3 down and 47 more to go! Go Iowa

Way to go, Iowa SC!!!!



<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/us/04iowa.html?bl&ex=1238904000&en=e70ffe2956e3a3c3&ei=5087">http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/us/04iowa.html?bl&ex=1238904000&en=e70ffe2956e3a3c3&ei=5087</a>



Hopefully the California SC will recognize the trend and overturn proposition 8.
 
I've been away from the IHB for a bit....but just caught this. Thanks I.C...... but don't think Iowa's voters aren't already spearheading a signature drive to get an invalidation on their next ballot. Just like California did for Prop 8.



And here's another snippet for you. The Vermont legislature just voted and passed a bill allowing gay marriage....but the Governor has promised to veto it (just like Arnie did). They are only 10 votes short of a veto proof margin. So, there is about 24 hours left to call the Vermont Dems that voted against this bill and try and change their mind. I just did.



<a href="http://thepoweronline.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/power-action-act-to-overturn-the-vermont-veto-now/">CALL VERMONT !</a>
 
Overturn the will of the people, sounds like a great strategy. I seem to recall Europe doing this in the 1400s, look how well that turned out.
 
Sorry, but I just hate the last post so much that I cannot let it stay in honor of Trooper. The will of the people can also be the will of the stupid, uneducated and completely bigoted, ignorant populace. It will not stand, it may take a while, but logic and common sense will eventually prevail. I'm so done with anyone who can't see that.
 
[quote author="tmare" date=1240401500]Sorry, but I just hate the last post so much that I cannot let it stay in honor of Trooper. The will of the people can also be the will of the stupid, uneducated and completely bigoted, ignorant populace. <span style="color: red;">It will not stand, it may take a while,</span> but logic and common sense will eventually prevail. I'm so done with anyone who can't see that.</blockquote>


Did you read the CA Supreme Court <em>In Re Marriages </em>concurring and dissenting opinion by Justice Corrigan? For those that aren't familiar, the <em>In Re Marriages</em> cases resulted from Prop. 22. Here is an excerpt:



"The process of reform and familiarization should go forward in the legislative sphere and in society at large. We are in the midst of a major social change. Societies seldom make such changes smoothly. <strong><em>For some the process is frustratingly slow. For others it is jarringly fast. In a democracy, the people should be given a fair chance to set the pace of change without judicial interference.</em></strong> That is the way democracies work. Ideas are proposed, debated, tested. Often new ideas are initially resisted, only to be ultimately embraced. But when ideas are imposed, opposition hardens and progress may be hampered..."



For many of us, this process is frustratingly slow. I'm 100% in support of gay marriage, but at the same time, I'm a big fan of separation of powers and I would be much happier if California voters would pull their heads out of their arses and unite in support of gay marriage through the legislative process. Having said that, I think a series of federal cases are destined for the Supreme Court in the next 5-10 years.



Edited to add: The cases that I think are destined for the U.S. Supreme Court involve gay rights, but may not necessarily be about gay marriage.
 
Back
Top