Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Thanks CA Supreme Court; I think.

Congratulations are in order for California! (I think.)

Their state Supreme Court actually held to the people’s will, sort of.

On Tuesday, May 26th, The Foundry reports, “the California Supreme Court disappointed advocates of same-sex marriage by concluding that Proposition 8 was a valid exercise by California voters of their right to amend their constitution. Today’s decision means Prop. 8 stands as an important victory for the 7 million Californians who worked hard to protect marriage as the union of husband & wife..."

Don’t remember Proposition 8? A little history then…See, one of the best Unintended Consequences of November’s election was that a “ban on gay marriage [aka Proposition 8] passed in CA, AZ & FL.” The delicious irony is that the Left’s insatiable drive to elect Mr. Obama led to the success of Prop. 8. It won “largely due to the turnout of African Americans -yes, Obama voters largely- who are not up for any kind of massive shift to the left, it seems.”

The price of the measure's success, however, has been high. The Foundry reminds us: “many individuals and institutions that supported Proposition 8 have been targeted for reprisals and intimidation. Some Prop 8 supporters have been pressured out of their jobs; some have had their businesses targeted…churches have been vandalized…and suspicious white powder was sent to certain Mormon temples. [Also] some individuals who supported Prop 8 have even received death threats.”

Which brings me to Unintended Consequence of November’s election #2 & the “I think” part of the Court’s decision: “The election of Mr. Obama has sewn up a seam between the Far Left fringe & the left-of-center. The Far Left has…poured in torrents onto the Culture War battlefield…Their actions have been worse than vandalism & protesting, friends. It's domestic terrorism…Do they believe they're entitled, because they identify w/ the most left-wing presidential candidate we've ever seen?” It’s a question that at least bears some thought, if not outright endorsement.

Meanwhile back at the Court, while the Justices were magnanimous enough to yield to the will of the people from hence forward, they ruled as valid “the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed before Prop 8 passed. So, while the will of the people was heard in part, it seems that the Court has left some cards on the table. With the world watching, they were forced to play by the rules of the game (We won!), but then allowed cheaters to win anyway (I think).

Where does that leave us, folks? Still on the battlefield; with a war for the essence of our culture – the very soul of our dear nation - in front of us.

But today, let’s say a big THANKS to the California Supreme Court! As for the “I think;” we’ll just address that tomorrow…

~~~

21 comments:

Southern Drawl said...

Thank you for your sweet comment. I love your site. I shall return...
:)

Bryan said...

"...they ruled as valid 'the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed before Prop 8 passed.'"

Such "marriages" will never be valid in the court that really matters in the end, God's court. When the government and even "churches" start giving validity to such unions, it only helps to drive the nail of deception even further.

"Some Prop 8 supporters have been pressured out of their jobs; some have had their businesses targeted…churches have been vandalized..."

I am reminded of when Lot addressed the men in Sodom, "...do not so wickedly." They responded, "...now we will deal worse with thee..."

Joe said...

One thing you can always count on where the CaSC is concerned: their strong point is inconsistancy.

Conservative Scalawag said...

After referring to the Constitution I believe the California Supreme court did the only and perhaps the first constitutional judgment out of that court.

For once you give a right, you cannot take it away from somebody,so the marriages,as sickening as it may be,must stand. However, the amendment to the state constitution will prevent from any further marriages from happening...for now.

Leslie said...

Can we wonder if it was all on purpose? They had to know they would have to uphold Prop. 8 at some point...

I am wondering what is behind it all in the first place.

Z said...

They couldn't overturn because they knew Californians would go CRAZY. That would not be the first time they overturned our votes.

Odd, isn't it? Iowa has gay marriage and that 'wild lefty nuthouse California' doesn't..........

Susannah said...

SD~ You're welcome for the comments. So glad you came by & please do come back!

Bryan~ "Such 'marriages' will never be valid in the court that really matters in the end, God's court. When the government and even "churches" start giving validity to such unions, it only helps to drive the nail of deception even further." Indeed.

Joe! Inconsistency - apparently so. Is that why maybe the 'let's redefine marriage' activists thought they had a good chance w/ this??

CS~ I think you're wise to note that it's not over. Vigilance & persistence is our key, no?

Leslie~ You're sounding like a conspiracy theorist. You think this was all orchestrated like someone's living symphony? Hmmmm...(IMO, you're wise to suspect, my dear.)

Z~ If I were a CA-ian, I'd have gone crazy...Stay strong, friend.

bjveraldi said...

Sotomayor is a RACIST- a Female RACIST- a Latino RACIST-a Diabetic RACIST- a Judicial RACIST. We have the Boy-King and his band of thugs telling the Right to "tread softly" and "be very careful" .TYPICAL threatening, Socialist behavior- good job, little B.O. butt-lickers -voting THAT PIG in.
And the Leftist DIMWITS like to constantly call the Right "irrelevent"- must be the favorite new word in their window -licker class.
The right should show as much courtesy to this nominee as the Left- in their typical, lying vicious has shown ours.
Don't worry-we'll take this country off your hands next election-it's obvious you can't run this and wipe yor ass at the same time.
Let's see, the Liberals had no problem attacking Clarence Thomas - a black, Sarah Palin - a woman, Alberto Gonzalez - Hispanic. They were joined by the media who welcomed the opportunity of assisting the Liberal cause by ganging up on the Conservative candidates. But for some unbeknown reason, the Conservatives are now being "advised" by the Socialist that they ought to be concerned about being PC.
Does anyone see something morally wrong with this picture??

Susannah said...

bjv~ I can see you're very passionate about the issue you're commenting on. Please note that the CALIFORNIA state Supreme Court is what I wrote about; nothing to do w/ Sotomayor. That's for another day, perhaps, & a different post.

Z said...

Actually, I'm quite proud of California these days...even the left seems to have had ENOUGH TAXES! And, as I said...we DID vote down the homosexual marriage bit.

Come see my latest post, "TAGGED" and read the bottom....you've been tagged! xxx

Shaw Kenawe said...

"With the world watching, they were forced to play by the rules of the game (We won!), but then allowed cheaters to win anyway (I think)."


I don't understand why you would label couples as "cheaters" when they were married legally in the state of California before Prop 8 was passed.

How do you reckon they "cheated?"

And you label the legal same-sex marriages in Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine as "cheaters" too?

I'd like to hear your reasoning on this.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Ooops, Susannah, I see you've got the same troll [bjveraldi] who posted the exact same venom over at my blog. (I deleted it, since it adds nothing to the discussion.)

How that sort of comment advances any argument is a mystery to me.

Maybe Mr. or Ms. bjveraldi can enlighten us on this if he or she can do so without using invective.

bluepitbull said...

Anytime that the supreme court doesn't legislate from the bench is a good day for all Americans.

I'm not against gay marriage, but if the people of California voted against it, then I see no problem upholding the proposition/ammendment.

Good article!

dmarks said...

I saw a Prop 8 opponent on TV blaming the proposal on the "far right".

This is an interesting accusation, considering that an overwhelming majority of African-Americans in California voted for it. In fact, it might be true that the black vote pushed it over the top.

Now, who in their right mind would smear African Americans as "Far Right" when as a group they tend to vote 90% for the candidates on the left?

Shaw Kenawe said...

dmarks,

African-Americans are not a one-issue group--that's a rather patronizing view of our fellow Americans.

There are plenty of African Americans who support gay marriage, btw.

We all know the reason Prop 8 passed in CA is that there was a influx of millions and millions of dollars from certain groups to push for its passage, and it worked. That, and the religious people who wish to impose their religious ideas on free people.

It is, afterall, a religious idea that homosexuality is an abomination to god.

bluepitbull said...

So Shaw, you're saying that it can't be true? I fail to see how he labeled anyone by stating that African Americans were a majority of the voters.

I don't see stating a fact as patronizing.

Obviously it's more than religion at work here even thought you would try and paint it differently.

Susannah said...

Z~ I'm proud of them too! And I will zip over to read your post right NOW!

Shaw~ Good questions. You've moved me to post today. Please see it!

Also, thanks on the tip about the troll. I suspected it, but I try to give first-time commenters the benefit of the doubt. And nice invitation for him/her...let's see if he/she wants to discuss or spew...

Bluepit~ ...and thank goodness for the Constitution! Thanks for the feedback.

dmarks~ "considering that an overwhelming majority of African-Americans in California voted for it. In fact, it might be true that the black vote pushed it over the top" That's what I mean 'delicious irony' of the Left's effort to vote in Mr. Obama.

Shaw~ Notice I didn't say above, 'African American effort'. Try to acknowledge that dmarks isn't patronizing, he's simply observing reality.

I do find it curious that you say "African-Americans are not a one-issue group" b/c stats tell us that as a sociological entity, "they" indeed were - this past election (vote in the black guy), or so it seems. Also note, please, that two of my FAVORITE local Republican friends are black men, so I'm not patronizing. I'm observing the reality of the trend.

"We all know the reason Prop 8 passed in CA is that there was a influx of millions and millions of dollars from certain groups to push for its passage, and it worked." PRAISE GOD! Then we learned a little something from George Soros!

bluepit~ "I don't see stating a fact as patronizing." Yes, & it's not pleasant to be put in a corner when you're simply making non-value-laden observations, eh dmarks? "Obviously it's more than religion at work here" Yes again - morality, spiritual health, family health, cultural & social concerns/values, etc.

Thanks for the comments, all. If you're in the mood for more, please see 5-29 post. :)

Im Here To Say It said...

I think that what bjveraldi said was very relevent to this topic, very passionate about the issue or not....It's true

Susannah said...

ImHere~ Yes, because a Supreme Court Justice may have a say in a 'marriage' case - if it ever gets in front of them...would that we had a slate of Supreme Ct. Justices that we could count on to defend traditional American families. Thanks for the comment & coming by!

MACW said...

Excellent blog and comments!

I've had several Christians tell me that same sex marriage is Ok. I ask them as Christians, how can they support same sex marriage.
Their answer: "The Bible is not relevant in today's society". I don't understand their thought process at all. I decided they are "pick and choose" Christians, they pick bits and pieces out of the Bible to believe and quote but ignore the rest.

Susannah said...

MACW~ SO glad you're here! I don't get that either. "The Bible is not relevant in today's society" --

Convenient, no?

"All scripture is God-breathed & is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting & training in righteousness" 2 Tim. 3:16

It's also important to know context - not so that we can say, "Oh, we don't live in that same context...it's not relevant," but that's so that individual passages can be understood within the 'full council of the Word of God'

Thanks again for coming by. Good luck w/ your writing!