L.A. NOW

Southern California -- this just in

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

False report on Proposition 8 being overturned lights up Twitter

The Twitter world has been abuzz today over a false report that the California Supreme Court had overturned Proposition 8, the voter-approved ban on gay marriage.

Here’s what seems to have happened: Some Twitter readers came across an archived Los Angeles Times story from a year ago, assumed it was breaking news and started sending it out on Twitter. A Times Web producer noticed the traffic and intended to send a Twitter message telling people that the story was a year old but instead copy and pasted an incorrect headline along with the Times logo.

The Times has since labeled the story as "archive." Other websites, such as Perez Hilton, have also alerted readers about the misinformation. Web guru Danny Sullivan offers a useful postmortem here.

The court's ruling on Prop. 8 is expected in the next few weeks. Full Times coverage of the gay marriage fight is here.

-- Shelby Grad

 
Comments () | Archives (14)

The best compromise that would respect equal protection, separation of church and state, and certain people's moral sensitivities would be to remove the state from the "marriage" business. The state should only offer civil unions, regardless of sexual orientation. Let those who wish to extend such a union into the spiritual realm do so at whatever religious institution is willing to marry them, and let the religious institutions decide for themselves about same-sex-marriage.

Interesting that the court hasn't issued its ruling yet. After the hearing I thought we'll get the ruling within weeks. I hope the court will address the Attorney General's argument that Prop 8 is in conflict of the United States Constitution and their ruling last year that overturned the gay marriage ban. If the court does allow Prop 8 to stand, its time that the state gets out of the business of marriage and into the business of Civil Unions. Let the church handle the marriages. That way straight and gay couples can marry in the church that welcomes them.

This would require nullifying all marriages in order to achieve equality (which isn't ever going to happen). If the court believes in justice and equality, then it cannot shrink away from this issue no matter how loaded it is. God willing, they will see that there is only one decision that will overcome this discriminatory issue once and for all.

Do we really believe it was that innocent of a mistake??

The business of marriage is the business of the State.

No church can marry people without a marriage license provided by the State.

All the churches can do is provide a ceremony.

With enough $$$ you can have a bishop to marry you and make it last for hours.

The legal marriage happens at the city hall for a minimal fee with a minimal performance.

Words cannot describe how massively idiotic Twitter is. I can't wait for the founders to cash out and for it to die a stupidly ironic death. I guarantee in three years we're sure as hell not going to be using twitter for anything useful. Remember myspace? I don't, and you probably don't either. It's hard to believe that a mob of people can organize, loot and burn and be totally wrong.

Clearly there is no value in checking facts, so why bother? Spark up the torch and grab the pitchfork. I am sure Amazon got a ton of apologies. This poor paper is going to die because of moronic wastes of time like twitter. If ten thousand people on twitter say it's true, it must be, eh?

I love how this story implies that those of us who forwarded the article (or those who twittered it) it did so because we "came across" the old article and made bad assumptions that it was breaking news---oh so casually glossing over that it was only LATER that they properly marked it as an ARCHIVED STORY. Where's the sentence pointing out that all us idiots who assumed it was breaking news did so because it was linked in the fresh news links part at right on the site?!

That carelessness (of LAT and of those of us who didn't think to carefully check that stale news isn't being posted erroneously as fresh news) make me grumpy! But you know what, maybe it's good that people are made to think about this issue again and what they can do to make sure that next time, it's not a false report.

Prop 8 conflicts with the fundamental right to marriage and equal protection established by the California Supreme Court. The court should reiterate that there is no legitimate state interest in denying gays and lesbians the right to marry. This proposition seeks to do just that and cannot stand.

A simple majority vote cannot strip away the fundamental rights of minorities, that would be a tyranny of the majority.

Check out my video on YouTube, "Gay Marriage: Just the Facts"

This is how the morons lost the last 2 elections, they believed their fake polls. 1st of all we did not need these last 2 elections because by definition of marriage at the writing of the state constitution it meant only man/woman. These justices never have any legal right to render any decision over-ruling the constitution. And the 18,000 gay marriages were never legal. There are plenty of people not registered and did not vote which are against gay marriage.

Leave it up to the right to take things out of context again.You wanna talk about false reports? How about those claiming they saw God's name written on their "salami" or Jesus on the tree trunk of a tree. That's why you are going to lose, you live based on ignorance, lies, bigotry, and hypocrisy.

Marcos El Malo: The problem is, marriage is not a religious institution. If it were, why can atheists get married? Why can people who commit various sins get married? Marriage was an institution far before Christianity was even in diapers. And why your religion? What makes Christianity more valid than any other religion? If you want to take marriage out of the state, then how about this, every non-religious marriage is the only marriage that is sanctioned by the nation. A religious marriage would not be recognized by the nation, but would be a special blessing for religious people. Until you can prove that God exists, and that it's the Christian God, you cannot force your religion down other people's throats and hold the rights to an institution that was never yours in the first place. Oh, and not only are your times numbered on gay marriage, your times may be numbered on religion being true.

A step closer to proving how life began on earth - further proof of abiogenesis:
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090513/full/news.2009.471.html


It ain’t just one religion but all religion based on the first book of the Old Testament that ban gay marriage.

In Gen 2:24, it is stated that “a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they shall become one flesh”.

So combined, it is the Christians, the Muslims and the Jews that believe this, not just one Religion! So when are the protestors going to protest outside of a Mosque?

This argument shouldn't be about religion. Religion is not what those who oppose 8 are after, or should be after. We are after equality under law, which SHOULD NOT be roadblocked by any group, including the religious.
Lets separate religion from county, state and federal law. Civil Unions are not the same as marriage. Does anyone remember the Brown v Board of Education ruling? "Separate but equal is inherently unequal" Which such a broad ruling and definitely words, why is it so far fetched that we cannot utilize this ruling with the current situation on marriage discrimination?
By not allowing marriage, under the law, for all groups we are dividing the people and classifying them. "Our government does not allow this, therefore it is wrong", that's the message being sent to the populace. Whether that is the message we want to send is likely for some it is not correct.
Voters of California have erred. California Supreme Court, you exist to clarify and sometimes, as I believe is the current case, to guide voters who have unjustly voted to pass a discriminatory and unconstitutional amendment.
We cannot interpret the constitution, state or federal, but the California Supreme Court can make an impact. Tell us we were wrong and that our wants do not supersede the constitution. Uphold it and guarantee equality whether the majority of voters want it or not.

This is a lesson that we still need to verify what we see on Twitter and not believe everything we read.

That way straight and gay couples can marry in the church that welcomes them.


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?
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: