Prop 8 protests

[Gollum]

These protests seem very strange to me. I don't understand why people are protesting a legitimate vote. If it wouldn't have passed, they would have been skipping down to the nearest courthouse and those that voted for it would have quietly accepted defeat.

 

But, when it doesn't pass these angry angry people carry on protests for at least a week after the fact.

 

How can you protest a legit vote? The courts weren't involved, there were no shenanigans. It was a vote. Someone won, someone lost. Why are we still talking about this?

 

I understand they are upset because they lost. But the vote can't be overturned by protesting. Their lack of respect for the democratic process is probably going to lose them more votes next time than they would have gotten otherwise.

 

Protest decisions made by leaders or protest decisions made by courts. I don't dispute their right to protest. In this case however, it seems that they are protesting against 52% of the voters. That is just a really strange thing to protest.

 

Regardless of your feelings on the issue of gay marriage, isn't there something wrong with these kind of protests on a fundamental level? Isn't there nothing more here than a lack of respect for the democratic process and our fundamental governmental system?

[eddy]

These protests seem very strange to me. I don't understand why people are protesting a legitimate vote. If it wouldn't have passed, they would have been skipping down to the nearest courthouse and those that voted for it would have quietly accepted defeat.

 

But, when it doesn't pass these angry angry people carry on protests for at least a week after the fact.

 

How can you protest a legit vote? The courts weren't involved, there were no shenanigans. It was a vote. Someone won, someone lost. Why are we still talking about this?

 

I understand they are upset because they lost. But the vote can't be overturned by protesting. Their lack of respect for the democratic process is probably going to lose them more votes next time than they would have gotten otherwise.

 

Protest decisions made by leaders or protest decisions made by courts. I don't dispute their right to protest. In this case however, it seems that they are protesting against 52% of the voters. That is just a really strange thing to protest.

 

Regardless of your feelings on the issue of gay marriage, isn't there something wrong with these kind of protests on a fundamental level? Isn't there nothing more here than a lack of respect for the democratic process and our fundamental governmental system?

 

and people say Republicans are whining too much about Obama being elected.

[John Purser]

People legitimately voted to segregate the schools, make blacks use separate water fountains, and to prevent women from voting.

 

Protesting is as important to a democratic process as voting is. Let's call them "Legitimate protests".

[achez]

Protestors spitting in a senior citizens face, stepping on the cross. Classless.

[Gollum]

and people say Republicans are whining too much about Obama being elected.

 

To be honest with you, I resent that. I posed a fair question. It isn't whining about the protests. I want to know why it makes sense to protest 52% of the population that voted for Prop 8. At least John's comment, while possibly inaccurate, presented something to discuss.

 

People legitimately voted to segregate the schools, make blacks use separate water fountains, and to prevent women from voting.

 

Protesting is as important to a democratic process as voting is. Let's call them "Legitimate protests".

 

I'm not sure that segregation was voted on. I believe segregation was a law instituted by the various states. Women's suffrage was on the federal level, but still a law instituted by the states in the Constitution. Blacks were protesting instituted laws. Women were protesting instituted laws. Neither was protesting the result of an election.

 

As I discussed above, I am not against protesting. I agree that it is an important right. If people want to protest laws made by elected leaders, fine. If people want to protest court decisions, fine. If people want to protest an executive's decisions fine.

 

I do not see these protests as legitimate. They are protesting an actual vote - the fundamental order of our system of government. They are not protesting an "unfairness" or that the vote was "ACORNed." They don't dispute the results. They are only protesting that they lost. What does that prove? They can't overturn the result. It is done.

[Chuckles]

They're not protesting the outcome; they're protesting/picketing the people who provided the financial backing to get the prop passed. Nothin' wrong with that.

[Nessmuk]

Being black isn't a behavioral abnormality, so that's apples and oranges.

 

Otherwise, they've got a right to protest all they want.

 

I'd like to protest that freaky woman having her second child while pretending to be male. Another example of medical professionals seeming to have warped ethics.

[Gollum]

They're not protesting the outcome; they're protesting/picketing the people who provided the financial backing to get the prop passed. Nothin' wrong with that.

 

They are not protesting the people that provided financial backing. The Mormon church did not give a dime to get Prop 8 passed. Some, and I emphasize some, members of the church donated time and money to get it passed. But, so did a lot of non-mormon people. Why not protest those people as well?

 

Plus, what is the point? Persecuting people for the way they voted? That's all it is. It's just harassment.

 

Being black isn't a behavioral abnormality, so that's apples and oranges.

 

Otherwise, they've got a right to protest all they want.

 

I'd like to protest that freaky woman having her second child while pretending to be male. Another example of medical professionals seeming to have warped ethics.

 

I'm not saying that they don't have a right to protest. I am asking what the point of the protest is? What do they hope to prove? That they lost? That they are mad at Mormons?

 

I'm also questioning the motives for the protests because protesting the outcome of a FAIR election is fundamentally contrary to the American governmental system. Agree or disagree with the majority, American government is based on elections. The outcome of a fair election has to be respected.

[Nessmuk]

They're just trying to scare everyone into putting it back on the next ballot, or force the courts to intervene on Constitutionality grounds. They're being the squeaky wheel and want to get lubed.

[Gollum]

They're just trying to scare everyone into putting it back on the next ballot, or force the courts to intervene on Constitutionality grounds. They're being the squeaky wheel and want to get lubed.

 

Interesting thought.

 

I wonder, though, how quickly the court will want to intervene on Constitutionality grounds especially because this is an actual Constitutional amendment to the California Constitution. I think it even more unlikely because the Court was really just badly embarrassed by the electorate.

 

I'm not sure the courts have any "lube" for them. I mean that what is done is done. I don't see that the court can call the Constitutional Amendment unconstitutional. The whole reason for the Constitutional amendment is to change the decision handed down in June.

[Nessmuk]

Interesting thought.

 

I wonder, though, how quickly the court will want to intervene on Constitutionality grounds especially because this is an actual Constitutional amendment to the California Constitution. I think it even more unlikely because the Court was really just badly embarrassed by the electorate.

 

I'm not sure the courts have any "lube" for them. I mean that what is done is done. I don't see that the court can call the Constitutional Amendment unconstitutional. The whole reason for the Constitutional amendment is to change the decision handed down in June.

 

 

The courts will have to be Federal, the grounds US Constitution.

[Gollum]

The courts will have to be Federal, the grounds US Constitution.

 

An appeal from the California State Court for a ruling on the Federal Constitution will give SCOTUS sole original jurisdiction.

 

So are you suggesting that SCOTUS will 1. Grant cert in the first place and 2. overrule their recent precedents that leave the gay marriage issue to the state?

 

I think this equally unlikely as the California Court overruling the outcome of the election.

[Nessmuk]

An appeal from the California State Court for a ruling on the Federal Constitution will give SCOTUS sole original jurisdiction.

 

So are you suggesting that SCOTUS will 1. Grant cert in the first place and 2. overrule their recent precedents that leave the gay marriage issue to the state?

 

I think this equally unlikely as the California Court overruling the outcome of the election.

 

 

Ah, I'm not suggesting the courts will do anything, and I don't really care one way or another. I'm saying the protesters are probably hoping to get the law reviewed by the SCOTUS.

[Gollum]

Ah, I'm not suggesting the courts will do anything, and I don't really care one way or another. I'm saying the protesters are probably hoping to get the law reviewed by the SCOTUS.

 

I understand your point. If that is the reason for their protests, I think their hope is vain, but at least that provides some reason for why they are doing this.

 

To be honest though, I don't think that the protesters have really thought that far out. I think they are just mad and looking to take it out on someone.

[moocks]

They're not protesting the outcome; they're protesting/picketing the people who provided the financial backing to get the prop passed. Nothin' wrong with that.

 

Then they are protesting the wrong people.

 

Black voters voted 70 30 against Prop 8 and were the deciding factor. See any protest at black churches ?