviliging another. But voters cannot directly vote against the rights of other citizens. This is called" tyranny of the majority" and it has *always* been the court's purpose to make sure minority rights are protected.

This won't be legislating from the bench, a phrase repeated so much that it has no clear meaning. Rather, it will be the courts doing their job.

[william kraal]

HOW WOULD YOU MARRIED STRAIGHTS WHO VOTED YES ON PROP 8 LIKE IT IF WE GAYS COULD VOTE TO GET YOU UNMARRIED???

[Miguel]

What a bunch of sore loser..........What is this! First it was the gay's getting mad because they thought they were going to win and they can't accept to lose. Then they go crying to the judges AGAIN! Then they go crying to the 40 liberal democrates and then to the Governor and now the LA superivsor are getting into the act. This whole group stinks to high heaven. They actually want to force to change the WILL of the people. This isn't the US I thought I knew about.

[Dew]

The issue with Prop 8 is that many of you voted yes based on your religious beliefs which, in California, cannot trump the state constitution. When it comes to individual rights, the majority cannot rule. If that were the case, I would still be a slave in this country.

Since many of you used religion your belief of religion to support Prop 8 means this law will be overturned and people have every right to protest against your wanting to impose your religious beliefs on individual rights and freedoms. I support the gay community in their fight and will boycott businesses who's owners supported and donated money to Prop 8.

I used to go to El Coyote every Sunday for dinner but I will find another local Mexican restaurant to spend my dollars.

[Alex Beckers]

Government needs to get out of the marriage business.

[John]

1) The No on 8 people can challenge in court, but they will lose. The only initiative in California history that was ruled a REVISION of the state constitution as opposes to an AMENDMENT contained THOUSANDS OF WORDS AND MULTIPLE SECTIONS. Prop 8 contains a MERE 14 OPERABALE WORDS. It's not even a close call. But they can try.
.
2) Whether or not it is the agenda of the gay community in general to force teaching of gay marriage in the schools, it will happen if we allow gay "marriage". Soon after gay "marriage" becomes established in California, at least one gay person (and one is all it will take) will sue claiming discrimination because their first-grade child's textbooks, story books, etc. have stories based around heterosexual married couples (something like "Mr. and Mrs. Jones owned a farm ...") but not based on a gay couple ("Mister and Mister Jones ...). They will sue because, as they claim, gay marriage is a "fundamental right", and to exclude it from the curriculum is a violation of that right. AND THEY WILL WIN.
.
3) The same logic applied to my comment #2 above will apply in many aspects of life to numerous to list, or even to imagine.
.
4) NATURE has determined that children are born to HETEROSEXUALS (or at least those who partake in heterosexual activity). If RELIGION happens to agree with NATURE, that hardly changes NATURE or is the fault of religion. Sorry, Prop 8 opponents, but it is those who wish to pretend that homosexual activity (activity that CANNOT produce offspring) is equivalent to heterosexual activity. This fantasy is AT ODDS WITH NATURE. That seems obvious enough.
.
5) Californians have already bent over backwards (no pun intended, but accidental pun kind of funny) to give those who chose to live homosexual lifestyles rights equivalent to married couples. To the extent, if any, that this is not true most of even those who voted in favor of Prop 8 support this. I support it, but I’m beginning to have second thoughts about that. “Give an inch …”
.
6) Where a radical change in the basic structure of society is proposed, the burden to show that the change is beneficial is on he who favors the change and NOT on he who favors the status quo. In this case, it will take at least one generation (the period of time to see the results of legally sanctioned gay marriages) of experimentation to see the effects of the proposed change. Massachusetts, with a population of 6 million provides a testing population more than large enough for the experiment without risking the bulk of this United States of America and its great society on the experiment.
.
7) I would be surprised that more than a very small percentage of even homosexuals would believe that the BEST, HEALTHIEST AND MOST IDEAL HOME for a child is that of a LOVING MOTHER AND FATHER. Although many homes fall short of this for lack of love, a mother, or a father, it remains the BEST, HEALTHIEST AND MOST IDEAL. This is what the word “MARRIAGE” represents. Sorry, homosexuals, but the best you can provide within a homosexual relationship is less than the best possible. It is in the INTEREST OF SOCIETY AND CHILDREN to uphold “MARRIAGE” as this BEST, HEALTHIEST, AND MOST IDEAL HOME.
.
8) Whatever the cause of homosexuality – be it genetic, environmental, or whatever – I empathize with those who feel this and especially those who valiantly struggle to resist this urge. Some here and elsewhere have said that they would not “choose homosexuality”, that it is not their choice and that it has been a difficult way to live. I empathize. I can only imagine based on my observations that homosexual tendencies (chose a different word if you want) are extremely difficult to live with and to overcome. I wish you no ill.

[Against Prop 8]

Oh no Ester! Maybe we should just start putting all the gays in internment camps so they don't infect our innocent children! Or maybe you should lock your children in a house for their whole lives so they aren't exposed to the evils of the world - especially the gays! We all know the WORSE thing that could happen to our children is them learning about gay marriage because then they might become gay too (it's contagious right?)

Ok that was completely sarcastic - people need to stop being so ignorant towards the gay community and just allow equality for all! This shouldn't have even been brought to a vote in the first place so i hope the courts overturn this yes on 8 nonsense!

[Nick]

I cant see how people can believe that it is reasonable to deny gays the right to marry, this thought process is just brought on society by dogmatic beliefs and only allowed through ignorance. I hope that the gay community would go and have a sitings-in until this ignorant religious amendment is removed

[BR SPer]

"I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership," said John. "The word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships." ~ Elton John

Section 297.5 of the CA family code gives equal rights to gay partnerships; the same rights enjoyed by heterosexual marriages

[ph]

Why is marriage considered solely a religious endeavor?? There are millions of married couples in this country who do not subscribe to any religion and yet were afforded the privilege. Maybe we should take the privilege away from everyone who has not been attending church regularly too..........

[NoMoreMrNiceGay]

Be careful for you pray for. You just might get it!

All these prayers for the passing of Proposition 8 paid off. The good Lord saw fit to answer those prayers.

However, the end result will not be what the religious right intended. God's plan is that the passing of Proposition 8 will usher in a new era by which the courts on the state and federal level will review Proposition 8 and conclude is a violation of civil rights and strike it as null and void.

Gays will finally get the protection of the enactment of civil rights. It is the courts and not the voters who decide on the issue of civil rights just as it happened during the sixties when voter's rights and laws regarding discrimination based on race and national origin were enacted.

Thank you God!

[Emily C.]

Good. The people aren't always right, and they certainly aren't this time around. That's why we have courts and judges, because they know the law a whole lot better than the average voter.

[Rick]

It's important to make note of the fact that a few members of the Board of Supervisors don't represent the will of the millions of Angelenos they represent... much in the same way that 5,000,000 voters don't represent the will of all the 25,000,000 million citizens of California who are eligible to vote. At least one of these two minorities is speaking in defense of the rights guaranteed to ALL CITIZENS by the Constitution, and not in defense of their own personal prejudice or a "sense of what is right, in spite of the Constitution."

Proposition 8 may be the "will of 20% of the electorate," but it is certainly not the "will of the people." The Board should be lauded for taking matters into their own hands where the issue of constitutional rights is concerned. Certainly, the electorate can take THAT matter into their own hands on the next election day.

Bravo, L.A. Board of Supervisors.

[Rick]

@blake - the day that government starts dictating culture is the day that we have to take up arms against the government.

[Carina]

YES on PROP 8. Well said Paul. I will vote again and again.

[Rob B]

Way to go LA County! We appreciate you doing what is right. What amazes me is those that say the people voted. I liked this statement from Kelly H at 1:20pm, but felt she said a few things wrong... so here is the better version:

I am absolutely disgusted at the thought of staunch right wing conservatives trying to overturn the right of the people. The people voted according to how their church told them to and now the anti prop 8 people are trying to fight for their civil rights and overturn the decision. I am also disgusted at the thought that there are people around today that are still so biggoted and prejudiced, but I feel a great sense of pride that my taxpaying money is going to these legislators and supervisors to spend time on this issue. They should be involved as they are our last hope of having our rights restored. If I have the opportunity I will vote for each and every legislator who is even remotely connected to trying to overturn what was wrongly taken away from us... our civil right. Let me say this again.. THANK YOU LA COUNTY!!

[Wagner]

It's not surprising to hear people argue for supporting "the will of the voters" when they think it supports their belief. Where were these same people favoring the writing of religous morality into the constitution when the Stem Cell proposition passed.

This country was started with direct representative democracy, in town halls. California (and the county as a whole) is too huge to do that. But even at the start of the country, the people and their goverment realize the important of protecting certain rights of all, and not leaving these rights at the whim of any majority at any point in history. If the people voted to uphold slavery or to force immigrants back to their home lands, do you think some of the people who are not so concerned about upholding a popular vote would feel the same way? If a majority voted to allow freedom of religion, would you people who are so concerned about majority rules be so tight to grasp on to that?

No, you wouldn't. You just want to cover your bigotry and cloak it under something else. You can't put lipstick on a pig and call it something else, folks.

[peter girard]

If marriage is a religious institution, then why do prop 8 supporters assume that all churches and religions oppose gay marriage? Many support it. This country was founded on religious freedom, not "majority rules" religion! The only way civil unions would be fair is if they replaced marriage for EVERYONE. Separate but not equal was the basis of keeping the "traditional" values of not allowing inter racial marriage as well as segregation. The American values of liberty and justice to ALL will prevail, as the constitution and bill of rights can not be voted away, and the barriers of intolerance, ignorance and bigotry have a history in the USA of being OVERCOME!!!!

[uhg]

It's a states decision, if you don't like the states law you live in then move.

it's democracy deal with it.

And I voted no. I personly don't care either way. I do care about the state you live in having the states rights and respecting the democratic system it uses.

[Mike Langlois]

Our CREATOR instituted marriage. Historically the last thing a country does before it falls is to embrace homosexuality. So if you disregard a God that said this type of relationship is an abomination, at least consider history and learn from past errors. We are now considering removing a balance of power that will affect everyone eventually. When a measure is taken back after it was voted on twice and the high courts overturn the measure then we, the people, regardless of how you stand on prop 8 has lost everything. Please don't impose something on those of us that voted for prop 8 something that we find disgusting.

[Paul]

Re: Spv. Antonovich's comment that the legal challenge should have been done prior to the election. It's disturbing that one of the stewards of Los Angeles County government has demonstrated this level of ignorance regarding the initiative electroal process. This is the way it's done. An initiative is placed on the ballot by petitioners with the wording of their choosing. If it passes, its legality is tested. This is why so many of the initiatives are invalidated --- AFTER they're passed, rather than before. Supervisor Antonovich should know this.

Re: Concerns of some regarding the Court having jurisiction. This is basic Constitutional law. The framers (220 years ago) were concerned about the rights of the minority being aborgated by rule of the majority. So they setup the judiciary to protect the minority from the majority. In other words, the judiciary being asked to step in on this particular issue of "minority rights," is precisely the role that that the framers intended.

[L.A. mom]

Thank you L. A. County Board of Supervisors! I'm a straight, married, Christian mother of 3 who believes that all of our citizen's deserve equality under the law. Changing the constitution to take away rights from our fellow citizens is wrong. Black voting rights, integration, legalizing interracial marriage etc. would never have happened in some parts of our country if it had been put up to a popular vote. Thank you for having the courage to stand up for what is right!