Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A conservative legal group is asking the California Supreme Court to stay its decision legalizing same-sex marriage until voters get a chance to weigh in.
The Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund wants the ruling stayed until November, when voters are likely to encounter a ballot measure would amend the state's constitution to ban gay marriage. That vote would overturn the justices' ruling.
I'm pretty sure that would be a pure democracy, which is not the form of government we have.
Correct.
Fortunately we live in America, not in mobville.
I'm sure JTraik's feelings would be quite different if the majority approved of a tax hike on his particular income bracket, or the majority approved of the banning of firearms in his municipality.
This should be decided by the people. If the people are ready to accept gay marriage, they will have to deal with the consequences, whether physical or spiritual. If not, it should not be forced down their throats.
This is too big of a change for a court to just impose on the same state that voted against gay marriage less than ten years ago.
The court made its ruling. Now it seems it is only right that the court gives the voters an opportunity to amend the state constitution before the ruling takes effect.
I have yet to see any polls about how voters are leaning. Regardless of the issue and whether I agree with it, I always have a problem with courts that legislate or make fundamental societal changes from the bench.
This should be decided by the people. If the people are ready to accept gay marriage, they will have to deal with the consequences, whether physical or spiritual. If not, it should not be forced down their throats.
Nothing should be directly decided by the people. The masses are irrelevant. People should elect experienced public servants who will implement laws.
That being said, the courts probably overstepped their bounds. This should really be decided in the State legislative level.
I think this will be very much like abortion where the court can make it legal but that does not mean people have to except it.It will go on and on for years to come. Besides I doubt that many states will follow california.Remember that the legislature of any stae can be over ruled by a vote of the peole. Thsi was between the people and the courts really.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
