Prop 8 Ruling

I join many LGBT Californians who are disappointed by the Prop 8 decision though not surprised. Though I can't say how disappointed I really am due to the fact that when I watched a bit of the legal arguments a few months ago. The original ruling on marriage for same-sex couples last May was actually a complete surprise due to the fact that this CA Supreme Court has been known as a more conservative court. I think a lot of the original decision last year was due to a sentiment by the judges that the vote to ban same sex marriage back in 2000 was completely outdated and that the people would have wanted a change. I come to that conclusion because when I watched a bit of the legal arguments a few months ago the judges seem almost astounded that there was a request to overturn the "will of the people" and the 6-1 vote to uphold Prop 8 seems to be far more along the lines of what we had expected from them a year ago. That being said there are a few things I'd like to discuss in the aftermath of this decision.

"Will of the People"
As I mentioned after the elections, I thought that the No on 8 campaign was utterly toothless and a horrible campaign to convey the gravity of the proposition and the precedent it set for the ability for a certain body of people to vote on a certain peoples rights. The campaign should have been more aggressive, should have countered opposition commercials and statments quickly and decisively, and should have done a lot more to really reach the undecided voters in the middle of the block. Do I think this really is the will of the people? No. I think the people were duped by being told that Prop 8 was about certain politicians statements and the "gay adgenda" to take over the world and force everyone to bend to their will. That's the No on 8 campaigns' fault.

"Activist Judges"
I absolutely loathe that everytime a more liberal court ruling comes down there's always a few conservative voices ready to call the individuals "activist judges" which almost seems to negate the validity of their opinions. I get so steamed the "activist judge" card is played...seriously people...just because you disagree with the judges interpretation of the law does not mean that they are incorrect in their interpretation. It just means that you disagree with it. Personally, as much as I may disagree with what happens on a case-to-case basis, I also feel that theres a part of me that just has to trust that the judge has spend quite a bit of time studying the law and precedents set by other cases to come to their conclusion. Shut up about your "activist judge" bias and stop acting like the world is screwing you over when the ruling doesn't really affect you at all.

Yeah...decent rant there.