Prop 8 is going to pass

[ute4ever]

95% reporting

Yes 5,163,908 52%
No 4,760,336 48%

With roughly 500,000 votes remaining to be counted, Yes leads by 403,500.

Note that this is significantly less than the 61% who voted for Prop 22 eight years ago.

Results

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

95% reporting

Yes 5,163,908 52%
No 4,760,336 48%

With roughly 500,000 votes remaining to be counted, Yes leads by 403,500.

Note that this is significantly less than the 61% who voted for Prop 22 eight years ago.

Results

When the dust settles I think the BYU undisputed National Championship of 1984 will result in more convert baptisms than this. I hope the Brethren take notice and encourage the good Saints of the Kingdom to invest where the Church gets a higher return in the future.

As far as the comparison to Prop 22 I believe it was Judge Bork who called it "sliding towards Gomorroah!"

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

95% reporting

Yes 5,163,908 52%
No 4,760,336 48%

With roughly 500,000 votes remaining to be counted, Yes leads by 403,500.

Note that this is significantly less than the 61% who voted for Prop 22 eight years ago.

Results

A tad belated, but is Prop 8 an amendment to the California constitution? If not, with the statute passed by the legislature already overturned, what's the use?

[exUte]

Originally Posted by Archaea

A tad belated, but is Prop 8 an amendment to the California constitution? If not, with the statute passed by the legislature already overturned, what's the use?

It is a change to the constitution.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by exUte

It is a change to the constitution.

The original law was against the constitution, so it was placed on the ballot so they could make the law part of the constitution. This scares me because it is an example of mob rules. The Founding Fathers were careful to institute a representative government, not a complete democracy.

So any right or law is open for change? For example, religious freedom. If a state could get 50.01% of the population to vote to amend the state constitution to outlaw religion, wouldn't people lose their right to practice religion?

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

The original law was against the constitution, so it was placed on the ballot so they could make the law part of the constitution. This scares me because it is an example of mob rules. The Founding Fathers were careful to institute a representative government, not a complete democracy.

So any right or law is open for change? For example, religious freedom. If a state could get 50.01% of the population to vote to amend the state constitution to outlaw religion, wouldn't people lose their right to practice religion?

I am thinking that your example would face a pretty stiff challenge when it was appealed to the federal constitution.

I think that if and when this one gets to the federal level the conclusion is that the states get to define what a marriage is.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

I am thinking that your example would face a pretty stiff challenge when it was appealed to the federal constitution.

I think that if and when this one gets to the federal level the conclusion is that the states get to define what a marriage is.

What if, over the course of the next 20-30 years, the U.S. becomes a lot less religious, and voted to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban religion.
The courts couldn't do anything to stop it, could they? I know this is very unlikely, but who would have believed how much this country has changed in the past 30 years?

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

What if, over the course of the next 20-30 years, the U.S. becomes a lot less religious, and voted to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban religion.
The courts couldn't do anything to stop it, could they? I know this is very unlikely, but who would have believed how much this country has changed in the past 30 years?

As far-fetched as that is... you bring up a good point. NOTHING in the Constitutio is immune from amendment.