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

[FredW]

I'm disgusted that our, city, county and state resources are being used to overturn the will of the people.

Prop 8 supporters made a coherent, intellectual argument for marriage and mothers and fathers. What does the gay community give them in return? Militancy, violence and personal attacks on their commitment to the poor and on their faith. The bigotry and intolerance against religions is astounding.

[David]

I wish there were blogs in 1964.

I'll bet there would be the same negative comments about equal rights for blacks as there are now supporting proposition 8.

I wish we could read those comments now and compare the bigotry.

[FredW]

I applaud Mike Antonovich for his choice.

The people have spoken, they have voted and Prop 8 needs to be enforced.

Our government officials are sworn to uphold the law, which includes laws enacted by the will of the people.

We should start impeachment or recalls of those elected officials that violate the oaths of their office.

[TD]

hooray for the board of supervisors!

[Madeline]

For all the people screaming that your constitution can't be unconstitutional - that's actually not quite the problem. The problem is that the proposition was unconstitutional. Rather than being an amendment (ie: an addition), it was in stark opposition to a preexisting section of your constitution. As a result, you (constitutionally) needed to remove the offending preexisting section, or insert a clause saying that that section didn't cover those in same-sex relationships. That would constitute a revision, requiring a 2/3 vote. You didn't do that. Your vote doesn't count. Sorry.

The courts (state, supervisors, etc) aren't actually overturning your vote. They're saying that your vote was illegitimate, and that you didn't have the right to make it in the first place. You want to change that? Then you need to first change the clauses of your constitution that ban discrimination.

And as for marriage being a religious institution - guess what? I just founded a brand new religion that says same-sex marriage is entirely equal to heterosexual marriage. Since you respect the Jewish tradition of marriage, I suppose you'll have to respect mine too? No? Then don't try to claim the religious tradition argument.

Traditions change all the time. There are historically documented cases of same-sex marriage dating back centuries - I believe the earliest occurred in years with BC on the end, if memory serves. As for Christian ones, there are documented cases of same-sex marriage within the Catholic and Orthodox churches between the 8th and 18th centuries. Yes, it was never the norm. No, you do not still get to claim it's some perversion of history.

[Zach]

Thank you, Board of Supervisors, for defending our Constitution from those who don't know any better, and our minorities from those who would oppress them. Oh, you Yes on 8 people say YOU may be oppressed? Read up on how American government works - checks and balances prevent ANYONE from dictating to the country how it will be run, and that includes the people (a slim 52% majority, in this case). We don't elect politicians and appoint judges just for show, you know. The founding fathers thought they would do better at making law than the common man alone. Judging by some extremely ignorant comments here, it seems they were right.

[aneriz]

Democracy, what democracy?

Democracy respects the will of the people. California's courts should come out and express their desire to separate themselves from the rest of the Republic and become their own country. That way they can impose their governments will on every issue...oh wait, then they will have no place to borrow money!

[Jonny]

If you so called "Christians" who voted yes on Prop. 8 would have donated all of the money you spent on campaigning against it to a just cause such as the homeless or the starving then you would be soldiers in the eyes of the Lord.
Unfortunately you are just thieves stealing human rights from those who live in the houses and neighborhoods that surround you.

[Eric]

Thanks LA County. This is absolutely a civil rights issue and should be decided by the courts. Do you think southern voters would have voted for school integration in the 60's? Of course not. Thats why civil rights had to be enforced by the courts. The will of the majority cannot be imposed on someone when their civil rights are being violated.

We have been down this road before and the message is still the same......SEPERATE IS NOT EQUAL!!!!!!!!!!

[LA Land Fan]

You stupid silly Yes on Prop 8 people. Once again you pick and chose things from the bible that are convenient. Are you following everything in the bible as law? Of course not you hypocrite. This proposition should not have been on the ballot in the first place. You can't put something like this to a vote. Otherwise black people would still be slaves and women second class citizens. Why put propositions on the ballot to outlaw divorce? How about jail time for adultery? That would protect your 50% success rate "traditional marriage". You people are narrow-minded and ignorant and hypocrites!

[tom]

UN CON STI TU TIO NAL

[Trojan Fan]

I am a democrat and voted for Obama. I am also a Christian and voted for Prop 8. It doesn't mean that I harbor any hate towards gays. It means that I am in favor of the biblical principles that make up the very moral fabric of my being. These same principles allow me and many others like me to devote time and resources in support of worldwide ministries catering to the sick, hungry, impoverished, homeless, widowed, orphaned, elderly, and oppressed. How much worse off would the human condition be without Christian ministries? When it comes to exercising a personal vote, which in this country I am entitled to, I am not required to set aside the principles I live by. Rather than lash out at Prop 8 supportors, understand the underlying biblical principle that drives them and say you disagree. We will all stand before God someday and we all do what we believe is right. Not hateful.

[Zan]

As a gay woman who married the love of my life on June 17th, 2008... I feel I need to speak here. Good for the Supervisors for doing the right thing and standing up for the minorities against the lies that propogated such a strong anti-gay turn-out on election day. The fact is- THE YES ON 8 ADS LIED. That's the truth. If anyone did the research for themselves, they would have realized that. This isn't about religion- religion and politics do not belong in the same sentence. So here's my proposal- how about the government stops using the word "marriage" at all? When in fact they really mean a "civil union" in the case of ALL legal marriages... why don't we work on changing the word so that it applies to ALL unions- gay and straight alike? So that EVERY couple heading to the registrar's office is there to pick up a Civil Union license... and the LEGAL ceremony is just that- a legal civil union performed outside of the church! The church would no longer be able to perform LEGAL ceremonies, only religious marriages. In essence, EVERYONE can have a civil union, but only those that have a religious ceremony can then refer to themselves as "married" in the eyes of their God. I'm all for it, as long as we ALL have the same rights (which, as domestic partners, gays currently do NOT). What do you say? I'd vote YES on that compromise. Fair is fair.

[Tom]

If the Supreme Court takes the Prop 8 cases and for the second time thumbs its nose at the will of the people, then the common sense people who passed Prop 8 should take a page from the ongoing homosexual intimidation book: recall the Supreme Court justices. Remember, Rose Bird and her ilk thumbed their collective noses at the will of the people over the death penalty so the people booted them off the Supreme Court in 1980. We should do the same again. The people have twice spoke. Listen up Supreme Court.

[Donald from Hawaii]

For those persons who would claim that their vote for Proposition 8 was both supported and encouraged by their respective churches and religious denominations, I can only offer my own humble opinion that their Creator, and not their religious leaders, will be the final arbiter of this issue. If what these voters have done is right by their Creator, they have nothing to fear. If not, their own clergy's blessing will do them little good.

[Peter]

The current gay protests against Proposition 8 are cowardly. They are cowardly, because gays are afraid, absolutely AFRAID to confront the overwhelming, 70 to 30 support by black people. Blacks put Propositon 8 over the top. It is easy to hold a demonstration at Saddleback and other white churches. It much harder to confront the community that actually caused Proposition 8 to become law.

[michael]

To those who complain about allegedly activist courts, etc: We do have 3 branches of government in this country. There is a reason for the Judicial branch, including preventing minorities from getting treated unequally by the majority.

[RadioAngel]

I'm so sick and tired of being terrorized by special interest groups. I haven o problem with gays adopting kids, sharing a household and getting next of kin. These things they already have. Marriage, however, is a cultural norm that has roots going back to the beginning of civilization. This is why I voted yes on 8. You cannot overturn human history. The people have voted twice to not recognize gay marriage. If you want this so bad, go move to CT or MA where they recognize it. Leave the legal democratic voting process alone. Obviously either time it was catergorized as Constitutional. Stop acting acting like schoolchildren and deal with the fact that not everyone HAS to accept you. People have the right to their opinions, and you do NOT have the right to castigate them for it.

[Rick]

@richard - fair point, but if marriage is religious based, then why are secular governments issuing licenses for marriage? Should not all "marriages," regardless of the participants, be civil unions in the eyes of the state? Do not "marriages" violate the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution if they are, as you say, "religious based?"

[Dracil]

The tyranny of the majority have spoken. Now we'll see if the system of checks and balances actually work.

[Zan]

"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."

THIS is the most asinine argument- my solution to this: PASS AN AMENDMENT TO MAKE DIVORCE ILLEGAL since more than half of heterosexual marriages end up in DIVORCE COURT, battling over money, custody, infidelity, abuse, etc. etc. etc. etc. Like THAT is a healthy environment for a child? How can you be so hypocrital? I can promise you, my step-daughter has had several positive, male role-models in her life that are NOT her father (her father was neglectful and emotionally abusive- that's SO healthy)... and now she has TWO loving parents who are raising her to be an intelligent, responsible and productive member of society. This would NOT have happened under the care of her biological "father."

[betty4225]

I commend and applaud the LA County Board of Supervisors for supporting the fight against Proposition 8. Just because "The People" spoke, didn't mean they were right. Just because they were the majority didn't give them the right to strip rights away from a group of individuals in the minority.

I am not gay, but I am appalled by all of the excuses Proposition 8 supporters list here to validate their initiative. Many of them are the same excuses that were used over the last 100 years to discriminate against African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, etc.

They use these same excuses to keep their worlds safe because they life in fear of change. They can't accept that someone different should be allowed the same opportunities that they have That it will some how affect their lives and strip them of their moral center.

If their moral center and their religious faith were strong to begin with they would understand and see that we are all God's children and he doesn't discriminate between us or choose one group, one race, above another.

Gay men and women deserve the same equal rights that we all take for granted. I just find it hard to believe that in this century, in the same year that we just elected our first president who is not white, that there is still a group of people who thinks it's okay to deny another fellow amercan equal rights.

I find it even harder to believe that many of the so called "right" call themselves religious and quote God and what he would want. I was raised Catholic and believe that God wants the best for all of us, the good and the bad, black, white, rich , poor, straight, or gay.

[John C]

> "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."

Actually, the court declined to hear it then because it was still in question whether Prop 8 would pass or not, and the court doesn't like to make decisions on hypothetical cases. If Prop 8 didn't pass they would have issued a ruling on a moot point. Now that Prop 8 did in fact pass, they're revisiting the original case.

> "This is not about discrimination. ... Each individual already has exactly the same marriage rights as every other individual."

You have the right to marry the person you love. Some of us desperately wish to do the same but do not now have that right.

[Reb]

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-DIDN'T A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT OPPOSE SLAVERY, AND WASN'T HE ASSASSINATED FOR IT, THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WERE NOT FOR SLAVERY, WHO WAS IN THE SOUTH-DEMOCRATS.

Since many of you used religion your belief of religion to support Prop 8 -NO WE USED OUR VOTE TO SUPPORT IT-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-OUR PROTEST IS PROP 8, AND NOT ALL OF THE VIOLENCE FROM ITS OPPONENTS. I support the gay community in their fight and will boycott businesses who's owners supported and donated money to Prop 8. AND I WILL BOYCOTT BUSINESSES AND OTHERS WHO SUPPORTED IT, INCLUDING THIS PAPER AND APPLE AMONG OTHERS

I used to go to El Coyote every Sunday for dinner but I will find another local Mexican restaurant to spend my dollars.-JUST CANCELLED MY LA TIMES SUBSCRIPTION, AND SOLD ALL OF MY APPLE PRODUCTS

[Liz]

I applaud the supervisors for doing the right thing and protecting the rights of all of californias citizens.

[Rick]

Gay marriage isn't a "violation of God's will;" physical intimacy between people of the same sex is. Proposition 8 doesn't outlaw gay sex; it says that only marriage between one man and one woman is valid and recognized in California. For those of you who are citing "God's will" or "God's law" in reference to Proposition 8, either you don't know what you're talking about or you're doing a poor job of disguising you're prejudice against homosexuals. -- and if it's the latter, then you're a coward, because if you want the state to outlaw sodomy or the love between two people of the same sex, then you should put THAT law on the ballot and see whether or not it passes. Defining marriage via secular legislation has nothing to do with "God's law," so stop using His or Her name as a defense for your vote on Proposition 8 - or have you forgotten the 2/3 Commandment: "Thou Shalt Not Take the Name of the Lord in Vain."

[John C]

> "A Constitutional amendment is, by definition, Constitutional."

By California law, if an amendment changes something in the Constitution, it is considered a revision and cannot be done as a voter initiative, it must first be approved by Legislature before being voted on.

The Supreme Court decided the right for gay couples to marry is part of the Constitution. (Try reading their decision sometime, rather than harping about activist judges legislating from the bench.) Arguably, Prop 8 changes that portion of the Constitution. Therefore it may be considered a revision.

[irene]

Yay Antonovich!!!
So glad i'm in your district!

[L]

I bet the same people who are rioting against the passage of Prop 8 are all happy with B.O. in the white house. I vote we ask the court to overturn the election of B.O. because I don't like the fact he will take away some of my rights. How about that radical gay activists? Are you OK with that vote be overturned?

[Shannon Ahern]

I am wondering how uninformed *are* these people on this board claiming that a barely-majority VOTE is a suitable method for rescinding civil rights? There is not much thinking going on here, and a tremendous amount of reactionary, religious-desire-to-legislate-beliefs-onto-others going on. It's repulsive to me that Americans, fellow Californians, cannot understand how ridiculous it is to "vote" away any minorty group's established civil rights. One PURPOSE of law is to protect minorties (of any type) from mob abuse by any "majority". Come on, people, pay attention. Do you really want a slim "majority" to someday try to vote away YOUR rights?

Church and state are designated as separate by the U.S. Constitution. Stop trying to legislate YOUR religion into MY personal life. (And I'm not even gay, OR a "minority", unless you count femaleness.) The point is the protection of the US Constitution, which ought to keep everyone's religion OUT of legal matters, period.

Thank you to the Supervisors who stood up for the law and civil rights. That took courage, but it was the right thing to do.

[John]

YES ON 8!!!!!!

[Jeff]

The State of California and the federal government have three branches of government, and it is the duty of the courts to strike down laws which violate the constitution. This is Civics 101 which many people on here seem to have flunked or wish to ignore.

For example, in 1963 the California Legislature passed a law banning discrimination in the sale or rental of housing (the "Rumford Act"). In 1966, led by the realtors' association, the voters passed an initiative striking down that law. The proponents of the initiative appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the California Attorney General at the time, Tom Lynch, successfully argued that the repeal of the ban on discrimination in housing violated the Constitution. That decision is still the law in
California.

Similarly, the California Supreme Court ruled in May that the laws limiting marriage to straights violated the equal protection clause and the right of privacy of gay and lesbian couples. Whether you agree or disagree with that decision,
it is well founded in case law dealing with the rights of homosexuals and the rights of African-Americans to marry persons of a different race.

Prop 8 tries to overturn that decision.

The courts have the duty to review Prop 8, which has not been done, to decide if it violates any laws or the state or federal constitution, once a proper case is brought.

The California and U.S. Constitutions do not create a pure democracy but a republic, in which the courts have the final say, and everyone has a duty to support the courts' decisions.

Even if the courts do uphold Prop 8, it will be back on the ballot for as many times as it takes to repeal it because it is not consistent with treating gays and lesbians as equal citizens, as the California Supreme Court correctly held.

There is no legal or constitutional basis for Prop 8 supporters to claim that gays and lesbians and their supporters cannot or should not bring this issue back to the voters. Younger voters do not share the prejudices against gays and lesbians, and as time goes by, Prop 8 will be overturned because that is the right thing to do.

[Mark in Bakersfield]

For those of you spouting "will of the people" you have absolutely no sense of California's or our countrys history. For those of you spouting "we need to save the children." From who? Gay people won't exist now that Prop 8 has passed? Marraiage is not discusses in California schools. For those of you who supported Prop 8 you don't get one important thing. The supporters of Prop 8 were smart enough to scare you that gay marriage would harm children- but they never told you how children would be harmed. The supporters of Prop 8 knew Californians would never pass a proposition that took away rights of a segment of the population- so they used the scare tactic of saving children. You were duped by organized religion. If you are married you only have a 50% chance that your marriage will last. I haved an idea, if you want to preserve marriage and save children, outlaw adultry and divorce. For you bible thumpers- what did God say about adulterers and what did he say about divorce?

[Mark in Bakersfield]

I dare you Yes on 8 proponents to watch this...and I forgot to say something to you people who keep using the term four 'reactionay, communist, wrong headed, liberal- whatever term you give to the state judges who overturned prop 22- 3 of those judges were appointed by conservitive republican governors. Odd, proposition 22 was also heavilly favored by the Mormon Church. How many of you Yes on 8 people are aware the Mormon Church was also against the passage of the equal rights amendment.

http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/invite/SpecialComment

[Joy]

Reading some of these comments really sickens me... protect marriage huh??... i'm sorry, i never knew that marriage was in danger! Jeezus, don't push your beliefs on me and I say let the gays marry whomever they like. It is wrong to take away rights from them or from anybody!! You people give rights to animals before you give rights to the gays?? How wrong does that sound?? Stop being scared/homophobs and let them live their life how you live yours. Marriage is not a priviledge... it's a right!!

[Jeffrey]

Our tolerant, loving gays just attacked an old woman with a cross. It is all all the news now and all over youtube.

All hail our new gay nazi overlords. Can't pick a fight with a regular guy, so they went after an old woman.

These nazis are going to do everything they can to impose their degenerate behavior upon us. FIGHT!

[Lula]

SOMEONE WROTE:

"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"

RESPONSE:

Ridiculous.

This man's bread and butter is the gay community. We're talking musical theater, for crying out loud!

He threw his artists (not to mention much of his audience) under the bus and expects to thrive leading them?!

Please.

The man should have known better than to compromise the dignity of those off of whom he made a living.

[mike]

good for you. changing the constitution to eliminate rights of one group while the remainder of california citizens continue to have the same rights available to them is simply un-American. it took 67% of voters to approve improving freeways. why only 51% to rewrite the constitution? let's not forget broader American tenets like separation of church and state, justice for all, equal protection under the law, no taxation without representation and, most importantly, all men are created equal.

[Jim from Silver Lake]

It would have been better to have thrown out prop 8 before the election, but it must be overturned by the courts. It is ridiculous to think that a majority vote can deprive people of basic equal rights. It is the function of the constitution to protect the civil rights of everyone. Those who wrongly call gays and lesbians "sick"
or say that sexual orientation is a choice and therefore not the basis of a healthy lifestyle are wrong. It is time to end unfair discrimination against minorities once and for all.
I hope that with Barak Obama as our new president it is "fair game" to honestly address prejudice present in ALL walks of life by everyone. We simply must get along with each other for our society to move forward towards a better life for all.

[Wade]

Trojan Fan, there are also many, many of us who believe that religions have been and continue to be the cause of a great deal of misery in the world. And the nice thing about our society is that you entitled your beliefs and I an entitled to mine. But we are all citizens and taxpayers. Thus it gets very tiresome to read so many of these posts from "voters" who are so stuck on the word "marriage" from a religious standpoint that they simply cannot respect that a sizeable majority of citizens view marriage as a civil and not a religious institution. We have many, many married atheists and agnostics. Would you also say that these marriages are not valid? Is marriage a strictly religious institution in our society as practiced today? No. Do people marry strictly to produce children? No. But many heterosexuals marry for status and money. Are these also less valid? Where do we draw the line? We can all be thankful for the judiciary to save us from the ignorant masses who vote not based on higher-order reasoning but out of fear and ignorance, and in this case, mostly bigotry. That the majority of people would vote to take away equal rights from a group whose "lifestyle" (whatever that means) they don't agree with is exactly why I would fear living in a country such as Iran or Saudi Arabia. And it is disgusting that women would support Prop 8 in view of their second-class status in much of today's world. Remember that there is much "historical precedent" used to support the ongoing subjugation of women all over the world.

[Berribrand]

People need to seriously read this... We have a lot of fly-by-night "lawyers" voicing opinions that are simply not true.
http://johnnycalifornia.com/?p=1313

In summary:
1. Since the California Supreme Court already declared that gays and lesbians were a “suspect class” who were being discriminated against and denied a “fundamental right”, Prop. 8 goes beyond amending the California constitution; they claim that Prop. 8 completely violates the “constitution’s core commitment to equality for everyone be eliminating a fundamental right form just one group – lesbian and gay Californians.” ...Prop. 8 can’t come along and take away that right from one group.

2. Prop 8...interferes with the job of the Supreme Court to protect “suspect classes” from discrimination and deprivation of their “fundamental rights.” In other words, Prop. 8...[is] telling the California Supreme Court how to interpret the constitution. It was decided back in the olden days that the Supreme Court is the only entity that can interpret the constitution into law and nobody can tell the Court how to interpret it. Or more simply, it’s illegal to pass a law that tells the Supreme Court how to do it’s job.

3. Ballot propositions are only allowed to “amend” the constitution and that Prop. 8 actually “revises” the California constitution. What’s the difference? There’s no hard and fast definition, but the suit claims that since Prop. 8 goes so far in altering the California constitution and the role of the Supreme Court, that it actually changes the very structure of the state government, which means it’s a “revision.”

[Larry Miller]

It wasnt too many years ago that other races in the united states were not allowed to marry outside of their race? is that the right thing to do? it wasnt then and its certainly isnt now to dictate what human rights should be. It saddens me that in this economy there are people that are more concerned about who others are in loving caring relationships with then the state of our economy! I wonder how many religous freaks are still hiding in closets, cheating on their wifes, and beating their spouse and children then turning around and in public are the holy ones!! I think not! look within before you turn on others

[Trent]

Wow, the lack of intelligence displayed by the anti-gay comments is not only apparent in their 'arguments' but in their use of grammar and spelling. It's sad that people who don't even know the difference between ARE and OUR (ahem, Kelly H) are voting on whether or not to take away existing rights from a specific group of people.

Of all of the lame, hateful arguments made in favor of prop 8, the one that I find the most ridiculous is "Hey, we, as a majority, voted to take away rights from this particular minority group--so that's the way it is." Clearly, these people do not understand that the courts are there to protect minority groups from mob rule! They are there to protect minority groups from the hateful amendment that is prop 8, and that has been their role throughout history. Come on, people! Put down your bibles and read a history book. Do you think that if we voted on slavery it would have ever been abolished? No.

Use your brain before you open your mouth. I hope the courts do what is right and just for all citizens and restore EQUALITY in California! Congrats LA County for doing what is right.

[ALS LA]

jchantgayguy: Well Said! It is very simple. The pro Prop 8 people say it is because of moral and religious beliefs. If this is the case than MARRIAGE is part of religious and should be kept out of government altogether. The government should then only be involved in Civil Unions and the word MARRIAGE should be left for religious ceremonies. I am gay and logical you must be too!

[BOUNDARY CROSSINGS]

I AM UNBELIEVABLY DISGUSTED AT LA CITY, AND COUNTY'S MOLINA, YAROSLAVSKY, AND BURKE FOR THEIR EGOTISTICAL NEED TO CHAMPION OPPONENTS OF PROP 8, TO WIN FAVOR WITH LIBERAL WHITES, LESBIANS, GAYS, BISEXUALS, AND TRANSGENDERED(WHAT IS TRANSGENDER?). TO CROSS A BOUNDARY SUCH AS WHAT THE SUPERVISORS HAVE DONE,USURPS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, THE WILL OF MANY OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS, AND USING THEIR POST TO DO SO MAKES ONE INCINED TO VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. REDIRECTION WAS INDICATED, A REFERRAL TO THE COURTS . SUPERVISORS, THIS WAS YOUR OBLIGATION, NOT JOINING A LAWSUIT ON MY BEHALF. VOTERS RIGHTS HAVE BEEN TAKEN AWAY. MOLINA WILL NOT GET MY VOTE AGAIN. BOUNDARIES HAVE BEEN SEVERELY CROSSED
A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST THE SUPERVISORS AND THE CITY OF LA IS INDICATED.

[Riza]

Why not just amend "civil unions" to have the same rights as married couples? Instead of amending marriage which is already defined as a union between man and woman....

[Peggy Howard]

47% of the American voters are not happy with the presidential election. Should they protest, destroy property and assault old ladies?

[Rick]

@adoptivefather - President-elect Barack Obama wasn't elected anything by the national popular vote; he will be elected President by the electoral college, and that vote will be by a considerably wider margin than Prop 8's victory.

[IT]

I can't believe how many people on this board think it's OKAY to vote on the rights of a minority.

Let's try a few different versions, shall we?

"The majority of voters agree that blacks can't get married."

:The majority of voters agree that Catholics can't get married."

"The majority of voters agree that Irish-Americans can't get married."

Do you get the point? THE ONLY REASON that doesn't happen is becaues "Activist Judges" do their job, and protect the rights of even the most unpopular minority from the cruelty of the majority.

ALL of us are minorites in some way....insert YOUR minority status and see how it feels.

[bill]

another example of leaders without a backbone,

[Rick]

@ Sara Luther - "dictator judges?" Was the Supreme Court that ruled in Brown v. Board of Education also composed of dictator judges? I mean, they too overturned the will of the people in the south, yes? You folks make it too easy for me; every time I hear "activist judge," I know I'm listening to a moron - there's no need to listen for nuance, sophistication nor a basic grasp of American civics.

[John]

Why the heck is the County of Los Angeles getting involved in this issue? Why don't you idiot leaders try balancing the budget or find a way to reduce taxes instead of jumping on the Gay band wagon? I guess you don't have enough to do at your present jobs. Perhaps you all should resign, since you don't have any important city business. For your information, the voters passed Prop 8!

Marriage is between a Man & a Woman! Period... "whether you like it or not"

[M]

Ahh...the Tyrrany of the Majority.

A majority of the people didn't have a problem with slavery in the 18th century. A majority of people in Germany didn't have a problem with the Nazis coming to power. Sometimes the majority are idiots, and its up to those who've we've elected for their judgement to do the right thing when what the people decide is wrong.

[Larry]

BRAVO!!!!

[Dan R]

How come none of the yes side understands that the U,S, and CA are a Democratic Republic - NOT a democracy? It was set up that way on purpose - that way "the tyranny of the many couldn't overpower the few". I'm surprised how many people don't know the history of their own country and are so fast to judge the very people that they elected to protect them from crap like this. The only failures are the ones who DON'T stand up to protect the minoirity. If no one stood up to the tyranny of the many we'd still have slavery. Read your history books and learn about the country you live in - because most people from other countries know more about it than you do!

[Jason V.]

Everyone talking about the "Will of the Voters" please, Get a clue. Prop 187 was "the will of the voters," it was wrong, and deemed unconstitutional by the Courts. Prop 8 was wrong and should be viewed the same way. If Prop 8 was about taking away Women's rights, and passed, it too would be unconstitutional and overturned.

[Jean Paulson]

What the LA supervisors recognize is that Proposition 8 should have never been placed on the ballot, PERIOD!! It is a violation of civil rights, and it is unjust! Those who say, "The people have spoken! No same-sex marriage!" CONTINUALLY ignore the fact that the Supreme Court found that it was discriminatory to deny same-sex couples the right to marry! Let me put it another way; would it have been just and fair to gather signatures and put an initiative on the ballot back in 1948 when the California Supreme Court struck down the prohibition on interracial marriages in their ruling on Perez v. Sharp? No--absolutely not. It would have been a travesty of justice, and a gross violation of civil rights. This is the same, EXACT thing, whether any of you want to admit or not!

[Lisa]

Bravo county supervisors! It's sad that people don't seem to get that in approving they voted to TAKE EXISTING RIGHTS AWAY. Looking back now, do you think it would have been a good idea to let white folks in the South vote on whether to approv the Civil RIghts and Voting Acts of the 1960s? Hell no! The rights granted through those acts would have been taken away by the voters in a minute! Should the people been allowed to vote by popularity contest when the Cal. Supreme Court struck down laws forbidding the interracial couples could marry in the early 1960s?! If so, the people of this state likely would have done so! Voting on rights already granted to people just doesn't seem constitutional on the face of it.

As to comments about why not give gays all the same rights available through civil unions and just continue to label them as such, here's an analogy: Remember the segregated public drinking fountains in the South before the civil rights movement? Typically, one would say "Whites," the other right next to it that said "Coloreds." Would you say that's wrong?...it's separate, but equal. It's a gesture that says, "you're not equal to us and we don't want you drinking from our fountain, but we'll be nice and give you you're own fountain."... Sorry, unacceptable. No group of people's relationships are "better" or "more sacred" than others. We all pay our taxes and the granting of marriage licenses is a tax payer provided service.

[anonymous]

To all of the people who say that marriage is a religious institution and that gay couples should only be allowed civil unions or domestic partnerships, I have two comments:

1. If civil unions are exactly the same thing as marriages (as many "pro-Prop 8 people claim to justify their stance), how do you respond to the claim that "separate but equal" is never really equal?
and perhaps more importantly
2. If marriage is a religious institution, what valid argument would you make against the argument that ALL civil "marriage" (i.e., a contract under state law) should be abolished, and every couple (straight and gay) may have a civil union (i.e., contract), but only religious institutions may perform marriages?

If you cannot agree with the suggestion in point #2, it is clear that you wish to make your religious institution a civil matter.

[mike]

We will _not_ have discrimination written into the state constitution. This is not 1948 Deep South, this is 2008 California.

[DWinOC]

The many elected officials whose duty it is to uphold the constitution are now using their offices to undermine the constitution. This is dereliction of duty. It is akin to a police officer aiding in the commission of a crime. They have proven themselves unfit for their role. They should be removed from office and replaced by those that respect the democratic process and have the capacity to fulfill their responsibilites, even if it isn't popular among their vocal constituents.

[NATIVE CALIFORNIAN]

APPARENTLY, THE MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIANS ARE NOT READY TO DEAL WITH GAY MARRIAGES.

WE CAN ALL STILL LIVE IN CALIFORNIA AND BE HAPPY, LETS MOVE ON.

WE AS CALIFORNIANS CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS. I LOVE LIVING IN CALIFORNIA, DON'T RUIN IT. I LOVE THE SUN, THE WEATHER, THE BEACHES, MOUNTAINS, THE MELTING POT OF THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF CULTURES AND CARING PEOPLE.

STOP THE HATE ON BOTH SIDES. BE THANKFUL WE LIVE HERE IN CALIFORNIA! (YOU ARE SCARING AWAY THE TOURISTS!)

[Benjamin]

Gay people seek acceptance and have received it. Now they need to accept themselves. Marriage for 6000 years has been a union between one man and one woman. As for all of us each man can marry any woman who is willing to marry him and each woman can marry any man who is willing to marry her. It is in the above stated sequence that all men and women have equal protection under the law. It is trajic when ones mental wiring and physical plumbing are in disagreement. It is even more trajic when such a small group of people are continually trying to brainwash society into giving homosexual marriage legitimacy. Marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman and God help us will continue to be only between a man and a woman.

[Steven]

Please get this straight (no pun intended). Marriage under California law is a civil contract. Civil marriage is NOT a religious institution. Moreover, the United Church of Christ, the Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church, the Unitarian Church and the Metropolitan Community Church all SUPPORT same sex marriage. It is an intolerable intrusion into the liberties of those religions to tell them what couples they can and cannot marry. This whole Proposition 8 affair is nothing but an attempt by some to force others to conform to their reading of scripture. Nobody really wants to return to "traditional marriage" because that institution ONLY permitted people of the same race to marry.

[Kevin]

If Prop 8 is a "revision", simply because it changed a ruling that was all of 3 months old, what does that mean about the legitimacy of amendments like Prop 13? After all, that changed the entire structure of CA government, top to bottom. Surely if Prop 8 is a revision, Prop 13 was.

Further, the "revision" argument, if sucessful here, will gut the right of initiative as nearly all meaningful changes will be attacked on this basis. SInce the bar is being set so low, it is hard to imagine any future initiative amendment having much effect.

While I voted NO on Prop 8 (and 22 back when), I will go well out of my way to sign a recall petition against any judge who overturns or enjoins Prop 8.

Democracy means that you accept losses. Otherwise we might just as well have a dictator (or 7).

[Nestert]

The only "sweeping overhaul" of the state constitution has been by the radical California Supreme Court, NOT Prop. 8. Prop. 8 merely restored the laws that existed before the Court decided to "find" rights that do not appear in the document and were never contemplated by the drafters of Constitution. The California Constitution has never, and still does not, provide a universal right to marriage or provide for homosexuals to be a suspect class.

What the constant meddling of the California Supreme Court and the LA Supervisors (the MAJORITY of whose constituents actually voted for Prop.8) puts in jeopardy is the loss of the most fundamental right of all of us: the right of self governance.

[Jeffrey]

Wait a minute, I voted for Ron Paul and I lost. Should I riot? I didn't ask for a bullet train either. Where do I sign up to protest. I want to beat up old ladies too and make a scene because I didn't get my way or I can't force my minority views down anyone's throats!

[A Dodger fan for traditional marriage]

Typical gay activists who will protest until their dying day until they get what they want. We in the mainstream have learned to tolerate but we will not accept your lifestyle. If you don't like the fact that marriage was designed to be between ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN, take it up with God!!!
In the meantime, based on last week's election....SCOREBOARD!!!!!!!

[jonathan]

the united states of america is a republic not a democracy...to me this means a majority cannot decide issues concerning and against a minority (if such issue is found in violation of a constitution)...the judicial branch plays a CRITICAL role in this process...some seemed surprised at this...would they really want to live in a pure democracy?

i pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the united states of america...and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands...

[fred]

Minorities used to be defined by race. It makes sense that minority races should have all equal rights as the white majority race. Now a few people decided for us all that minorities are also defined by sexual preferences. So should polygamists, pedophiles and incest lovers also be considered minorities with equal marriage rights? If not then why not, they love each other and they're not hurting anybody right? We're already throwing out the traditional marriage definition from dictionaries, other cultures and religious books. We're now trying to throw out marriage definition from the laws. Then why can't groups of people, blood relatives, and minors also have equal marriage rights? Maybe some of you think there is nothing wrong with these relationships. All it takes is 1 or 2 judges to declare them as minorities and we will have polygamous, pedophile and incest marriages in maybe 50 years or so. Some kids might have three moms and two dads, or mom and dad/grandpa, or mom and mom/aunt. But they love each other and not hurting anybody so we dare not impose right? So the kids might become utterly confused, but again they are not hurting anybody yet so its not our problem right?

[Kellen]

Why do people feel so threatened by gay marriage? That's something I don't understand. How does it detract from your own life? Will you and your spouse no longer be able to enjoy your heterosexual marriage? Gay marriage has been legal in Canada and in Massachusetts for a while now, and they're still standing.

By the way, for everybody who says that homosexuality is a "choice" -- religion is also a choice. Yet for some reason, it is wrong to discriminate against religious people. If we are supposed to respect your choices, then you should respect ours.

(Of course, I also implore everybody to "choose" to be gay for a week, and see how that works out for you.)

[steven kent]

Dear President elect Obama,

The people have spoken and continue to speak. They say that "Separate is Equal" in regard to marriage equality for all Americans. The voters also say that domestic partnership is equal, same sex couples don't deserve the label marriage.
So please listen to the people and enact federal legislation today to make domestic partnerships 100% equal to marriage with taxes, inheritance, hospital visitations, etc.
Let's settle this once and for all in all 50 states. So that we can stop wasting valuable resources and focus on the economy. Give marriage to the religionists. The rest of us both gay and non-gay can share the glorious new institution of legal unions.

[Just Saying]

1. If you want to protect traditional marriage, ban divorce. Let's see how many people vote Yes on that.

2. Marriage has a religious context and a secular context.The court ruling didn't say your religion had to change, it said the secular, legal definition had to change. It didn't infringe on your religious freedoms; if your specific church wants to discriminate, it would still have been allowed to do so. Some churches (Metropolitan for example) don't discriminate, and would accept "gay" marriage. Does Prop. 8 now violate their religious freedom? Using the same faulty logic, Prop 8 needs to be overturned because it violates the Metropolitan Church's religious freedom.

3. With the exception of one, those "activist judges" who ruled in favor of same-sex marriage were appointed by Republicans. This isn't a democratic/liberal/progressive agenda. It's just the right thing to do to allow for equal protection under the law. If conservative judges can see that, maybe there's something to it.

4. We're all people. If some are happy being married to someone of the same sex, why would you want to take happiness away from them just because you're uncomfortable. That's just mean and self-centered.

[Zach]

I see people have brought up the old lady who was confronted/assaulted at the No on 8 rally. Well, I'm hardly surprised, since out of the tens of thousands of people who've shown up to these protests so far, there's bound to be a couple whackos. Let's not forget the two Yes on 8 guys arrested for beating up a teenage girl in San Mateo: http://www.mercurynews.com/crime/ci_10905770

"Around 4 p.m., a man in his 20s holding a "Yes on 8" sign crossed the street and attacked a 17-year-old girl opposing the proposition, knocking her down and striking her in the head, San Mateo police Lt. Mike Brunicardi said.

A man then ran up and spit in the girl's face, police said."

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

[bobby dee]

Marriage is one man, one woman. Not 1 man and another man. Sometimes I want one man, two woman. But that is against the law. And I respect the law. Why can't LA politicians respect Prop 8. It is the law.

[Mike]

What if the "will of the people" were to ban marriage from anyone with blue eyes or what if the will of the people were to reinstate laws restricting marriage between people of different races?

Is any law right and just if there is simply a majority rule? When do we cross a line?

[DC]

Isn't that just the state of California today!! The voice of the people is once again overruled by it's government!! I thought this was a Democracy, but if they don't get their way they just file a lawsuit.

This is really a great way for a minority group to gain acceptance. Let the people vote on an issue and then once it doesn't go their way try to have the majority opinion overturned by filing lawsuits!!

[Arizonan]

I have very personal feelings about this prop. I live in Arizona and it passed here too. I had a brother -in-law who was gay and died of aids two years ago, and my next door neighbors, who I care very much for are gay They are kind and sweet to my children. They are the best neighbors in the area!! But- I believe that marriage should be between a man and a women. I believe that God created a man and a woman to be together. By nature our bodies are meant to be that way! God's plan or nature, they are made that way. I am sad that in this world of "accepting" others rights there has been so much "hate" against me for my belief. I think some protestors have the wrong idea about who "hates". I loved my brother- in- law and I love my neighbors! My right was to vote yes on the prop. and It passed, which makes it a law. You don't see people who disagreed with other elected prop.'s go out and rally and fight and file lawsuits. It was voted by the people. I hope this country will always have our right to vote! ( and not be taken over by judges, by "their " opinion)

[jv]

i don't necessarily agree at the fundamental level at the passage of this proposition. But, i do respect the process and the decision by the majority of people of this great state. it should be respected like any other initiative and set up for a re-vote in 2 years time.

[Jason]

At the federal gov't - its hard to change the constitution. In nearly every state it takes much more than 50% of the vote to change the constitution.

The real problem here is we have a flaw in our California Constitution - it should take more than 50% to change it. Constitutions aren't suppose to be easily changed - to be swayed by the passions of the moment. Otherwise, there is no difference that creating a law or changing the constitution.

52% passage on a constitutional item is not the "will of the people" being exercised. It nearly every other state, Prop 8 would of failed because it would of taken 55% -67% to pass.

LA County and others are right to take up this issue because in reality there was not a mandate to make a change of a constitutional nature. People should not just be able to turn over a supreme court decision with a majority vote - you don't have proper checks and balances that way.

[Seth]

LA TIMES for once post this! As a recent advocate for students with disabilities, I bluntly see what's wrong with prop 8. I am a heterosexual male and realize that in our society it is important to protect the rights of every individual. I don't see anything wrong with the marriage of homosexual couples. They pay taxes, vote, as much as anyone else. Why deprive somemone of their inherent rights? It is not like we as a secular society are forcing religious groups to marry homosexual couples. This is mainly a secular issue. There is a clear separation of church and state. Some say, "we have to protect the institution of marriage" To those people I would say, "Where have you been??" There are more divorces than marriages. What is there to protect?? If you are religious why don't you learn to love your neighbor?

[Travis]

I don't see why people see this as a civil issue when it is clearly a moral issue. If everyone were gay or lesblan than the human race would cease to exist which clearly tells me that it is a moral issue rather than a civil issue. I am grateful that the majority of the people of California have realized this.

[Civil Rights]

Politicians actually taken a stand for something ... "round of applause"

[Luis]

How sad it is to see people unable to handle defeat. Get over it and just accept the will of the people. Trust me if prop 8 does not go through you will see turmoil in California and all will rest on the shoulders of our leaders that have no regard to our democratic system, I thought Americas greatest strength was our democratic process. What will the rest of the world think about the disrespect in honoring our vote for the second time.... What a shame..

[Rita Hernandez]

people say "the voters spoke"
CORRECTION: HALF of the voters spoke. and just because half holds certain beliefs and thinks they should be enforced upon every one else doesnt mean legislature should reflect that. they are inflicting their religious convictions upon the rest, not every one believes what half of the voters believe, so we all shouldnt be forced to abide by a law that has been drawn up simply on beliefs.

this law breaches what is protected by the constitution, and the very principles that this country was founded on, LIFE, LIBERTY and!! the pursuit of happiness.

also, seperation of church and state, this piece of legislature was drawn up with purely religious intentions and their arguements were based on lies(children are NOT taught about marriage in schools). i dont care if this country was founded by religious individuals(whom were mostly Deists), not every one serves the same religion, if any religion at all.

discrimination doesnt float here and prop 8 will not stand.

[Glen]

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke"

Alas, the immortal words of the founding fathers have been given an Orwellian spin and should now read: 'All men are created equal, but some are more equal than others.'

[Venice Pete]

Conservatives continually site "the will of the people" and "the people have spoken" as valid arguments in favor of prop 8. They should remember that it was the will of the people that blacks sit in the back of the bus in Selma, Alabama. It was also the will of the people to have "separate but equal" facilities for black americans. Simply because a majority votes on something does not mean it is correct or just. It only means that that is the opinion of the majority. Constitutional protections exist in order to prevent the majority from lauding their sheer numbers over those that are fewer in number. An unjust law whether voted in by majority or not continues to be unjust. The racial purity act of Virginia was "the will of the People" yet it was overturned by the US Supreme Court "Love decision". According to the logic of many of the conservative postings we should reinstate it. After all it was the will of the people!

[Denda]

dont you guys get it what part you guys dont understand " let me said it Again
si on prop. 8 find something else to do and learn how to respect our vote.
ONE MORE TIME YES ON PROP. 8

[Married, Catholic with Children]

Does ANYONE who voted for Prop 8 remember that our founding fathers called for a separation of Church and State? Part of the State's job is to govern the people and ensure that all are treated equally. The Church is entitled to uphold it's beliefs within it's congregation, meaning no church will be forced to marry gay couples. But the Church cannot dictate discrimination, on ANY basis. Shame on all of you for being so ignorant. And if you're worried about how this will affect your children then you must not be very confident in how good of a parent you are.

[Robert Reincke]

The legislature is doing what it is entrusted to do by the people. This kind of proposition should never have gone on the ballot. In times when we as people should all be coming together it has done nothing but create divisiveness. If people think it is a moral or church issue, so be it. In which case it should have never been put to a vote or entered our (my) constitution in the first place. People can do whatever they want with their won morality or convictions but should not impose on separation of church and state. Gays have just as much right to marry as heterosexuals. This is not an issue for the masses to decide. If people dislike that then don't attend our wedding. But it is appropriate for it to be removed from our constitution and our legislatures to protect us, a much badgered minority from the angry mobs of people who continually deny us our rights.

[James Stone]

I like how the sole argument for the gay marriage proponents is "It doesn't hurt anyone else!" Maybe if the opponents did a better job of reaching beyond religious rhetoric for our justifications, we could explain exactly why it does:

http://counteredmajoritarian.blogspot.com/

[Val Streit]

Religion and morals...that is what the supporters of Prop 8 spew out in their quest to state that gays are "separate but equal". I am sure most of you know what that means...we can have something of our own, just not the same thing. It happened to blacks during the Civil Rights movement. Marriage is NOT religious (I got married by a Commissioner of Civil Marriage). And to the the guy who said "marriage was made by our creator", you are really out of touch. Marriage use to be a contract, often of selling a woman to a man or trading her. Marriages were performed by a Justice of the Peace. People took marriage into churches, and NOT everyone gets married in a church so it is NOT a religious institution like some of you claim. Atheists marry and I can bet the farm they don't do it in a church.

It is YOUR freedom to believe whatever you want, but DO NOT impose your religious beliefs on people to take away their right to happiness. You have NO right to do that.

Gay marriage went on for 5 months and kids were NOT taught anything about it. The supporter of Prop 8 have done more to teach children about gay marriage than gays. How? Everywhere you drive now there is a protest and it is all over the news...can't hide that and they see it. They are learning hate first hand from those of you who supported Prop 8....and they are learning about rights, just like I did when I was little in the 60's. I was a child watching blacks get beat up and degraded on TV and I saw them march. If I would have grown up and racist and bigot like my father, I would have had the mindset that all the Prop 8 supporters do. Luckily I saw unfairness and learned to like the people who most didn't.

Take a lesson from that!!!

[John G]

Welcome to the tyranny of our L.A. board.
The people have VOTED twice about this issue but they don't care.

I'll remember that at the next election and work like hell to get all of them VOTED OUT.
This is a democracy, if they want to make their owns rules without regard for the people go work in Iran or North Korea.

[Lauri L.]

Having voted for allowing gay marriage 2 x's now, I too was dissapointed at the outcome of this past election. Despite my votes I am not pro gay marriage, in fact it makes me uncomfortable but recognize the discrimination aspect of it. However, with that said, I do not like tax payer dollars being spent at time where the economy is awful, people need homes and food, and a lot of other civil resources, going to a non urgent cause. I just can't get behind the board, city of los angeles, and san francisco at this time. Why can't they just put civil unions on the ballot, why does it have to be marriage. I would even want the whole civil unions to be for all people----I would much rather as a straight person get all the rights of a civil union, vs having to impose my religion upon my mate with marriage.

[Mark]

Good for L.A. County. Minority rights should not be stripped away with a simple popular vote.

It's sad that so many still want to keep gay people from being happy and from feeling that they are equal with the rest of the world.

It's so easy to be hateful when you're in the majority, isn't it, folks?

[James Sullivan]

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.

If there is a god and most people believe there is, the homosexuals are the ones who will have to explain themselves.

[DingTank]

LOL!

The teacher's union and our city legislature are against the children's right to be parented by both sexes.

No wonder kids are increasingly becoming violent and anti-social.

With the downturn in our economy it is certain that we will have more time for these kinds of battles.

And we will not rest until we take back our government, people.

[Brian]

Has it occurred to people that these public figures may realize they are on their last term by popular vote by opposing Prop 8? Maybe they would rather take a fall trying to restore a civil right than to sit around and do nothing. You people who think that Prop 8 is a do all and say all on same-sex marriage don't seem to realize that this war is just beginning. You don't think there won't be another movement of the likes of the Civil Rights Movement in the 60s? You have no idea what you all got yourselves into.

[Lisa Andersen]

Prop 8 passes in Los Angeles County. Why are the leaders of the county trying to overturn what the people they are leading want? That makes no sense.

[John]

Love it. Love all the controversy. We gays are so scary !!! Boo.

Ha ha hahha hha ha - It gives me great joy to see all the vibrant, happy, excited NO ON 8 people protesting and all the scared, self-righteous, YES ON HATE "democracy-lovers" mad that we scary gays have an opinion. Boo !

Democracy only lasts a second, equal rights stick around. So be afraid. We're going to bring equal rights to a State near you.