Page 86 of 152 FirstFirst ... 3676848586878896136 ... LastLast
Results 851 to 860 of 1516

Thread: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage[W:780]

  1. #851
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 04:17 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,032

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Just a technical point...

    It wouldn't take a 4% shift. Using your 4% number that represents a 52-48% result. Prop 8 squeaked by on a narrow margin. It only takes a 2% shift to change the outcome. The outcome for California referendums are based on 50%+1 to pass.

    Prop 22 (2000) passed with a 23% margin of victory. Prop 8 passed by 5%. From 2000 to 2008 that is a shift of 2.25% per year over the intervening years. If that trend continued on an upward slope, then Prop 8 would have been repealed by the voters in 2012 if it had been on the ballot.

    Personally I think there would have been a lot more capital to be made via a repeal effort instead of doing it through the courts. The court victory was a tactical victory, repeal would have been a strategic victory.



    >>>>
    There was a heated debate on whether - and when - to go back to the polls. (I was on a couple of the email lists debating it; I'm sure it was happening even more than I saw.)

    Go back in 2010? But that's an off-year election, and that tends to draw conservative voters. So I think most groups were looking at 2012.

    But in Aug, 2010, Judge Walker made his ruling that Prop 8 was unconstitutional; at that point, it didn't seem the best strategy to spend the money to get an initiative on the ballot when the courts could settle it.

    BEFORE the Perry vs Schwarzenegger case, a lot of people in the LGBT community did NOT want to go to the courts, for fear of what the Supreme Court would do. There were groups that did not support the Perry case at first. But it was so strong, and the lawyers were so good, that I think everyone came around to supporting that approach.

    But going back to repeal Prop 8 was definitely the plan until the court case happened; but I think the general feeling was 2012 would be better than 2010, and by then it seemed unnecessary.

  2. #852
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by paddymcdougall View Post
    There was a heated debate on whether - and when - to go back to the polls. (I was on a couple of the email lists debating it; I'm sure it was happening even more than I saw.)

    Go back in 2010? But that's an off-year election, and that tends to draw conservative voters. So I think most groups were looking at 2012.

    But in Aug, 2010, Judge Walker made his ruling that Prop 8 was unconstitutional; at that point, it didn't seem the best strategy to spend the money to get an initiative on the ballot when the courts could settle it.

    BEFORE the Perry vs Schwarzenegger case, a lot of people in the LGBT community did NOT want to go to the courts, for fear of what the Supreme Court would do. There were groups that did not support the Perry case at first. But it was so strong, and the lawyers were so good, that I think everyone came around to supporting that approach.

    But going back to repeal Prop 8 was definitely the plan until the court case happened; but I think the general feeling was 2012 would be better than 2010, and by then it seemed unnecessary.

    I agree that 2012 would have been a better target for a repeal vote. I'm not commenting on what other people "felt" ( ), I was pointing out the difference between a tactical victory and a strategic victory. Winning the court case so that SSCM resumed in CA via a court case was a tactical victory, IMHO though there would have been much more strategic value in having the voters repeal it.


    >>>>

  3. #853
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,015

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony60 View Post
    Can you think of anything that was the impetus for these amendments? Or do you think they just came up with them out of the blue?
    It really doesn't matter why the Amendments were put into place. The way they are written easily cover everyone constitutionally. "Cruel and unusual punishment" would not cover nearly as much as it currently does. Arms wouldn't cover or exclude what we currently do if we went on a meaning based from the 17/1800s.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #854
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    It really doesn't matter why the Amendments were put into place. The way they are written easily cover everyone constitutionally. "Cruel and unusual punishment" would not cover nearly as much as it currently does. Arms wouldn't cover or exclude what we currently do if we went on a meaning based from the 17/1800s.
    But it does. They easily cover if they are misinterpreted (which they are). Arms was written with the intention of what the military had, so it doesn't exclude.

  5. #855
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,015

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    But it does. They easily cover if they are misinterpreted (which they are). Arms was written with the intention of what the military had, so it doesn't exclude.
    They cover what they need to. The entire intent of the whole Constitution is to restrict the government from denying rights to individuals. The 14th expanded that to the states. No matter the intent originally, the base intent is to treat everyone fairly to the biggest degree possibly in the law, to not allow others to be able to unfairly have power over certain people just because they possess the numbers (hence why we are not a direct democracy, but rather a constitutional republic).
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #856
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 04:17 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,032

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    I agree that 2012 would have been a better target for a repeal vote. I'm not commenting on what other people "felt" ( ), I was pointing out the difference between a tactical victory and a strategic victory. Winning the court case so that SSCM resumed in CA via a court case was a tactical victory, IMHO though there would have been much more strategic value in having the voters repeal it.


    >>>>
    I agree, but by 2012 it sure looked like a waste of money and time to go to the polls to get it repealed. Not saying you're wrong, though.

  7. #857
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 04:17 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,032

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Old democrats and independents?
    There's a slide in this deck that shows voter registration by age - (around slide 15)
    http://jonathanfoxucsc.files.wordpre...-final_pdf.pdf
    Yes, they are more dem than repub, but less so than younger voters


    and this site says
    Forty-two percent of likely voters in California are 55 years or older, though this age group makes up only 30% of the state’s adult population.
    California's Likely Voters (PPIC Publication)


    This site says
    Driving Factors of Prop 8 Vote - Let California Ring
    WASHINGTON, Jan. 6 — An in-depth analysis of the Proposition 8 vote released today shows that party affiliation, political ideology, frequency of attending worship services and age were the driving forces behind the measure’s passage on Nov. 4. The study finds that after taking into account the effect of church attendance, support for Proposition 8 among African Americans and Latinos was not significantly different than other groups. Through a precinct-by-precinct analysis and review of multiple other sources of data, the study also puts African-American support for Proposition 8 at no more than 59 percent, nowhere close to the 70 percent reported the night of the election. Finally, the study shows how support for marriage equality has grown substantially across almost all California demographic groups — except Republicans.
    and
    More than two-thirds (67 percent) of voters 65 or older supported Proposition 8, while majorities under 65 opposed it.
    So with that last quote my guess is yes, some older dems joined in repubs in voting for prop 8. Do you have a point in asking that?

    Key thing is - older voters tend to be more against SSM, but others are more in favor of it; the study just above finds:
    The study found that overall support for marriage equality has increased by 9 percent since 2000, with support increasing among every age group under age 65, across all racial and ethnic groups and among Protestants, Catholics and Jews. There are three “holdout” groups where voting patterns have not changed: Republicans, conservatives, and those 65 and older. The largest gain — up 16 percent — was among voters 45-64 years of age, followed by a 13 percent increase among voters 18-29.

  8. #858
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by paddymcdougall View Post
    Do you have a point in asking that?
    Democrats are the reason why prop 8 passed.

  9. #859
    Sage
    Anthony60's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,568

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    It really doesn't matter why the Amendments were put into place. The way they are written easily cover everyone constitutionally. "Cruel and unusual punishment" would not cover nearly as much as it currently does. Arms wouldn't cover or exclude what we currently do if we went on a meaning based from the 17/1800s.
    The problem we have today is that the left tries to stretch and twist the words to get them to cover their left wing agenda. Equal protection means that everyone is treated the same. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Anyone can get married. Same sex people can not get married. It applies to all. Completely equal.

    There is no federal power to force states to change the meaning of marriage. That power lies with the states. If the people of a state choose to change the meaning of marriage, so be it. Utah chose not to.

    I object to the federal government taking an unconstitutional action in this case.
    "We have met the enemy and they are ours..." -- Oliver Hazard Perry
    "I don't want a piece of you... I want the whole thing!" -- Bob Barker

  10. #860
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 04:17 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,032

    Re: Federal judge strikes down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Democrats are the reason why prop 8 passed.
    So you had no reason. Got it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •