Proposition 8 watch

First, we go to Pam’s House Blend where one of their diarists explain that Proposition 8’s proponents are just running a Potemkin type of campaign. Its just Christmas in July explains Chino Blanco because the campaign is just for Jeff Flint and friends to make money and nothing else.

Even if you are for Proposition 8, don’t hire Jeff Flint because all he wants to do is sap your hard earned campaign money or cause you to get fined by the FPPC or FEC.

Then we go to Blogcabin California where Kevin Norte explains that there is a legitimate argument for striking down the initiative off the ballot because the current proposition 8 is a revision not an amendment and we would need the legislature or a constitutional convention in order to change and restrict marriage in our state. There are many arguments the opponents of proposition 8 will use in their case (Bennett v. Hollingsworth), and we will have to wait until August at the latest to find out what will happen with Proposition 8.

Since we are not allowed to find out who signed to place Proposition 8 on the ballot unlike other states with innovative sites called Knowthyneighbor where you can find out who signed in other states to initiate a dialogue with family and co-workers. We are only able to go after the contributors who write the big checks to place this initiative on the ballot. Such as Boathouse, a farmer who donated over 100,000 to the proponents, and Doug Manchester, the hotel owner who donated 125,000 as well. Pro-equality campaigners are encouraging people to patronize other fresh fruit beverages and other San Diego hotels respectively.

For your reading convenience I have decided to place the reply in the case to strike down Proposition 8 for download.

3 thoughts on “Proposition 8 watch”

  1. I understand that risk, if the lawsuit succeeds, however people’s civil rights should not be on the line based on the will of the people.

    However if the equality crowd won with the defeat of the Briggs Initiative in 1978, when it was not cool to be kind to the GLBT Californian. I do have faith in my side to get people to vote No on 8.

    However if 8 wins, I think the true idea to protect marriage is to ban divorce if you have any children under 18, and maybe to protect the children if you miss three child support payments in a row you go to jail for 20 years. I like the idea of demonstrating absurdity by being absurd in the mold of Rush Limbaugh.

  2. I understand that risk, if the lawsuit succeeds, however people’s civil rights should not be on the line based on the will of the people.
    The fact of the matter is that it is .

    Constitutions are the basis on which courts decide what constitutes civil rights, and constitutions can be amended for better or for worse.

    I do support a law prohibiting divorced people from remarrying until their ex-spouse dies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *