Pray for California

[Faithdancer]

Barring any further delays, the US Supreme Court is expected to announce on December 3rd whether or not it will take up the matter of the 9th Circuit Court’s upholding of a District Court overturn of Proposition 8, the California measure, passed in 2008, which would amend the California State Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman, only. If the court refuses the case, same sex “marriage” will quickly resume in California, perhaps within days. This is landmark because if the court does take up the case, analysts think it will overrule the Circuit and District Courts’ decisions, since to affirm the decision could in effect make same sex marriage the law of the land. Even the most liberal court members may not be willing to deal with the fallout from such a decision- not just yet, anyway. Justice Kennedy may be the swing vote, as he often is.

Prop 8 and its identical predecessor have been passed twice.by the people of California, only to have it blocked by the courts. In the case of Prop. 8 the initial adverse ruling on this proposed amendment was made in the District Court by an openly homosexual judge who should have recused himself. The higher, Circuit Court upheld his decision not to recuse himself.

The impedance of this amendment, passed by the will of the people, is a gross miscarriage of justice and a deliberate thwarting of a popular vote. Please join your prayers to mine that the US Supreme Court does the right thing, takes up the case and overturns the lower court’s decision.

 

[mab23]

my prayers go out to this,

I am a Californian!

 

[Faithdancer]

my prayers go out to this,

I am a Californian!

Thank you for your help, Mab23. Let us pray!

I should point out, for those folks who may not know, that should the Supreme Court take the case and uphold the lower court’s decision- same sex “marriage” will become the de facto law of the land.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Our Father, Who art in heaven
Hallowed be Thy Name;
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us;
and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil. Amen.

 

[rossum]

In the case of Prop. 8 the initial adverse ruling on this proposed amendment was made in the District Court by an openly homosexual judge who should have recused himself. The higher, Circuit Court upheld his decision not to recuse himself.

Here’s hoping that all openly homosexual and heterosexual judges on the Supreme Court will recuse themselves, leaving only the neutral bisexual and asexual judges to make a final decision.

rossum

 

[tskrobacz]

Here’s hoping that all openly homosexual and heterosexual judges on the Supreme Court will recuse themselves, leaving only the neutral bisexual and asexual judges to make a final decision.

rossum

Well said.

 

[s_schaffner]

I’ve been praying, but am not getting involved with politics anymore (except for voting), as it is driving me mad. I have a gay brother in law and this has been a really difficult time for us and my wives family as well, as we know he will and his partner will get married. I don’t talk to him or his partner about it, but he told my wife he doesn’t care if his family doesn’t show up to a ceremony; that their true friends will.

We have a 9 month old son now, and I am scared of how to raise him in this crazy world. I know that **God is in control **and we need to love everyone unconditionally as hard as it is.

Same sex marriage will as you probably already know eventually pass, but it will never be recognized as a valid marriage anyway in a true Christians eyes.

 

[Faithdancer]

I’ve been praying, but am not getting involved with politics anymore (except for voting), as it is driving me mad. I have a gay brother in law and this has been a really difficult time for us and my wives family as well, as we know he will and his partner will get married. I don’t talk to him or his partner about it, but he told my wife he doesn’t care if his family doesn’t show up to a ceremony; that their true friends will.

We have a 9 month old son now, and I am scared of how to raise him in this crazy world. I know that **God is in control **and we need to love everyone unconditionally as hard as it is.

Same sex marriage will as you probably already know eventually pass, but it will never be recognized as a valid marriage anyway in a true Christians eyes.

How sad that instead of respecting your beliefs he has to guilt-trip you like that. Well, all you can do is pray for him, and his conversion. God bless, schaffner!

 

[Catholic1954]

After that disasterous Obamacare decision last summer, I have very little confidence in the Supreme Court to do the right thing. If Prop 8 is struck down, it will be a very short time before same sex marriage is the law of the land.

 

[Faithdancer]

It will be interesting to see if retired judge Vaughan Walker, the District Court judge who made the initial ruling that Prop 8 was unconstitutional, will take advantage of the renewal of same sex “marriages” in California, should the Supreme Court refuse to take up the writ of certiorari, or take the case and then affirm Walker’s ruling.

Ironically, Walker actually opposed the use of the term “Gay Olympics” earlier in his career, which at the time drew the ire of the homosexualists. Was he in the closet at that time? At the time he ruled on Prop 8, he was in a long term homosexual relationship, which he did not disclose because apparently, he didn’t have to. Did his homosexuality affect his ruling, or didn’t it? The fact is, his orientation is shared by only a small minority of the American people, yet he has directly thwarted the will of the people of California.

 

[Timothysis]

After that disasterous Obamacare decision last summer, I have very little confidence in the Supreme Court to do the right thing.

That decision was actually a nuanced, conservative decision that lessened the power of congress to just do things willy nilly. Congress has the constitutional authority to tax, which is what the ultimate decision was in the Obamacare decision. Don’t like it? The same thing happened in the 1930s with Social Security. It can certainly be said that, unlike Griswald, Roe v. Wade or even Brown v. the Board of Education, it was NOT an activist decision, which is how the court is supposed to operate.

Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose…you just need to learn how to swallow the lose.

 

[Giants]

It will be interesting to see if retired judge Vaughan Walker, the District Court judge who made the initial ruling that Prop 8 was unconstitutional, will take advantage of the renewal of same sex “marriages” in California, should the Supreme Court refuse to take up the writ of certiorari, or take the case and then affirm Walker’s ruling.

Ironically, Walker actually opposed the use of the term “Gay Olympics” earlier in his career, which at the time drew the ire of the homosexualists. Was he in the closet at that time? At the time he ruled on Prop 8, he was in a long term homosexual relationship, which he did not disclose because apparently, he didn’t have to. Did his homosexuality affect his ruling, or didn’t it? The fact is, his orientation is shared by only a small minority of the American people, yet he has directly thwarted the will of the people of California.

Perhaps Walker’s sexual orientation did affect his ruling. Though that’s hardly an issue. A female judge isn’t required to recuse herself when faced with a case over women’s rights, nor a judge with kids in case where the ruling might directly affect them.

No matter how large the consensus, Californians are not permitted to vote in legislation that oversteps the Constitution. People need to get their heads around this fact.

 

[Faithdancer]

Perhaps Walker’s sexual orientation did affect his ruling. Though that’s hardly an issue. A female judge isn’t required to recuse herself when faced with a case over women’s rights, nor a judge with kids in case where the ruling might directly affect them.

No matter how large the consensus, Californians are not permitted to vote in legislation that oversteps the Constitution. People need to get their heads around this fact.

It hardly seems constitutional for a segment comprising 5% or less of the American population to redefine marriage for the other 95%.

 

[Giants]

It hardly seems constitutional for a segment comprising 5% or less of the American population to redefine marriage for the other 95%.

The 5% isn’t trying to redefine marriage for the other 95%. It’s trying to redefine marriage for the 5%. Nothing would change for the 95%.

And it’s entirely unconstitutional for the 95% to deny the benefits of equal protection under the law to the 5% by way of popular vote. As it would be for 5% to deny it to 95%. Or 100 million people to deny it to one.

 

[edwest2]

Perhaps Walker’s sexual orientation did affect his ruling. Though that’s hardly an issue. A female judge isn’t required to recuse herself when faced with a case over women’s rights, nor a judge with kids in case where the ruling might directly affect them.

No matter how large the consensus, Californians are not permitted to vote in legislation that oversteps the Constitution. People need to get their heads around this fact.

So who put it on the ballot? It was defeated twice.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

How sad that instead of respecting your beliefs he has to guilt-trip you like that. Well, all you can do is pray for him, and his conversion. God bless, schaffner!

Tolerance in action. Pray for his conversion. Yes, we’re all sinners here but the goal is to move closer to God’s will not away from it.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Giants]

So who put it on the ballot? It was defeated twice.

Peace,
Ed

Anything can make it on the ballot, assuming it has enough petition signatures ahead of time. But the will of the people cannot overrule the Constitution. The judicial branch is following its mandate- determining whether a given piece of legislation violates the Constitution. And Prop 8 did.

 

[Faithdancer]

Anything can make it on the ballot, assuming it has enough petition signatures ahead of time. But the will of the people cannot overrule the Constitution. The judicial branch is following its mandate- determining whether a given piece of legislation violates the Constitution. And Prop 8 did.

The federal courts need to keep their hands off measures that are passed by popular vote of the people of California and upheld by the California State Supreme Court. This is tyranny by the federal government, in this case the judicial branch.

 

[Faithdancer]

So who put it on the ballot? It was defeated twice.
Peace,
Ed

Actually it passed twice, Ed- assume that’s what you meant? Passed twice, and has now been blocked in implementation twice, in 2000 by the California Supreme Court (that one was an ordinary statute and not a constitutional amendment). Proposition 8 was passed in 2008 and then declared unconstitutional by District Court judge Vaughn Walker.

Parenthetically, if same sex “marriages” resume in California, will Walker have the nerve to get “married” to his male partner? That would certainly make this debacle complete.

 

[Giants]

The federal courts need to keep their hands off measures that are passed (twice) by popular vote of the people and upheld by the California State Supreme Court. This is tyranny by the federal government, in this case the judicial branch.

No, it’s exactly what the judicial branch of every level of government is supposed to do - weigh a given piece of legislation against the Supreme Law of the Land - in this case, the U.S. Constitution, and determine whether it meets that standard.