Yes or No. Do you think Prop 8 will be overturned?

[devilgrrl]

I do, so I'm voting "yes".

Prop 8 is ridiculous and everyone knows it!

[Double T]

1. Yes. Individuals rights have been violated.

Discrimination is no longer allowed and diversity is all important.

[mitchtv]

2. I don't thinks so

Remember Calif recalled several anti DP Supreme court Justices, Rose Byrd the most prominent. Be prepared to fight a recall if they declair it void

[dbonds]

3. Yes because it is the right thing to do.

I believe good will beat the thugs in the end.

[BlueCaliDem]

4. Yes. Prop 8 wants to change the CA Constitution and from what I've read...

... this can only be done by the CA Legislature - and they need 2/3rds of the votes in that body. In addition to that, it will require 2/3rds of the electorate and if my math is correct, 52% is still not 2/3rds.

Anderson Cooper (who would've thunk it) posed this to the Focus on the Family guy and he had no rebut to this little factoid. At any rate, 3 suits so far has been filed to overturn this prejudiced bill and ultimately, the CA Supreme Court will have the last say.

We'll see, I guess.

[AntiFascist]

14. It all hinges on whether the changes to the constitution are considered...

broad or narrow. This is determined both quantitatively and qualitatively. I've tried to present the qualitative argument here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4423010

[BlueCaliDem]

25. Thank you! Thank you! I could KISS you for this post! Once again, I feel hopeful...

... when I felt so down and saddened after my elation that Obama had won,

Now once again, hope is alive in me.

[AntiFascist]

31. Your welcome....

:blush: I just wish more of the "legal experts" would get behind this.

[Toasterlad]

5. Eventually. It's Inevitable.

[electron_blue]

6. Yes. Gays had the right to marry legally. There will be no effective way to stifle that

longterm.

[EFerrari]

7. Yes and in part because CA is going more FOR gay marriage

all the time.

And, I hope that the mormon and catholic "churches" get conseequences for their hateful interference, too.

[cboy4]

8. I need a "I'm not sure" choice.

I'm hopeful, but I'm somewhere in the middle of yes it will be overturned and no it won't.

But I voted "yes" if only because I want the courts to take action.

[Oeditpus Rex]

9. Yes — but

it ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

[EFerrari]

10. I don't know. We have a lot of activated young voters who support gay marriage

looking for something to do. :evilgrin:

[Oeditpus Rex]

11. I don't see this going on the ballot in 2010

That'd easily be soon enough to leave it wide open for an "Oh, here they go again" hate campaign, which might resonate with fence-sitters. And, if it lost, that'd be like the "third strike."

I'd rather see it go back to the courts, especially the USSC, to keep it out of the hands of ignorant bigots. But that process takes time.

[EFerrari]

12. I'm hoping the Court will resolve this, too.

And, I hope it happens in CA. The USSC is too much of a gamble right now, imho.

[Motown_Johnny]

13. yes, but it will take years

[ColbertWatcher]

15. But, that's a good thing.

We don't want it going to this Supreme Court.

[Motown_Johnny]

23. Well, I will skip all the obvious comments and go straight to the point

Equal protection under the law means equal protection under the law. I don't see how any court can rule any differently

[plaintiff]

24. The concept was pretty mangled in Bush v. Gore

just sayin'

:shrug:

[ColbertWatcher]

26. GOP-controlled, Federalist Society-filled courts are determined to ...

... redefine what "equal," what "protection" and what "law" mean.

[Irishonly]

16. Yes

I hope the churches backing it feel the wrath of real Americans. You DO Not take away people's rights.

BTW, I was checking communities around me and who gave what. A church in San Dimas gave money under the churches names. I was also shocked at how much money was given to the yes idiots in Pomona. The city is heavily Catholic but is also considered poor. There were many thousand dollar donors.

I also think the evangelical churches gave out yard signs. A couple of weeks before the election I was shocked to see Obama yard signs next to yes on 8 ones.

[CatholicEdHead]

17. I hope it does but my gut says it will not be overturned

[bunkerbuster1]

18. It will join a long list of dumbass, unconstitutional referenda drafted solely to GOTV.

California's collective capacity for stupidity astonishes me sometimes.

[yodoobo]

19. Overtime, its an absolutely certainly. The question is how long

I don't think that it'll be fixed at the state level, and I'm not certain the supreme court will take it, and then there is the issue of the supreme court makeup.

But eventually, the right thing will happen.

[plaintiff]

20. I voted 'yes' but not with a lot of confidence.

:shrug:

[blue_onyx]

21. Depends

If the question is asking if Prop. 8 will repealed in the near future because of lawsuits, no.

If you mean, will Prop. 8 eventually be reversed because people come around to the belief that gay people should be equal, then yes.

People passed it and I don't see how it will be overturned. Even if the California Supreme Court repeals Prop. 8, the people in support of it will probably appeal the decision to a higher court. We all know what would happen if the case to overturn Prop. 8 made it to the US Supreme Court.

[gollygee]

22. I will give a hopeful yes

but I think it'll have to go to the SCOTUS to have that happen. But I hope so.

[terrya]

27. Yes, but it will take a couple of years.

Ultimately it WILL be overturned.

[Solly Mack]

28. A hopeful Yes

[Mike 03]

29. Absolutely. Furthermore, it should be fast-tracked. This needs to be resolved at once.

Also, the standards for what propositions can be put on a ballot need to be more rigorous, and the margin by which it must win should be higher than fifty plus one percent. These were frivolous and unconstitutional propositions in the first place.

[GinaMaria]

30. Hell Yes

hope it goes to the supremes, but it will probably be settled by a lower court and therefore not applicable to the other 49 states. Let's pass ERA while we are at it.

[PBS Poll-435]

32. Yes

Amending the constitution to aid folks or expand rights is what the process was designed for.

Amending the constitution to take away rights and harm a specific subset of people is incorrect.

[ismnotwasm]

33. Yes

My most practical reason is evidently the 18,000 marriages already performed are remaining valid marriages, although that will be challenged.

The prop 8 proponents have a legal mess on their hands. You can't have some Gay marriages valid and deny others, no matter how you're fucking up your constitution. Well, I suppose you can, but I see solid and effective court challenges on the horizon