Welcome to RightForever

Welcome to my blog; a straight talking, Conservative blog, made for all ends of the political spectrum. Be sure to follow and comment on my posts. After all the blog's meant to provoke discussion and discuss the issues of today's political environment! And don't forget to vote in my poll which runs until election day 2010!

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Breaking News: Prop 8 Ruled Unconstitutional

Welcome back everyone,

This is a big day on the American political scene. At about 1:26 pm PST (so 4:26 for us on the East Coast), Drudge reported that at about 2 pm PST (5 pm here), the judge presiding over the Prop 8 case (the referendum banning gay marriage in the State of California) would strike the referendum from the law books. Controversial to say the least. RightForever will break it down for you.

Proposition 8 was introduced to the ballot in California in 2008, after a mass of signatures was amassed by thousands of volunteers state wide. It was a motion to ban the practice and recognition of same-sex marriage in California. The people of California voted to pass the referendum question with over 52% of the vote. This is saying a lot in a year where the most liberal President in the history of the United States swept the elections for the Democrats. Now, here at RightForever, I have absolutely no problem with the concept of same sex civil unions with equal benefits as marriage. My beef with this judge comes down to them defying the people of their State and acting as an activist and not as an upholder of the Constitution.

For beginners, the fact that this even needs to go to Court is absurd. The State of California already put this proposition through purest form of democracy (a referendum voted on by its CITIZENS). This means a majority of Californians agree with what happened, regardless of who spent what money on whichever television stations. For a judge to overrule the people he is supposed to protect by upholding the law is abhorrent. Furthermore, for him to justify it on based on constitutional grounds is beyond laughable. The Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution included NOTHING on the concept of marriage, simply because they never, in their wildest dreams, imagined that 250 or so years later, people would actually believe in gay marriage. The same goes for such things as abortion. This is because the United Stated of America is a country founded on Judeo-CHRISTIAN values. And should anyone believe that Christianity believes in the concept of gay marriage, there is no form of treatment that can correct the illness you have. Perhaps if this judge admitted that he made his decision based on his own notion of fairness (even though that would be a blatant violation of the standards of his job), I would be able to respect him for his bravery. But hiding behind the Constitution in a matter that would make the founders sick, is an insult to not only the peopole of California, but the men who fought for the founding of the USA.

But hey, what can we expect from a State that gave us the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman, Babara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Arnold Schwartzenegger (possibly the biggest RINO - Republican In Name Only - the Republicans have ever seen)? And if you listen close enough, I'll you can hear the Founders rolling over in their graves at this very moment.

Another example of the most biased judges in the country, using their power to push the agenda on the people, who want no part of it. Shocker isn't it? Seems like this judge was following the lead of the Democrats on Arizona and Health Care.

Cheers,
RightForever

4 comments:

  1. "This is because the United Stated of America is a country founded on Judeo-CHRISTIAN values. And should anyone believe that Christianity believes in the concept of gay marriage, there is no form of treatment that can correct the illness you have."

    What about the separation of church and state? Bearing that in mind, who gives a fuck about Christian values?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mothsdust,
    I must have missed the part of the Constitution that mentioned the separation of church and state. Perhaps you should actually read the First Amendment.

    You've nailed it on this one Jon. This is an issue for voters to determine, not an imperial court.

    Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks Ari. New post coming soon, stay tuned everyone!

    ReplyDelete