READER COMMENTS ON
"On Prop 8 on Veterans Day..."
(51 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 10:24 am PT...
As one of those veterans whose right to marry was taken away, I am very sad on this day.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 10:53 am PT...
That was much more graceful than I managed. I was furious. Now I'm sad, and embarrassed, and frustrated that that there are so many idiots in my state who were sucked in by advertising dollars by the Mormon church and Blackwater.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 11:04 am PT...
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 11:33 am PT...
Another veteran denied here. I would like to say that the passage of Prop 8 would have been only a small step to our rights and freedom.
A personal friend of mine is in an eleven year partnered relationship with an illegal status immigrant.
Even with Prop 8 passing and they marrying; they would continue to have to live in fear of the partner being sent back; because the gay marriage would not automatically allowed citizenship. They have lived in love and horrific fear of this happening and of their financial lives being destroyed as well. For those that think these decisions do not cause pain and suffering, consider yourself responsible. Years of living like this in our country, in America; it is shameful. They are not the only gay couple in this circumstance, and while straight couples can who marry an immigrant can afford to be insensitive and self righteous; know that you are causing such agony that you obviously do not know what you do.
Thank you Brad.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 11:46 am PT...
Somewhat OT, but since it's Veterans Day, I ask everyone to read this article "Saxby Chambliss Seeks Deferment From Runoff --- Cites 'Bum Knee'" at HuffPo. The article is about the Senate runoff in GA and our efforts to dethrone the incumbent who most likely stole his seat in 2002 according to studies done after that highly suspect race was decided on Diebold voting machines [after GA SoS 2002 Cathy Cox installed the machines 100% across GA.]
Part of Sissy Shameless' record:
Chambliss Voted Against the New GI Bill for Veterans of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Chambliss Has Voted Against Veterans Programs at Least 23 Times Since Joining the Senate
Chambliss Voted Against Additional Funding to Research Traumatic Brain Injury--thee "Signature Wound" of the Iraq War.
Chambliss Opposed the Webb Amendment Guaranteeing Troops Time At Home Between Deployments
Chambliss Repeatedly Voted Against Additional Funding to Give the Men & Women in Uniform the Armor and Equipment They Need.
ActBlue has finally added Jim Martin to their list - any donation, however small, will be a big help for Martin to win this runoff.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 12:16 pm PT...
Well said, Brad. I'm not gay, just a tired old widower, but I'm a veteran, and my brothers and sisters when I served were just that, brothers and sisters, and only that. I heard some news today that made me want to go burn down a Catholic Bishop's residence, jewels and all, but of course I won't do that. When will they ever learn...
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 12:18 pm PT...
Hey Kira! Lookin' good, girl!
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 12:22 pm PT...
I think that many people believe that gays should be allowed to marry (equal status if not marriage), they don't believe that teachers should teach students that gay marriage is a terrific alternative to heterosexual marriage.
The thing is that once you approve this - you inherit all sorts of other questions... and they need answers.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 12:22 pm PT...
As a vertern I dont agree with the notion that because of our service we must disagree with the Prop 8 decision. As a person who served his country and defended it on multiple shore I must say that our role is not fight for any freedom in people wish to engage( IE. Drugs, Gay Marrige). We support our Consitution and our Democracy. The freedom to choose our leaders and make our laws is what we fight for. Prop 8 was voted on and in a majority decided. Even though we may not agree with the outcome , as Verterns we must respect our Democray.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 12:34 pm PT...
Hey Czaragorn! How's the beach?
I enjoyed the photo slideshow of the Prague Chicken Festival from the link you gave us Election night [when we were outrageously giddy from all the anxiety!] You're blessed to live in such a beautiful country. It reminds me of the landscape I grew up in before strip malls and McMansions destroyed it.
70 days to inauguration - plenty of time to Impeach bush et al.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 12:47 pm PT...
I'm against the language used when describing amendments to the Constitution [or other propositions] on our ballots. The legalese used is designed to confuse and subvert the will and intent of the voter.
For example, last year I asked all the people working my polling place to decipher an amendment up for the vote and not a one of them could. I asked them how they could vote on the issue if they didn't understand the language --- they scratched their heads and agreed with me it needed to be changed. BUT ... they head already voted. DUH.
I think we should all raise a stink about it and insist they use common language everyone can understand.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 1:35 pm PT...
Yes, I totally agree with you Brad. It may not help, but when they put these propositions on the ballot, it needs to be in plain English, instead of double negatives. I think it is a devious maneuver.
Thank you to all our brave veterans and soldiers. I do appreciate all you do and pray for your safe return home.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 1:52 pm PT...
Anthony Look @ #4:
Just for clarity, passage of Prop 8 would BAN the right to marriage equality in CA, as per an amendment to the state's Constitution.
Your confusion, that passage would have allowed it [the CA Supreme Court already determined that banning it violates the CA Constitution, hence the supporters move to create a Constitutional amendment to take away the rights of people via Prop 8], was likely not yours only, and probably one of the reasons that it seems to have so far passed...as based on the ballots that have been tabulated so far, anyway.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 1:57 pm PT...
Shawn #8 said:
As a vertern I dont agree with the notion that because of our service we must disagree with the Prop 8 decision.
First, thank you for service. Secondly, I agree that you don't have to agree with any notion you are not inclined to. That's your right that I would defend with my life.
As a person who served his country and defended it on multiple shore I must say that our role is not fight for any freedom in people wish to engage( IE. Drugs, Gay Marrige). We support our Consitution and our Democracy.
Actually, my understanding is that you took an oath to defend the Constitution and that "democracy" had nothing to do with your oath. A veteran is free to correct me on that, of course.
As such, one of the bedrock principles of the Constitution is equal justice under the law. Denying some people freedoms, while allowing it to others, is decidedly in violation of that Constitution.
The freedom to choose our leaders and make our laws is what we fight for. Prop 8 was voted on and in a majority decided. Even though we may not agree with the outcome , as Verterns we must respect our Democray.
Once again, I thank you for your service. But you may wish to review both the oath you took when you signed up, and the Constitution you swore to protect and defend.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 3:00 pm PT...
Saxby Chambliss Seeks Deferment From Runoff
Hey Saxby! We don't need the runoff if you will concede.
A question, Saxby, instead of a "Support our Troops" ribbon on your car, do you instead have a "Spit on our Troops" sticker? Or are you a dishonest scumbucket?
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 7:36 pm PT...
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
Jeannie Dean (not in) FL-13
said on 11/11/2008 @ 8:44 pm PT...
ScandalMgr: Thank you so much for that link! PERFECT action to ward off the Prop 8 willies; great way to strike, LEGALLY, at the heart of this most insidious, unconstitutional initiative. What a disgusting use (and yes, fully intended) of G.W.'s "Faith Based Initiative" tax exemption--exactly what I was afraid of.
No wonder we had SKYWRITING over the Hollywood Hills that read: "VOTE YES ON PROP 8"! I was disgusted on so many levels, I didn't have the time to name them all. ScandalMgr's above connecting some dots I had forgot!
(While I was typing this post, was listening to Peter B./ just played a great song called, "If gays can't get married, then straights can't divorce." HhehHHEAA! Seems the least of fair n' square compromises to me!)
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 9:21 pm PT...
This is terrible!! Marriage was created by the church NOT the STATE!! No they shouldn't be allowed to be married! Not in my religion and none that I know of. Separation of church and state.
The great Einstein said that War is fought by murderers not heros. So to say that you murdered others makes you deserving of a gay marriage. What? Be happy that you didn't kill someone in the U.S. your ass would be in Jail. Marriage is a union under GOD not under a government. Get REAL!
If gay people need a piece of paper to make them happy than get a piece of paper. Don't desicrate my beliefs because you feel left out. My uncle is gay and no I don't care if your gay. Be happy with what you do have.
Stop murdering others for your "democracy"
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 9:41 pm PT...
Al Einstein ~ "Killing under the cloak of war is no different than murder"
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but world War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 11/11/2008 @ 11:08 pm PT...
Unshared Views @ 18 said:
Marriage was created by the church NOT the STATE!! No they shouldn't be allowed to be married! Not in my religion and none that I know of. Separation of church and state.
Nobody requires your church to marry anybody. We're talking about the state. Your church can do what it pleases.
The rest of your insane rant is not worth replying to. But have a great day!
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 8:29 am PT...
meanwhile....in another part of the country...gay marriage is legally recognized
...as Arnold says, it's only a matter of time before the California U.S. Supreme Court rules AGAIN that this ban is UNCONSITUTIONAL, get over is neocons, YOU prop hate mongerers, YOU LOST, WE WON!
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 8:48 am PT...
Let's back up a little.
Siegfried and Roy, through the exercise of their judgement, decided that it was safe to have a nightclub act of performing tigers with no barriers between them and the audience. The result was tragic.
Matthew Shephard was unable to see past the smiling shark teeth of his attackers to be and left the bar willingly with them. Again, a supreme tragedy (personally, I believe his attackers deserve the death penalty). His mother said he was like a sweet kid. Perhaps he was a permanent kid, a permanent 9 or 10 year old with the judgement to match.
What if for a significant percentage of gays, their gayness is simply a secondary characteristic of a personality-wide arrested development? Including their personality, judgement and sexuality? Paglia terms this the Peter Pan Syndrome.
Should Seigfrid, Roy, Matthew Shephard have/have had the right to adopt? Absolutely not, they lacked the judgemental capabilities to be responsible parents.
IMO, gays should have all the other "marriage rights" but I don't think this is simply a discrimination situation.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 10:34 am PT...
Oh my Lord. Letsbackup #22
Using that kind of litmus test for marriage would knock off at least 50% of the republican party.
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 10:36 am PT...
Not everyone cares if you feel that their comments are worthy of your reply. The same applies to your insane theories of fraud as not many people listen to your views.
I never asked for your consent and really don't care if you agree or disagree. My friends have gone to Iraq and have come back a shell of a man, and for what?
As for rants yeah! I know do it on purpose!! It still doesn't remove the fact that my rants are usually right. It is my way of saying F*** You!
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 10:45 am PT...
#24 said: My friends have gone to Iraq and have come back a shell of a man, and for what?
For starters, they were sent to Iraq to fight a war based on lies - a proven fact.
Secondly, the election fraud via voting machines [owned by the same political party that sent so many of our young people to Iraq to fight a war based on nothing but lies and greed] serves to make uninformed people believe the majority supported that war.
You can have your opinion, but it doesn't change the facts.
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 11:26 am PT...
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 12:52 pm PT...
Something interesting - who was behind putting Prop 8 on the ballot??
Max Blumental reports that the two biggest individual backers of Proposition 8 in CA are the mother of Blackwater founder Erik Prince and Howard Ahmanson.
We all know Blackwater, but Ahmanson has two claims to fame. He was the main financier of election machine company ES&S …
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 1:18 pm PT...
Blaming African Americans for Prop 8 is a mistake:
From Salt & Lake's A.D. Odom
I do not understand why the rights of some of this state’s citizens was placed on a ballot for people to vote their prejudices. When given the opportunity, people will vote their prejudices, pure and simple. Looking at the Prop and how it was written — which was sooo confusing — and the idea that a Proposition was used to change the state’s Constitution to deny rights to some of its tax paying citizens represented, IMHO, a “Fail Whale” from the start. Basically, it was destined to pass, it did, no surprise there.
Before I launch into my rant and rage against the machine let me first state I am an African American lesbian, homeowner, and one who voted “No on 8.” I felt stupid voting on something so ridiculous but I did and that’s that. However, I do know a lesbian couple who missed the point altogether by voting “Yes on 8″ because they did not quite understand Yes meant No and No meant Yes. I am a firm believer where there is one, there are others. This lesbian interracial couple are two smart women with advanced degrees but they found the wording of the Prop — confusing.
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
Jeannie Dean (not in) FL-13
said on 11/12/2008 @ 3:17 pm PT...
Kira (#27)~"who was behind prop 8..." !!?
ES&S financier, BILLIONAIRE Howard Ahmanson? Kira, I should have known! After 2 years of poking around ES*S's sickly, smelly underbelly- -of course he would be the source of this un-American undermining of the Constitution(s)! In the Sarasota case, I saw some shit from ES&S's legal team that turned my (metaphoric) balls inside out from shock and awe.
..."We all know Blackwater, but Ahmanson has two claims to fame. He was the main financier of election machine company ES&S and he is also a raving Christian Reconstructionist, a member of the group that believes the country's laws should come from the bible, and that homosexuals, among others, should be executed..."
Woah! That vital information needs to be blasted through megaphones on every street corner in California, Florida, and Arizona. Has anyone contacted the 'no on 8' org to make damn sure they're aware of this before the G/L community becomes radically, racially divided? How can we make sure this Kooky Looney King Pin Psychopath is held accountable by the newly-charged, opposing grassroots movement?
I think Bowen de-certified their asses, right? So ES&S could not have had any direct hand in the election process or the actual counting or recording of the prop 8 VOTES--could they? Are ES&S machines still in use in California? If so (I know if FL we still have some touchscreens in use for "disabled" voters)--if so, anyone know how many ES&S machines of any kind were used and where?
Great info in subsequent post, (#28) as well. Thanks, Kira. Staggering info.
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 3:31 pm PT...
Unshared Views @ 18 said:
"Marriage was created by the church NOT the STATE!!"
In Western Civilization, marriage was observed strictly as a social contract--no religious ceremony, no clergy present--until approximately the beginning of the 2nd millennium, and church weddings as we know them did not exist before the 16th century.
And there are apparently recorded (though rare) instances of the term "marriage" referring to same-sex unions during the Roman Empire.
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 4:14 pm PT...
Jeannie Dean - The ES&S M100 is used in some or all counties in CA, according to Kathy Dopp.
ES&S Opti-Scan Machines Found Miscounting By 4%
The usage distribution of the ES&S M-100 scanners in the U.S. can be found at Verified Voting here.
However that turns out, creepy Ahmanson donated a fortune to push Prop 8. Max Blumenthal's article is very long & in-depth. [Almost more than we wanted to know ...]
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
Jeannie Dean (not in) FL-13
said on 11/12/2008 @ 4:45 pm PT...
Great, Kira~excellent link-age, again. Okay, according to the amazing search by state data available at verifiedvoting.org: (Note: I searched for ALL ES&S equipment, not just the M-100)
Search results for:
* Equipment Used For: All Equipment
* In Selected State: California
* Type of Voting Equipment: All Types
* Equipment Vendor: Election Systems & Software
* Model: All Models
* Paper Type: All Equipment
Jurisdictions: 14 | Total registered voters in search results: 6,232,659 |
Well, there ya' go. Six million voters on the rolls(potentially)in 14 California jurisdictions voting for or against this unlawful proposition on a voting system financed by a Neo-Christian-Fundamentalist-Billionaire-Wacko-Extremist.
This should be posted as priority across the blogosphere--in big, bold, red-letter font. An action alert should be issued. (Or maybe we can get the 'no on prop 8' folks to use some of that 36 million in their coiffers to SKYWRITE IT.
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 5:18 pm PT...
# 30 David Nobel, there are apparently recorded (though rare) instances of the term "marriage" referring to same-sex unions during the Roman Empire. Yes I have read of that too, it was more common than we think.
We have had same sex marriage in Canada since 2005 and I have not heard nor read of any negative vibes from anyone. The world hasn't ended! Isn't it ironic that two same sex people who love each other are a threat to "marriage". I don't get it.
I personally think homosexuals should be entitled to the same ball and chain as heterosexuals
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 5:39 pm PT...
Looks good, Jeannie. [or bad actually.]
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 6:00 pm PT...
Sheesh - I thought California gave ES&S the boot until I started researching Prop 8 & Ahmanson. Whatever gave me that idea?
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 6:10 pm PT...
Thanks for your comment, GWN. Nothing like having real experience on an issue to lay irrational fears to rest.
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
Jeannie Dean (not in) FL-13
said on 11/12/2008 @ 6:12 pm PT...
Yah, and get this, Kira: Almost all of L.A./ San Fran and surrounding districts are USING the ES&S Automark M100 Optical Scan Systems.
Incredible map of California voting systems by county at verified voting.org, as well:
Brad reported four million ballots uncounted before victory was declared/ misplaced memory cards/ and thousands of calls from California to the EPC reporting problems with the machines on election day.
Do we know how many of these complaints were specifically due to ES&S machine "malfunction"?
Does the EPC data cover that without having to cross-check for the specific problematic systems reported?
A commenter in that bradblog thread cited 2.7 million of those votes coming from L.A...?
From "Between the Lines News", pridsource.com dated Nov. 12th:
"...The margin of victory for the Yes on 8 side has actually shrunk since No on Prop 8 officials conceded last Thursday. According to the Secretary of State's office, as of the morning of Nov. 10, 5,668,960 voters supported Proposition 8, while 5,173,113 voted against it last Tuesday. The difference is 495,847 votes...
"...The Times did not suggest that the as yet uncounted votes could close the margin and change the result of the voting. 'In order to reverse that result,' said the Times, 'opponents of the measure would have to win just more than 59 percent of the uncounted ballots' and so far, they've won only 47.6 percent of them."
Are there any citizens tracking the ballot chain of custody procedures? Do the no on 8 peeps have official designated observer status?
COMMENT #38 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 6:29 pm PT...
Jeannie, you're AMAZING! Good questions & Good work
COMMENT #39 [Permalink]
Jeannie Dean (not in) FL-13
said on 11/12/2008 @ 8:35 pm PT...
Correction/ clarification to my above post:
Just checked the 1-866-ourvotelive.org site:
There were 86 reports of machine malfunction in California on election day out of roughly 1,800 calls. 38 of those originated in Los Angeles, by far the highest percentage of overall reported problems statewide. The second highest percentage of "voting equipment" problems reported were from San Francisco (8) and San Diego (8).
If ES&S is at the helm here in Los Angeles (the largest voting block in the country) AND tabulates the votes for San Francisco, and ALSO had financial ties to the proposition's original billionaire backer--then this should DEFINITELY be entered into evidence in any of the upcoming legal efforts to overturn.
Is anyone, other than our Brad and VR, reporting or suggesting that prop 8 may NOT have been decided by said 70% of black voters?
Is that stat just another divisive lie?...
Who is looking at that data? And can they make the GLBT community aware of these very disturbing election "trends" asap?
COMMENT #40 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 8:36 pm PT...
Jeannie Dean -
For clarity, all of L.A.'s votes are counted on InkaVote systems distributed by ES&S.
Unshared Views -
Thanks for your thoughts, sweetheart!
COMMENT #41 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 9:05 pm PT...
Florida voted in a Constitutional Ammendment that is much worse than Prop 8 in that it not only takes away gays right to wed, but it maeks any domestic partnership invalid. Like, say, if two old people want to have a civil union for economic or medical reasons, that would be invalid.
Prop 8 is getting all the attention, but the Florida law will have repurcussions on many unions, not just gay. I'm just curious why no one is giving it any attention.
COMMENT #42 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 9:22 pm PT...
Jeannie, that 70% of the black vote thing might be a dirty trick. Where did that poll come from? I haven't checked it out, but I'm very suspicious.
Remember the Brooks Bros. riot? In this case, send an inflammatory report through the AP designed to cause dissension between 2 minority factions of the Democratic Party. That would make both sides look bad and lower the general population's respect for both, thus making a stronger case for Prop 8.
Check out this dKos link:
Facts Belie the Scapegoating of Black People for Proposition 8
COMMENT #43 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 9:26 pm PT...
That's just AWFUL, TerriKH #41. Sure seems like we're going backwards real fast to the Stone Ages.
COMMENT #44 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 9:37 pm PT...
I just found it - a random sampling which isn't good enough in my opinion to advertise 70 PERCENT!!!! Not only that, but how did they phrase the question?
The survey of 2,240 California voters was conducted for AP by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International. Most were interviewed in a random sample of 30 precincts statewide Tuesday; 765 who voted early or absentee were interviewed by landline telephone over the last week. Results for the full sample were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, higher for subgroups.
COMMENT #45 [Permalink]
Jeannie Dean (not in) FL-13
said on 11/12/2008 @ 9:47 pm PT...
Perfect! Righto! So, EM/ AP polls with too small a "random" sample to be taken seriously--2,000 voters in only 30 PRECINCTS? In a state so big it's a practically a whole coast?
...Wow, Kira. And as the live wire lies, it quietly becomes a reported fact/ seeds the general consciousness with rage.
COMMENT #46 [Permalink]
said on 11/12/2008 @ 11:25 pm PT...
Wow is right, Jeannie. That's a big story we researched - I'm emailing Rachel Maddow with links & our concerns [plus info on ES&S & a link to bradblog.] I hope she will use it for a report.
COMMENT #47 [Permalink]
said on 11/13/2008 @ 4:38 pm PT...
Partial list of the Mormon Church business interest involvment:
Affiliated Computer Services
American Express Company
Beneficial Financial Group
Bonneville International Corporation
Black & Decker
Brigham Young University
Cornerstone Realty Income Trust Inc
Central Pacific Bank
1-800-... Read MoreContacts
Deseret Management Corporation
Downey Savings and Loan
Five Star Quality Care, Inc.
Hollywood Entertainment (Hollywood Video)
Host Marriott (Marriot Hotels and Resorts
Kroger foods (Ralph's and Albertsons)
La Quinta Properties, Inc (La quinta Hotels)
Merit Medical Systems
NPS Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
COMMENT #48 [Permalink]
said on 11/17/2008 @ 9:03 pm PT...
Ah, poetic justice....heckuvajob there 'loyal bushies'
Focus on the Family forced to make layoffs after spending $600,000 to defeat marriage equality.»
Colorado Independent reports that Focus on the Family “is poised to announce major layoffs to its Colorado Springs-based ministry and media empire today.” The layoffs come after the right-wing group spent more than $600,000 to defeat marriage equality in California. Praising the passage of Prop. 8, the group said that the measure “helps protect millions of children from radical indoctrination in the homosexual lifestyle.” The group also touted its involvement collecting signatures and gathering donations, patting itself on the back for being “integrally involved” in the fight against marriage equality.
COMMENT #49 [Permalink]
said on 11/19/2008 @ 9:45 pm PT...
Just like Prop 22 was overturned, this one looks like it's headed back to the CA State Supreme Court!
Top Court in California Will Review Proposition 8
New York Times - 3 hours ago
By JESSE MCKINLEY SAN FRANCISCO - Responding to pleas for legal clarity from those on both sides of the issue, the California Supreme Court said Wednesday that it would take up the case of whether a voter-approved ban on same-sex unions was ...
California court to hear gay marriage ban case Reuters
State Supreme Court will hear challenges to Prop. 8 San Diego Union Tribune
San Francisco Chronicle - Los Angeles Times - The Associated Press
all 1,246 news articles »
COMMENT #50 [Permalink]
said on 11/23/2008 @ 2:41 pm PT...
COMMENT #51 [Permalink]
said on 11/23/2008 @ 2:56 pm PT...