Just saw the Prez on tv saying "in America anything's possible"

[konnichi wa]

Including, apparently, taking away the rights of a minority by a simple narrow majority popular vote.

[Captain Hilts]

1. No, it's not. It's great he's prez, but the rest of us have a long way to go. He's got his, now we

need ours.

[sandnsea]

2. Actually, no rights have been taken away

And if people move quickly, California can be the first civil unions for all state in the country. The court specifically said that only thing the designation of marriage had been removed. Page 7
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15825222/Prop-8-Decision-California-Supreme-Court

[konnichi wa]

4. Could you please repost that in English?

Thanks! :D

[sandnsea]

6. From the Court

Proposition 8 does not entirely repeal or abrogate the aspect of a same-sex couple’s state constitutional right of privacy and due process that was analyzed in the majority opinion in the Marriage Cases — that is, the constitutional right of same-sex couples to “choose one’s life partner and enter with that person into a committed, officially recognized, and protected family relationship that enjoys all of the constitutionally based incidents of marriage” (Marriage Cases, supra, 43 Cal.4th at p. 829). Nor does Proposition 8 fundamentally alter the meaning and substance of state constitutional equal protection principles as articulated in that opinion. Instead, the measure carves out a narrow and limited exception to these state constitutional rights, reserving the official designation of the term “marriage” for the union of opposite-sex couples as a matter of state constitutional law, but leaving undisturbed all of the other extremely significant substantive aspects of a same-sex couple’s state constitutional right to establish an officially recognized and protected family relationship and the guarantee of equal protection of the laws.
By clarifying this essential point, we by no means diminish or minimize the significance that the official designation of “marriage” holds for both the proponents and opponents of Proposition 8; indeed, the importance of the marriage designation was a vital factor in the majority opinion’s ultimate holding in the Marriage Cases, supra, 43 Cal.4th 757, 845-846, 855. Nonetheless, it is crucial that we accurately identify the actual effect of Proposition 8 on same-sex couples’ state constitutional rights, as those rights existed prior to adoption of the proposition, in order to be able to assess properly the constitutional challenges to the proposition advanced in the present proceeding. We emphasize only that among the various constitutional protections recognized in the Marriage Cases as available to same-sex couples, it is only the designation of marriage — albeit significant — that has been removed by this initiative measure.

[SoCalNative]

8. It basically means that

because the initiative wasn't worded in such a way that it denied recognition of ANY relationship rights to same-sex couples (like the one that passed in FL did) it is only "marriage" that is limited to one man and one woman.

Domestic partnerships are still in tact in the state, and it doesn't preclude civil unions either should they be offered at some point.

[konnichi wa]

13. I get that it's essentially a fine semantic distinction without much of a difference.

But if anyone has a 'right' to call themselves and have society recognize them as 'married' (which seems to still apply to those ~18,000 couples), it seems to me the decision upholding P8 indeed causes a loss of that 'right.'
That's all I'm saying.

[bluedawg12]

14. Yes, it is the loss of a right. Like it's only the back of a bus.

"By clarifying this essential point, we by no means diminish or minimize the significance that the official designation of "marriage" holds for both the proponents and opponents of Proposition 8; indeed, the importance of the marriage designation was a vital factor in the majority opinion's ultimate holding in the Marriage Cases, supra, 43 Cal.4th 757, 845-846, 855."

[Chulanowa]

16. Basically what that means...

Is that while the water may come from the same pipes, they still have to use the drinking fountains at the other side of the building

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

3. I know what you mean. My neighbor just told me "good afternoon."

I told the lying motherfucker to eat shit and die.

[Neecy]

5. hey, don't forget....

It's also 'possible' for us to be thrown out of the military in this great land of ours, despite a certain campaign promise...

[Mythsaje]

7. Anything's possible--even fucked up shit.

Sounds about right.

[demodonkey]

9. How about single-payer healthcare with everybody in and nobody out??? nt

[girl gone mad]

10. Anything is possible..

as long as you're a pragmatist with malleable ideals and no real desire for justice.

[slipslidingaway]

11. Not for profit healthcare is not possible, or so we are told. n/t

[robinlynne]

12. Don't be put off by people who know what is not possible. Do what needs to be done, and check to see

if it was possible after you do it."
Paul Hawken.

[slipslidingaway]

17. Great rule to live by, thanks for posting :) n/t

[Badgerman]

15. a cartoon as an example of 'anything possible'...

:wtf: