I do not see the decision by SCOTUS as a Gay Day, I see it as states right day. I believe that prop 8 is not dead, there simply need to be a different plaintiff
Posted on | June 26, 2013 | 24 Comments
if you look at 4 major decisions of the Supremes brought to to public review and public consumption in the last 3 days, you will see onered line, one common thread, it it is States Rights.
Throwing out 1965 provisions ment that we as a nation came to the point of equality of races and there is no justification for the feds to usurp the states rights.
similarly,the DOMA case was ruled based on supremacy of states rights in the area of ascertaining the will of the people in the social areas.
the court did not state that the Federal government have supremeacy in regards to prop 8. they simply stated that organizers of prop 8 did not have standing. we need different kinds of cases to boost the rights of the citizens of the states.
Here is an example: a priest refuses to marry a gay couple. recently there was a case where a baker was sued by a state, i believe, Colorado, for refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding, as the state found it to be discriminatory.
I believe, it is time for for the citizens of the state of Ca to sue the Attorney General and Governor, who refused to defend proposition 8, possibly open gay federal judge, who ruled against the prop 8 and I guarantee you that SCOTUS will take the case, as here we have corrupt state officials, corrupt federal judge acting based on their personal feelings and depriving 40 million citizens of the state of CA of their right to enforce the laws they voted on.
If Gay and Lesbian community wants another vote, to overturn prop 8, they have a constitutional right to do so, however a corrupt federal judge who happened to be gay and was chosen by judge shopping and a corrupt Attorney General have no right to throw away the will of 40 million people.
I need people willing to bring the case against the presiding federal judge and AG of Ca and seek a stay in overturning prop 8 to go straight to Kennedy. Read the opinion again, particularly the dissent by Kennedy, he is sending a message to the citizens of the state of CA that as a justice in charge of 9th circuit, he will stay overturning of prop 8, as he believes that the citizens have a right to act in defending the winning propositions and laws, when corrupt state officials are refusing to defend the laws that people voted on.
If prop 8 would have been defeated by the people, I would be silent, as this would have been the will of the people, however as people have spoken, their rights have to be defended by the courts, not disregarded, as it makes the people the slaves of the regime without any rights
Comments
24 Responses to “I do not see the decision by SCOTUS as a Gay Day, I see it as states right day. I believe that prop 8 is not dead, there simply need to be a different plaintiff”
Leave a Reply
EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !
Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day
OrlyTaitzEsq.comTAITZ REPORT
Official Facebook
IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!
Historic DVD Now Available!
DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling.
---------
To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.
Advertisement / Sponsors
29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
Ste 100
Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
orly.taitz @gmail. com
(949) 766-7687
--------------------------------------
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
--------------------------------------
Bumper Sticker
$9.99 thru PayPal--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------Orly Taitz Photo Collections
June 26th, 2013 @ 8:29 am
You are apparently not aware that if Prop 8 were put to the ballot again it would lose, soundly…give it up Lady Liberty, you are on the wrong side of history AGAIN.
June 26th, 2013 @ 8:43 am
“… however as people have spoken, their rights have to be defended by the courts, not disregarded …”
Just like when 65 million people voted for President Obama.
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:01 am
With all the talk about marriage, the most important “definition” of marriage has long been lost to public consciousness.
It is that, until a Supreme Court decision in the 1970s (which over-ruled the age-old provision) — the marriage of the biological father to the mother obligated the man’s support of the children.
If the mother did not have a marriage certificate, showing a legal relation to the biological father, the child was illegitimate. The father was not compelled to support the child. Who supported it then?
With that case of the 1970s, the biological father, married or not, became then legally responsible for child support. What’s the backstory?
The expansion of the welfare system, to include unwed mothers and their children, became a tremendous burden on the welfare budgets. They asked, as all bureaucracies, where can we get some more money. Enter the biological, but unwed father.
Prior to the state paying for the “illegitimate” child, who paid? if not the father? Obviously the mother’s parents. THAT was the strong incentive for the parents, and society in general, to be very strict about the girl’s amorous habits. Think about it. Seriously, think about it.
Enter: the explanation for today’s women without husbands, and without fathers for their children.
How short the public memory is.
I used to write about this for the National Organization for Men.
At this time I am unable to remember or identify the name of the court case.
The major plague of our traditional values is not the “breakdown of the family” — rather, the breakdown of marriage as a bond to make the man financially responsible for his children.
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:02 am
if Obama would have been a legitimate pres, that would be the case However he pretended to be one, using all forged and stolen IDs
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:04 am
there is a difference between a proposition losing in court and judges throwing the will of the people in the toilet
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:38 am
“there is a difference between a proposition losing in court and judges throwing the will of the people in the toilet”
You really don’t get it, do you? Once again you show your complete and utter ignorance of anything legal.
Let me see if I can help you…
A federal judge ruled Prop. 8 violated the federal constitution and permanently enjoined its enforcement.
SCOTUS held that there was no one with standing to defend Prop. 8.
In order to understand the opinion, you have to understand what standing is.
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:47 am
“…judges throwing the will of the people in the toilet”
Dive in there and get it, bitch, you’ll be RIGHT in your element.
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:48 am
Keep focused Orly. This is a non-issue. By the time this comes up again all the California gays will have been married. Getting that overturned will be monumental.
We need you to fight the usurpation of the presidency. Stick with that.
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:55 am
Dr. Taitz,
I’m willing to bring a case against the federal judge and the AG of CA.
June 26th, 2013 @ 10:58 am
“if Obama would have been a legitimate pres, that would be the case However he pretended to be one, using all forged and stolen IDs”
He is legitimate. There is not one scintilla of evidence or support for your statement. It’s made-up BS.
June 26th, 2013 @ 12:07 pm
Remember it was done twice by the justitutes.
June 26th, 2013 @ 12:28 pm
I believe the marriage act should stand and there should be no need to have a law for redacted to marry. They already have as much right to marry as anyone, all they have to do is turn their life around and stop living in pure sin. They need to join the rest of the good people and find themselves a partner of the opposite sex and marry. Those who cannot change on their own should seek medical help because being redacted is a sickness not another sex or a normal thing. There is nothing normal about it.
June 26th, 2013 @ 12:31 pm
I cannot understand how five of nine appointed people can vote to overturn the will of 40 million people, something is really wrong in this country.
June 26th, 2013 @ 12:39 pm
Who has standing? As a California resident (lifelong) and one who voted in favor of Prop 8 am confused. Do I have standing because my elected official i.e. AG Harris decided not perform her primary job function, and that is represent the will of the voter? I guess it is no different than our SOS refusing to do her job by verifying BO eligibility. However, Orly is right SCOTUS in the last two days has given some rights back to the States! A small victory is better than nothing at all.
June 26th, 2013 @ 1:08 pm
Why are you so sure Yoel?
Anyway, for you and other aching heart liberasts here are some points to consider:
https://www.resonoelusono.com/Prop8TalkPoints.htm
June 26th, 2013 @ 1:42 pm
Well, Yoel, I wondered when you would post against our Dr Orly! If you’re not an attorney, where do you get off telling her to give it up?
That’s fairly obnoxious! She’s right! Dr Orly is the one that has had to put up with all the treason in Ca. for about (5) years! The suit should be brought and it sounds like the Judge here, Kennedy, would do what’s right?! So…
why don’t you face it?
June 26th, 2013 @ 2:08 pm
If you look at what Kennedy said in the DOMA case, he will not issue a stay in Prop 8.
And to sue the California officials, you need a cause of action. Disregarding the alleged will of the people is not a cause of action.
June 26th, 2013 @ 2:29 pm
When did Yoel convert over to Communism? I thought he was one of the good guys.
June 26th, 2013 @ 3:16 pm
Yoel – you sure about that? Already been on the ballot TWICE with Prop 22 and Prop 8 and passed by the people with a majority BOTH times. Nice try. The only way you libtards can get your way is with activist judges ignoring the will of the people – prop 187 and 209 ring a bell? Jackass.
June 26th, 2013 @ 4:33 pm
Just before Rome fell the very same kind of law was enacted. The design will destroy marriage and family progression. What’s really sad is the BPA chemical in plastic food containers is a potent female mimicker that has been proven responsible for allot of the gender identity problems plaguing American’s.
June 26th, 2013 @ 5:01 pm
Once the American people accept that Obama is not the President and that Kagan and Sotomayor are not Supreme Court justices, then this decision will be null and void as will all of the decision that Kagan and Sotomayor participated in.
June 26th, 2013 @ 5:25 pm
Just guessing that a desperate
ignorant fool, assumed Yoel’s
identity.
Maybe that is a compliment.
June 26th, 2013 @ 8:52 pm
Scrubbed again! Hope I get my hands on the POS THAT KEEPS SCREWING AROUND WITH THE POSTS!
@Democracy wins: Like hell it does! O was lucky to receive Flatulance from anyone this past election!
Paul Jackson: Does your brain ever come out of that COMA?
Dore-Falatio: may all you “tinker-bells” have a Godly, Spiritual awakening, so you learn right from wrong??? Yeah, right?
Andrew Mois: That’s exactly the reason to flush out the treason in the judiciary, to save America!
If all these poeple were two-story building, they’d have NOTHING UPSTAIRS!!! LOL! 🙂
July 1st, 2013 @ 7:54 am
> Already been on the ballot TWICE with Prop 22 and Prop 8 and passed by the people with a majority BOTH times. Nice try. The only way you libtards can get your way is with activist judges ignoring the will of the people
That’s funny, but when the people vote for something you don’t like, you ask courts to strike it down and yell “we’re not a democracy, the majority can’t oppress the minority!”.
So whatever happens, you right-wingers flip-flop on whether courts can/should overrule the majority or not.