A Prop 8 challenge for swankers - Page 9

Gemini Cricket · 10-22-2008, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katiesue

So now when any Prop 8 ads come on her comment is "it's Stupid that they can't get married".

Madz is so very awesome. And so is Mom!

Morrigoon · 10-22-2008, 12:06 PM

Well, doing a prop 8 search on twitter is encouraging, but we all know that only taking a sample from the wired world is not representative.

Ghoulish Delight · 10-22-2008, 04:41 PM

Awesome. Just got handed a letter from an openly gay coworker asking to vote against 8 (in which I learned he was married in '04 in SF to his partner). I of course told him I already was. It was in an envelope with my name on it, so I assume he's only handing them to people whom he has a working relationship with and is not blanketing the company, but good for him for doing something!

ETA: Heh, also learned that he was a practicing devout Mormon for 30 years.

Prudence · 10-22-2008, 07:40 PM

I object to the idea of amending any constitution to limit standard rights for particular groups of people. Generally constitutional changes are reserved for specifically enumerating rights.

innerSpaceman · 10-22-2008, 08:25 PM

Which will, in fact, be the basis of the lawsuit filed if Prop H8 passes. There's some sort of precedent which holds the Constitution cannot be amended by ballot initiatives for the purpose of taking away Constutitional rights ... or some such thing.

scaeagles · 10-22-2008, 08:31 PM

The problem, as I see it, is (and I'm assuming that it would be the same as the federal Constitution) that there is no limitation to what can be an amendment. I would guess that if enough people voted for it, one could amend the constitution declaring that chickens have voting rights and the owners have the power to vote on behalf of their chickens (thereby reducing the voting power of non-chicken owners).

BarTopDancer · 10-22-2008, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

A little more info on my Twitter post -

There were 7 or 8 if not more No on 8 signs along the path I took home from the freeway. This path was basically off the 133 down to just before Sand Canyon. Not a super busy road. Last week I noticed a bunch of No on 8 signs placed along the path. Yesterday I noticed a few of the No on 8 signs missing. Didn't think anything of it, as I could have just overlooked them. Today I am certain they have all been removed. Other political signs are up, just the No on 8 signs have been removed. There are no Yes on 8 signs up (there weren't before either).

The signs have been replaced and re-done. They now say "this sign has been torn down [number] times. Stop the hate. No on 8. With a print out of the Irvine municipal code that it is illegal to remove political signs.

innerSpaceman · 10-22-2008, 08:43 PM

scaeagles, there's a limit on what can be amended BY BALLOT MEASURE to the California Constitution. I've seen the case law on it.

That's not to say there isn't any conflicting case law. But there will be a lawsuit on that basis if the measure passes.

BarTopDancer · 10-22-2008, 09:01 PM

From what I understand, amendments cannot be made based upon vote. Only the legislation can make them.

Kevy Baby · 10-22-2008, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

There's some sort of precedent which holds the Constitution cannot be amended by ballot initiatives for the purpose of taking away Constitutional rights ... or some such thing.

Now THERE'S a solid legal argument if I have ever heard one!

10-22-2008, 12:06 PM	#82
Morrigoon I throw stones at houses Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Location: Location Posts: 9,534	Well, doing a prop 8 search on twitter is encouraging, but we all know that only taking a sample from the wired world is not representative. __________________ http://bash.org/?top "It is useless for sheep to pass a resolution in favor of vegetarianism while wolves remain of a different opinion." -- William Randolph Inge
	Submit to Quotes

10-22-2008, 04:41 PM	#83
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Awesome. Just got handed a letter from an openly gay coworker asking to vote against 8 (in which I learned he was married in '04 in SF to his partner). I of course told him I already was. It was in an envelope with my name on it, so I assume he's only handing them to people whom he has a working relationship with and is not blanketing the company, but good for him for doing something! ETA: Heh, also learned that he was a practicing devout Mormon for 30 years. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

10-22-2008, 07:40 PM	#84
Prudence Beelzeboobs, Esq. Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Gavel - I haz it Posts: 6,287	I object to the idea of amending any constitution to limit standard rights for particular groups of people. Generally constitutional changes are reserved for specifically enumerating rights. __________________ traguna macoities tracorum satis de
	Submit to Quotes

10-22-2008, 08:25 PM	#85
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Which will, in fact, be the basis of the lawsuit filed if Prop H8 passes. There's some sort of precedent which holds the Constitution cannot be amended by ballot initiatives for the purpose of taking away Constutitional rights ... or some such thing.
	Submit to Quotes

10-22-2008, 08:31 PM	#86
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	The problem, as I see it, is (and I'm assuming that it would be the same as the federal Constitution) that there is no limitation to what can be an amendment. I would guess that if enough people voted for it, one could amend the constitution declaring that chickens have voting rights and the owners have the power to vote on behalf of their chickens (thereby reducing the voting power of non-chicken owners).
	Submit to Quotes

10-22-2008, 08:43 PM	#88
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	scaeagles, there's a limit on what can be amended BY BALLOT MEASURE to the California Constitution. I've seen the case law on it. That's not to say there isn't any conflicting case law. But there will be a lawsuit on that basis if the measure passes.
	Submit to Quotes

10-22-2008, 09:01 PM	#89
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	From what I understand, amendments cannot be made based upon vote. Only the legislation can make them. __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes