The court disagreed, saying that a revision of the state Constitution would require a re-working the entire document, and therefore Proposition 8 was an amendment. They also stated that the judiciary can only interpret the laws and constitution. Since Proposition 8 changed the constitution, it therefore changed what the judiciary had to work with when they defended minority rights and therefore does not violate the separation of powers. The court also ruled that same-sex marriages which were issued before Proposition 8 was passed will still be valid.

Marriages in the United States have always been issued by the state. Therefore, decisions as to who is allowed to be married and who isn’t are the prerogative of the state. California and 28 other states have held referendums to decide the issue, and in almost every instance the voters have decided that homosexual marriage is not something that the state should recognize.

Proposition 8′s passage has unleashed a lot of venom from homosexual activists, which has been detailed in other posts on this blog. It has generated much more venom than the 28 other states that have passed constitutional amendments banning homosexual marriage. Why is this? I think the answer lies in California’s reputation as a liberal and pro-homosexual state. If homosexual marriage can be banned by popular vote in California, then it will probably be banned almost everywhere that it gets put up for a vote.

That’s the real issue – Proposition 8′s passage has show how little popular support there is for legal homosexual marriage in the United States.

TO THE EDITOR:

The Young Democrats sponsored a “Prop 8 Musical” that debuted in the Pit on Wednesday.

In doing so, the Young Democrats have shown their antagonism toward religion and have made it very uncomfortable for Christians to affiliate with their organization.

The play mocks Christianity and the Lord Jesus Christ in a way that is inappropriate and does not further productive discussion or thinking. For example, in their infinite wisdom, the Young Democrats have sponsored a play that compared the Mosaic Law regarding whether Jews should eat shell fish to the sins of fornication and sodomy as they relate to Christian morality.

Christians are accused of “picking and choosing” what biblical passages they believe. Brilliant!

Here’s the thing, about 2,000 years ago Jesus Christ came and abolished the law through the cross and now the righteousness of God is manifested by way of faith in Jesus Christ, not in what you eat. And just, oh, by the way, fornication and homosexuality are considered to be morally wrong according to the New Testament writers; eating shell fish is not.

If this play had treated any other religion the way it treated Christianity, there would be riots by the same arrogant bunch that put on this moronic musical.

Before the Young Democrats argue against a tradition central to a coherent society, perhaps they ought to first understand what they are talking about.

Having said that, it is necessary the Young Democrats repudiate religious folk, seeing as heaven ain’t big enough for both Chairman Obama and God.

Justin L. Crowder

To be clear, and to ease the minds of my editors and fellow staff writers, the last line is meant as a joke with reference to the idea that Obama is treated as a messiah or a savior.