Well, today is an interesting day in judicial history. First, Obama nominates a vocal advocate of judicial activism to the Supreme Court. Then, the California Supreme Court, in a rare fit of originalism, upholds the constitutionality of Prop 8.
Interesting times, interesting times. Sotomayor will almost certainly be confirmed, but I think Prop 8 will be overturned by ballot proposition within the next 2 years. Thoughts? Fights? Wildly unpopular political opinions you care to publicly express?
Daniel Semsen 11:21 am on 26 May 2009 Permalink
Agreed. It’s only a matter of time before Prop 8 goes bye-bye.
Chad 1:51 pm on 26 May 2009 Permalink
I will restate my position that the Christian right needs to legislate against adultery if they’re gong to be fully intellectually honest with themselves.
Leonard 4:17 pm on 26 May 2009 Permalink
Why do you think this Chad? I would love to know.
Chad 5:40 pm on 26 May 2009 Permalink
Because we’re trying to make legislation that matches Scripture. We oughta go after blasphemy, while we’re at it.
Leonard 9:28 pm on 26 May 2009 Permalink
When do we not cross this line and when is it okay? Legislate lying? to some degree it is. Legislate, forms of violence. Legislate certain sexual standards… we do this already, scripture or not. What should we do about the subject of homosexual marriage? I am not trying to argue with you, just trying to understand your thinking.
harmonicminer 10:32 pm on 26 May 2009 Permalink
It’s a matter of turnout at the elections. Just like the most recent. The PRIME chance Prop 8 had of being defeated was in an election where Obama won by 8 million to McCain’s 5 million votes. I doubt that the Left can engineer that kind of turnout again, even for an election where Obama is the (now repeat) candidate.
So I think there is less chance of a Prop 8 overturn than you, I guess.
BTW, while it seems to be received wisdom that 70% of African-Americans voted FOR Prop 8, this is interesting. Which means, if true, that larger African-American turnout didn’t make as much difference as initially thought by some, since they seem to be close to a match to the general percentages.
I have no doubt that the Left will try to put an anti-Prop 8 initiative on the ballot fairly soon, though.
harmonicminer 10:45 pm on 26 May 2009 Permalink
Chad, I think you’re comparing making something illegal to approving it with extra legal dignity.
Homosexuality is NOW just as legal as adultery, and just as “legally protected.” More so, if anything, since people who commit adultery are more likely to be given a hard time in child custody hearings than gay people.
There isn’t an exact analogy that’s easy to make for this, if you’re trying to compare hetero couples with gay couples.
The closest analogy seems to me to be the laws requiring 16 yr olds to get permission from parents to marry.. and making it possible to jail an 18 yr old for having sex with a 16 yr old. That’s a pretty arbitrary standard, isn’t it? It is FAR less historically defensible than the hetero-only definition of marriage.
Marriage is not legally protected primarily for religious reasons, but for eminently practical societal ones involving children, and responsibility for them. Which is why laws against blasphemy or other sins don’t direct compare, either.
Chad 7:56 am on 27 May 2009 Permalink
I had a lengthy discussion with many folks on my Facebook page about this yesterday, and it sort of exhausted me, so my commentary here was pretty drive-by. Sorry. :(
Stupid Facebook.
It’s my opinion that this is a losing battle and we’ve used, and are continuing to use, losing tactics. Over the years, most of my debates with Phil (or my other conservative friends, for that matter) have been over the methodology of how the culture war is being fought, rather than the merits of the culture war itself.
I think that the simplest way to actually influence the culture on this issue is to model healthy families, marriages, and friendships under the banner of Christ’s love. We will simply never, ever be able to legislate this one away.
Ever.