L.A. NOW

Southern California -- this just in

« Previous Post | L.A. NOW Home | Next Post »

Senate approves resolution opposing Proposition 8

Gay Just days before the matter is to be taken up by California’s Supreme Court, the state Senate today approved a resolution today calling Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage, an improper revision of the Constitution because it was not approved by the Legislature.

Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) said the initiative is a fundamental revision to the document, not an amendment, and therefore required deliberation by the Legislature and a two-thirds vote of both houses to put it on the ballot.

"Do we have a constitutional democracy in California, or do we have mob rule?" Leno asked his colleagues before the 18-14 vote approved the resolution.

The issue of whether proper procedures were followed in putting the measure on the ballot is to be considered Thursday, when the state Supreme Court takes up a legal challenge to the ballot measure.

Republican senators said the resolution was an inappropriate attempt by the Legislature to influence the courts.

"Californians have spoken. They have spoken a couple of times," said Sen. George Runner (R-Lancaster). "I guess I don’t see the California citizens, who I believe thoughtfully went to their voting places, as participating in mob rule."

--Patrick McGreevy

Photo: Protesters demonstrate against Proposition 8. Credit: Los Angeles Times

 
Comments () | Archives (77)

This is not an issue that will just go away. As someone above stated, the "sleeping giant" has been stirred. The fact that the fundamental right to marriage is being questioned to me is baffling. Anyone should have the right to marry anyone. I can understand a religious bias against it (not that I agree with that) but is it a religious bias, or a societal bias?

A minority's rights should not be able to be voted on. They should be given as citizens of the United States, the "free country" we espouse ourselves to be.

This maneuver may be all about semantics, but behind this political manuever lies something much bigger: equal rights for all.

Allowing this skewed proposition to stand allows for loopholes in our country's foundation...and where there's one loophole there are plenty of others. Justice shouldn't allow overlooking these weak points, and neither should we.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. What is so hard to understand about that. In addition, a majortiy has spoken, twice.

I am an American citizen.
And I demand my EQUAL rights!

NOW!

This gay lobby is unbelieveable! We, the voters are not a mob and no one's civil rights are being taken away. Gays never had this right at anytime in history and Californians decided they were happy to keep it that way. President Obam agrees, the vast majority of Black Americans agree...why aren't the gay activists going after them? Gays can have a civil union...they are just grandstanding over semantics and creating so much drama. It is pathetic that so many Americans, including the idiots in our State Senate, are too intimidated by their tactics to do the right thing. If we allow gay marriage then why not other forms of marriage? Why not polygamy, incest and bestiality? Many people really love their animals and many love more than one person...why shouldn't it all be legal?

What a bunch of morons in this State of California.

The people voted twice to strike gay marriage.

Are you ready for the revolt when the courts strike down the SECOND VOTE OF THE PEOPLE.

Liberals cannot group together in gay clubs and court houses and think that the hard working Californians who are focused on their families and careers will turn a blind eye again to this.

The GIANT is now awake.

What this all means is that all those gay senate members will continue to undo what the people of California vote on. First they reverse what the people voted on and allow gay and even gayer people of the same sex to marry. To Marry, do any of you really know what that means?

You make a mockery of all that is sacred in marriage. Tell me how all you gay and gayer and lesbians can "BE FRUITIFUL AND MULTIPLY", you can not! You will cease to exist.

No one discriminates against you as human beings just as doing immortal things and ridiculing it by taking part in a sacred ceremony of MARRIAGE .

Our county is sinking into the pits so fast. No wonder so many countries think we have no morals, it is so true.

. What you all fail to see is that being gay (BEING, is a state of being) is not a minority or a race or nationality or a religion. So sad..........................

The founding fathers put in place 3 branches of government for a reason. I understand that Prop 8 supporters might not want these three branches of government to do their jobs, but like it or not, that is the system of government that we have. Our system has never been one that just puts up all public policy to a majority vote. There's a good reason for that. I suspect that if this went to the US Supreme Court the mere idea of putting up for a popular vote certain civil rights would not get an obvious easy pass. But the system dictates that the appeals start at the state level and only go to the federal courts once all state avenues have been exhausted. I suspect this will be challenged to the US Court by whoever loses the current appeal.

Gays...always seeking to force society to validate their lifestyle choices. Can't convince the people democratically, they opt for fascism instead.

The USA immigration courts are flooded with petitions for political asalym based on persecution for sexual orientation. I don't mean the real persecution. I mean geterosexuals in masses lying before USA immigration attorities that they were persecuted for being homosexuals in countries of their origins.
I understand the pain of those homosexuals who were abused as children and that confused their sexuality. The psycological help to get adjusted is lenghty and costly. Geterosexuals are full of problems too. Basically we all need to use self-help for various problems that we as corrupted humanity are experiencig. And there are no easy ways for all of us.
Homosexual brothers and sisters, please have courage and strenght to deal with your problems. Do not give in into the lies. Frogs are boiled to death without pain when you slowly heat the pot they're in.

Mac Reynolds wrote:
"Looking at the precedent of cases which have come before, the voters were well within their means to pass this initiative. This was not by any stretch of the law a revision, as defined by the court in past cases. "

I'd agree with much of what you wrote except for the fact that SC clearly say in their original ruling that they are overturning the original ban on equal protection grounds. You get no closer to core principles than that. You might believe that ruling to be a mistake, and I might even agree that it opens a huge can of worms, but the words are there and the state (and the SC) have to live with them.

I expect a reluctant court to abide by its earlier stand and reject prop 8 as a revision. I also expect they'll be more circumspect in their future rulings.

For those who say "Didn't we already vote on this?":

Yes, but if you know even a minimal amount of history, you know that the voters don't always have the final word when it comes to civil rights. Like it or not, if the California Supreme Court says that marriage is a fundamental right, then it is. We have a judicial branch of government for a reason, you know.

Honestly, anyone who voted to invalidate the 18,000 marriages that took place legally last year is a disgusting, mean-spirited human being, in my opinion. You're so wrong, and someday history will prove this to be true.

Yay!!!!!! EQUAL RIGHTS!

So first off the constitution is supposed to guarantee rights, not take them away. The only amendment(Federally) to ever take away rights was prohibition, but that was repealed... Second inorder for a constitutional amendment to be accepted is that it needs to be approved by 2/3 of the legislature and 3/4 of all the states, again federally speaking, I think that if the voters should be able to change the constitution it should nly be with a 2/3 majority, not simply a 50% majority. All of you preaching about the sanctity of marriage would you vote to ban divorce if it was on the ballot? I guarantee you that a divorce initiative would fail overwhelmingly, though divore does more to destroy the sanctity of marriage then gay marriage, which further proves that people voted for prop 8 based off of pure hate and not to protect marriage. Also if you are all in favor of a simple majority vote, then why don't we go back to the publics will of slavery, banning inter-racal marriage, etc... because at those times the MAJORITY was in favor of such things.... Also the bible says I can stone my wife and sell my daughter into slavery, so should I be held accountable to the law if I stone my wife to death, or sell my daughter?

Our country was built on seperation of church and state, and built on personal freedoms. In our country you have rights until your rights impede on the rights of others. Gay Marriage doesn't hurt anyone, you may argue oh the sanctity of marriage and religious bullshit all you want, but then we need to get into a fundamental debate on religion, and as I understand it we have freedom of religion and aren't forced to follow a single religion or god, therefor keep religion out of it.

So again gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone or impede on their rights. If gays get married it doesn't stop you from having the freedom of religion, speach, the right to own a gun, the right from improper search and seizure, the right to a trial by jury, the right against self incrimination, the pursuit of life liberty or happiness, NO it doesn't take away anyone elses rights!!!

However if you ban gay marriage then you are impeding on gay peoples rights to pursuit happiness, or to exercise their freedom of religion, b/c you are denying them a basic right and shoving your religion down their throat.

If you peoplefeel that strongly about the term "marriage" then what I propose is that the government should not recognize ANY MARRIAGE, instead the government should only offer civil unions, and that is all that should be recognized to government. Civil unions should be available to everyone gay and straight, and if you want to get married then you can go to your church and get married in God's eyes. That way we can preserve the sanctity of the term "marriage" and yet offer everyone equal rights... Also it preserves the seperation of church and state. No one should be against this idea because it does preserve your precious term "marriage"

Basically proposition 8 boiled down to pure hate, I am ashamed to say that I am from California after this passed. Again if we were to put divorce on the ballot, we should see it pass with the same percentage as prop 8, but it wouldn't, which again shows pure hate.... There are several racists out there, should we allow them to vote the rights of blacks, asians or hispanics away???? Because I am sure in some parts of the country, especially in states like Arkansas, Mississippi and Alabama they could achieve a simple majority to ban the rights of blacks, but is that right? NO, again stop this bickering about prop 8, it is pure hate, and I can not wait until the California Supreme Court overturns it.... Remember the constitution preserves rights, not take them away, and also people should be guaranteed rights unless they impede on someone elses rights, and gay marriage does not take away anyone elses rights, that is the fundamental point, they do not impede on anyone else, therefor it should be perfectly legal!!!

hooray for the senate! now, let's hope the supreme court is as enlightened.

New principle:
Casting ballot is mob rule.
Demonstrate and intimidate is constitutional rule.

Well, bigots, we have governments because intolerant jerks need their ignorant opinions reversed. As Sean Penn said, your grandchildren will be mortified. How DARE you think it is your decision to decide things that don't affect you. GROW UP. I'm so happy intellegent people are working for the government (not George Runner and his pals, obviously), and not just backwoods-minded people like those who showed up to vote. It's 2009. GET A LIFE. ALL people deserve to be treated the same. Let's go ahead and leave it to God to judge, not just small-minded bigots. I can't believe this is even a point of discussion in this day and age. How awful. HOORAY FOR EQUALITY!

Well, you people finally see that California does not have true representation, your elected officials, you elected are turning a deft ear to you... Why, because you no longer count.

Lobby has taken the pupet strings over and are making policy the way they think it aught to be.

You voted time and again, what have you gotten your way? Immigration? Transportation? Taxes? Business? Reform? Crime? I cant count one accomplishment to the benefit of the majority, listen to Mark Leno, Majority is mob, but it was majority that got him into office...

Californians are about to be taxed in ways they have never known before, but what you get in return is larger classrooms, higher prices, closed hospital emergency rooms, congested traffic, potholes in your roads, murder, and other violent crime, open borders, drug infested neighborhoods, forclosures, unemployment, homelessness, etc etc etc. and the only thing they are trying to solve is somebody's right to get married....

If Californians dont stand up for something, they are going to fall for anything. Write your senator, and tell them what you want, blow their phones off the hooks, and let them know your next vote will not be for them if they do not take the quality of life for the representatives seriously enough to knuckle down and make some changes.

Get serious people, or get stuffed!!!!!

Mac,

What is a constitutional revision should be clearly defined. That would be helpful for me. Please do not refer in past cases for it either.

Citizens have never had a fundamental right to marry anyone. The recognition of a marriage is determined by the state which is determined by the people.

True, but what happened in the sixties when interracial marriages were not permitted. This same argument could have held. At some point you have to bring in fundamental rights. I dont think one persons fundamental rights could deprive another person of a fundamental right. Fundamental rights are not imaginary, but a priori.
If you feel that two gay people getting married is preventing you from enjoying fundamental right, then the problem probably resides in your head.

I dont understand how same sex marriage would impact religious freedom. It probably has to do with the church and state intertwinement as you suggested. I dont think society would collapse if gay couples married. A loving couple is the same no matter what type of genitals a person has. Plus sex and romance is 99% mental anyways. Ive known many guys to take the feminine role in a straight relationship and many women to take the male role. It wouldnt make the dysfunctional family situation any worse because its not a matter of straight/gay, its more of a matter of how present a person is to their child's needs.

Gla d to see the State Senate took this action ! To all those claiming "there will be mob rule if Prop 8 is overturned" , you don't remember your history. In the early 70 s the State Supreme Court outlawed discrimination in fair housing. Blacks were being denied the right to buy houses and rent apartments in neighborhoods that discriminated. There were enough "conservatives" and bigotrs in this state they got a Prop on the ballot to overturn the non discrimination ruling. It passed . Was it wrong that the court then stepped in to overturn the results of that Prop ? What I hear from the Yes on 8 supporters is a resounding YES ! It is OK to discriminate if we want whether it is against Blacks or gays.

Mac Reynolds wrote:
"Looking at the precedent of cases which have come before, the voters were well within their means to pass this initiative. This was not by any stretch of the law a revision, as defined by the court in past cases. "

I'd agree with much of what you wrote except for the fact that SC clearly say in their original ruling that they are overturning the original ban on equal protection grounds. You get no closer to core principles than that. You might believe that ruling to be a mistake, and I might even agree that it opens a huge can of worms, but the words are there and the state (and the SC) have to live with them.

I expect a reluctant court to abide by its earlier stand and reject prop 8 as a revision. I also expect they'll be more circumspect in their future rulings.

Let's clear some things up....

US Constitution, 15th, 19th & 26th Amendment = Guarantees your right to vote in a democratic process and prohibits the federal government and the states from forbidding any citizen to vote due to their race, sex or age (18 and older)

Democracy = government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

Majority = the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder

Minority = a group of people who differ racially or politically from a larger group of which it is a part

To over turn the voice of the people that chose to exercise their right to vote, which is guaranteed by the United States Constitution, is a direct violation of the freedoms that are afforded to we the people of the United States. Rather than applauding this resolution, whether or not you agree with prop 8 or this resolution, every American should be outraged that the California State Senate has raped its people of the very process that has put these so-called "leaders" in their positions!

The action taken today by the California State Senate is a disgrace!

Good ol R-Tom Harman Huntington Beach states Prop 8 is not an amendment because it is a "14 worded initiative" but when D-Mark Leno San Francisco asked would it be an amendment if it stated "Jews can't marry"? Good ol R-Tom Harman Huntington Beach DID NOT EVEN ANSWER!!! I wonder WHY HE DIDN"T ANSWER THAT ONE?????? haha PATHETIC!!!!

Why do you people even bother voting anymore? If the Socialist Liberals don't like the final result, they just find a friendly judge to overturn the will of the people.
This is the main reason why I left that sinkhole you call a state 2 years ago and will never come back.

Would it have been a revision of the constitution if voters had approved gay marriage ?

Why does this come up now after the voters have voted on this prop and have said no to gay marriage.

After passing the smoke and mirrors budget which lives on Federal printed cash, legislators are back in business to usurp the constitution,

Nex year this time we will be in a even bigger budget hole and there will be nothing left to tax, except for our gay friends.

Why can't we all get along? We could compromise: The religions should have their own rules about who may marry within their associations. The government that serves all society, may be all inclusive, and have a policy that is not prejudiced against anyone. And since the religions want to be active in politics, they should start to pay property taxes on their religious estates. (They certainly can afford it when they spend millions just to be divisive.) And they should stop trying to impose their rules on everybody.

 
« | 1 2 3 4 | »

Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Video

About L.A. Now
L.A. Now is the Los Angeles Times’ breaking news section for Southern California. It is produced by more than 80 reporters and editors in The Times’ Metro section, reporting from the paper’s downtown Los Angeles headquarters as well as bureaus in Costa Mesa, Long Beach, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Riverside, Ventura and West Los Angeles.
Have a story tip for L.A. Now?
Please send to newstips@latimes.com
Can I call someone with news?
Yes. The city desk number is (213) 237-7847.

Categories




Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: