follow up on California Homosexual Marriage Defeat And Obama 11-6-08 "That controversy is also likely to end up before California's high court and could reach the U.S. Supreme Court." (see post/comments)
***
California Attorney General reverses self, asks state high court to overturn Prop. 8
(12-19) 19:25 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- State Attorney General Jerry Brown, in a surprise turnabout, asked the California Supreme Court on Friday to overturn Proposition 8, saying the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage violates basic rights guaranteed in the state Constitution.
Brown, who is required to defend state laws unless he cannot find reasonable legal grounds to do so, said after Prop. 8 passed Nov. 4 that he would support the initiative before the state's high court.
But in a lengthy filing late Friday, he argued that the measure was "inconsistent with the guarantees of individual liberty" in California's governing charter
The authors of the state Constitution, he said, did not intend "to put a group's right to enjoy liberty to a popular vote."
The court is reviewing lawsuits filed by gay and lesbian couples and by an array of local governments, led by San Francisco, that contend that ballot measure exceeded the legal limits on initiatives by destroying fundamental rights and stripping judges of their authority to protect a historically persecuted minority.
The justices could hear the cases as early as March and would be required to rule within 90 days. Other interested parties on both sides are scheduled to submit written arguments Jan. 15.
***
California Attorney General reverses self, asks state high court to overturn Prop. 8
(12-19) 19:25 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- State Attorney General Jerry Brown, in a surprise turnabout, asked the California Supreme Court on Friday to overturn Proposition 8, saying the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage violates basic rights guaranteed in the state Constitution.
Brown, who is required to defend state laws unless he cannot find reasonable legal grounds to do so, said after Prop. 8 passed Nov. 4 that he would support the initiative before the state's high court.
But in a lengthy filing late Friday, he argued that the measure was "inconsistent with the guarantees of individual liberty" in California's governing charter
The authors of the state Constitution, he said, did not intend "to put a group's right to enjoy liberty to a popular vote."
The court is reviewing lawsuits filed by gay and lesbian couples and by an array of local governments, led by San Francisco, that contend that ballot measure exceeded the legal limits on initiatives by destroying fundamental rights and stripping judges of their authority to protect a historically persecuted minority.
The justices could hear the cases as early as March and would be required to rule within 90 days. Other interested parties on both sides are scheduled to submit written arguments Jan. 15.
Asked why he had changed the position he took after the election, Brown told KCBS radio that since his initial comments, "we've spent weeks researching all the cases, really looking at this law, reflecting on it, going back and forth."
With the help of senior attorneys in his office, he said, he concluded that the public's right to change the Constitution was outweighed in this case by "the duty of the court to protect minorities, to protect the fundamental liberties for which the Constitution is created."
---------------------------------------
re: Brown asks Supreme Court to overturn will of the people
re: Brown asks Supreme Court to overturn will of the people
The homosexual agenda continues on it's mad course toward a headlong plunge into the abyss aided and abetted by a vast array of co-conspirators (see 'Obama' at top) including State Attorney Generals, and by twisting truth, outright lying, and a masterful distorting of interpretations of words and legal clauses...e.g. to oppose homosexual marriage is now an act of "destroying fundamental rights". For another example, Brown is quoted as saying that it is the "duty of the court to protect...fundamental liberties". That 'twist of logic' raises a question though: Who will protect the "fundamental liberties" of innocent children of being safeguarded from being the target of homosexual proselytizers flooding into the school districts armed with their legal papers?
With blinded minds and seared consciences, the multitudes of the ungodly of this world have cast away all restraints, and God in turn has cast them away. The result of this is that the world is now, entering 2009, being enveloped in a thick palpable darkness.
It is a fearful thing to see the depths of depravity the human heart is capable of when the LORD God Almighty turns man over to his own ways. here
see also: God-gave-them-up: "...due to the "lusts of their own hearts"....[God] has 'given them up'."
see all: burning in lust; Rom. 1:27
maranatha
--------------------------------------------------------
John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
--------------------------------------------------------
John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Unfortunately verification hassle has been made necessary due to infestation of spam-bots - AVRev. 18:4