Gay Marriage Fight: Proposition 8 Trial Pauses, But Not For Ruling

This is NOT the pause that refreshes.

We'll be in limbo for a while.

The judge in this case isn't particularly known as a friend of the GLBT cause. The following passage is taken directly from my one (and thus far, only) comment to the "Huffington Post" site regarding the yet-to-be determined trial against implementation of Proposition 8, California's restrictive law prohibiting same-sex marriage.

Sidelight: interesting that the most frequent daily coverage of the trial, appearing first on Yahoo, was reportage from the Baptist Press organization. If they're watching that closely, they've got to be nervous.




I'm surprised the plaintiffs' attorneys haven't raised the key issue, which I believe will be pivotal: under the California state constitution, two-thirds of the voters must approve any amendment, which Prop 8 was. However, Prop 8 "won" only 52 percent of the vote. Anyone can do the math: 52% is clearly, NOT the 66+% required for passage.

The present implementation of Proposition 8 is demonstrably unconstitutional on those grounds.

The plaintiffs' attorneys have presented eye-opening testimony about the oppression of gay and lesbian couples, the bias and ignorance of Proposition 8's creators, the damage done to gay/lesbian citizens (including the "conversion-therapy-by-genital-electrodes" torture of one young man).

I believe that, with their eyes opened by such evidence, the voters will be better informed when another ballot measure overturns Prop 8 - IF the compelling issue of its unconstitutionality isn't raised on appeal.

End note: ironically, "Marriage Equality," which would like Prop. 8 overturned, doesn't want to move toward another public ballot referendum until 2012. What are they waiting for? And what, I wonder, are they doing with the money they keep soliciting for support of the "crucial work?"