Gay-marriage foes lose in court

by MsMcReality | August 9, 2008 at 12:02 pm

137 views | 0 Recommendations | 0 comments

Although recently legalized in our beloved state of California, a gay-marriage ban will be considered in November. Humorously enough, the very next paragraph of this article discusses how the writer of this ban, which is titled "proposition 8", should have written a more "neutral statement". Maybe I'm the only one who'd raise an eyebrow at this, but doesn't that sound a little ironic? I mean to say, the word proposition is defined as:

the act of offering or suggesting something to be considered, accepted, adopted, or done.

Upon that note, it seems a little hard for me to believe that any proposition could be written as neutral. I mean, if you think aobut it, when someone has the guts to write a proposition, it's not gonna please everybody.

In an eight-page ruling, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley called the title and summary, saying Proposition 8 would eliminate the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry, an "accurate statement" about the measure.

When Jerry Brown began writing the proposition, he said it would "impose a limit on marriage...to provide that only marraige between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Brown was persuaded to write this by a petition from opponents of gay-marriage.Brown believes that the lawsuit regarding gay marriage was more about politics than about law.

The initiative's supporters said they would appeal. They say Brown's descriptions contrasted with the attorney general's routine practice of selecting ballot titles that state the subject matter of an initiative in a neutral way.

Again, maybe it's just me, but seriously, this article is rather odd using the argument of "neutral ballots". I mean when you're voting you're gonna be voting for something which, in of itself is gonna cause come kind of prejudice. But I guess now, there are propositions that are without prejudice... uh... ok... go figure.