Fascists Leaders in California Sense The Future: Attempt Another Coup on Democracy

[Silhouette]

In a reaction, obviously to the Hobby Lobby Ruling and the writing they see on the wall, the fascist leadership of California moves to block what they see obviously coming: the restoration of Propositon 8 as an enforceable law.

In a move to block the dominant initiative system [it's dominant to the legislature's Bills] in that state, lawmakers proposed a Bill to remove the language of Proposition 8 off the State Constitution in an pre-emptive strike to try to force gay marriage on a state whose majority does not want it there.

Thus, if citizens allow this usurping of democracy in contempt of Windsor, they would have to put another initiative on the ballot to restore the traditional marriage description as it legally stands today. But guess what? Lawmakers have to approve of every iniative put on the ballot. So they'll block it and will have successfully forced gay marriage upon the citizens of California without their approval.

I suggest that citizens in California begin a lawsuit IMMEDIATELY to challenge this coup on the grounds that a final decision at the US Supreme Court is needed to legally remove the description of marriage off of California's Constitution. They need to appeal to the US Supreme Court to intervene because this mess and giant blast hole placed in the broadside of California's initiative system was made directly by their vague-Ruling in 2013...a vagueness BTW that a county clerk with standing sought to clarify but was refused: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...ds-Request-for-Stay-on-Prop-8--216634801.html And without that lawsuit, the citizens of that state have abdicated their initiative system in favor of a totalitarian regieme that panders to the gay sex cult entrenched there.



For reasons why citizens all across the country should be alarmed: this is a cult that has been utilizing blackmail and nazi-style techniques to force its agenda on various states and ultimately to access orphaned children. How this becomes a problem is obvious in my signature and in this thread: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

A bill that would strike the traditional definition of marriage from California law was approved by the state Senate on Thursday after the U.S. and state supreme courts allowed same-sex unions to resume last year.

SB1306 would remove from the state Family Code language that marriage must be "between a man and a woman.'' It would substitute gender-neutral language, define marriage as a personal relation arising from a civil contract between two persons, and remove limits on the state recognizing the validity of same-sex marriages performed outside of California....

...said Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco....

..."I cannot bring myself, though, to diminish the words `husband and wife,' and this clearly does that. Throughout history those words have been widely used and accepted,'' said Sen. Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber, the only senator to speak in opposition. "They're kind of sacred terms, I would argue, and by this bill we are diminishing those very important words.''...

...The bill was sent to the Assembly on a 25-10 vote, with only Republicans in opposition. Two Republicans, Anthony Cannella of Ceres and Ted Gaines of Roseville, voted in favor.

"All this bill does is bring our Family Code section up to date to comply with those two court decisions,'' Leno said. He added later: "The sky did not fall, civilization as we know it did not end'' when gay marriages began. California May Remove "Man and Woman" from Legal Definition of Marriage, Replace with Gender-Neutral Language | NBC 7 San Diego

The sky did fall however when the initiative system in California was rendered defunct by collusion between the US Supreme Court's refusal to clarify its decision on constitutionality and by this fascist-dictator's unquestioned influence over the state's legislature and the Governor's office. There is literally no bill that they will deny the gay state senator from San Francisco. He is the one who pushed forward the "law" that minors may not get access to therapy to change their orientation from gay to straight, even if they were molested and want nothing to do with those unwanted compulsions and the sick memories they stir up in constant unstoppable repetition...

Yet all manner of help and assistance is available for straight kids to change over to gay.

This is a coup on democracy. Here's what it says about the initiative system's dominance:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL


SEC. 2.5. A voter who casts a vote in an election in accordance
with the laws of this State shall have that vote counted....

...CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL


SEC. 4. The Legislature shall prohibit improper practices that
affect elections and shall provide for the disqualification of
electors while mentally incompetent or imprisoned or on parole for
the conviction of a felony....

...CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL


SEC. 8. (a) The initiative is the power of the electors to propose
statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject
them.
(b) An initiative measure may be proposed by presenting to the
Secretary of State a petition that sets forth the text of the
proposed statute or amendment to the Constitution and is certified to
have been signed by electors equal in number to 5 percent in the
case of a statute, and 8 percent in the case of an amendment to the
Constitution, of the votes for all candidates for Governor at the
last gubernatorial election.
(c) The Secretary of State shall then submit the measure at the
next general election held at least 131 days after it qualifies or at
any special statewide election held prior to that general election.
The Governor may call a special statewide election for the measure.
(d) An initiative measure embracing more than one subject may not
be submitted to the electors or have any effect.
(e) An initiative measure may not include or exclude any political
subdivision of the State from the application or effect of its
provisions based upon approval or disapproval of the initiative
measure, or based upon the casting of a specified percentage of votes
in favor of the measure, by the electors of that political
subdivision.
(f) An initiative measure may not contain alternative or
cumulative provisions wherein one or more of those provisions would
become law depending upon the casting of a specified percentage of
votes for or against the measure...

..CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL


SEC. 9. (a) The referendum is the power of the electors to approve
or reject statutes or parts of statutes except urgency statutes,
statutes calling elections, and statutes providing for tax levies or...

...CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL


SEC. 10. (a) An initiative statute or referendum approved by a
majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election
unless the measure provides otherwise. If a referendum petition is
filed against a part of a statute the remainder shall not be delayed
from going into effect.
(b) If provisions of 2 or more measures approved at the same
election conflict, those of the measure receiving the highest
affirmative vote shall prevail.
(c) The Legislature may amend or repeal referendum statutes. It
may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that
becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the
initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without their
approval. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_2

The Proposition 8 statute DOES NOT come with permission for the state legislature to amend or repeal it. And its legality is binding up until the US Supreme Court provides clarification on the Windsor/Prop 8 Decision in 2013.

 

[g5000]

Which "traditional marriage description" would that be?

Is that the one which is a union of two people of the same race?

 

[Katzndogz]

Supporters of same sex marriage have tried several times to get an initiative on the ballot to change the law at the legislative level. They can't get enough signatures to qualify.

If the invasion from the south continues, same sex marriage will be ended as an issue. The Hispanic invasion will put an end to it. Liberals have just not thought that far ahead.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Blacks and Hispanics don't like Gays or Gay Marriage.

It's just a fact.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Prop. 8 is long dead. Move along now.

 

[Silhouette]

Prop. 8 is long dead. Move along now.

Proposition 8 is legally binding and on the California Constitution. The lawmakers and governor of that state know the only way they can remove it is with the voters' permission. They are attempting to remove it outside the due process of law. They say "we are only going to amend it". But they cannot legally do so according to the state's constitution. It's "diet-sedition in increments". The entire purpose of Prop 8 was to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Changing its core meaning by inserting genderless language is the same as eradicating it. The US Supreme Court did not give a statement on the constitutionality of Prop 8 and therefore lawmakers at that level cannot remove it or amend it.

The fact that they're trying to change it says they know it isn't dead. Otherwise they would simply remove it. And this is a brazen affront to American democracy: the removal of the power of the people to govern themselves. An immediate appeal on Prop 8's 2013 unclarified limbo must be sought by Californians. They SCOTUS cannot grant a stay to Utah but then deny it to California, with both stays sought on the same grounds: a state's right to govern itself.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Prop. 8 is long dead. Move along now.

Proposition 8 is legally binding and on the California Constitution.

The 9th tossed it and the SC passed. It doesn't get any deader than that regardless of where it's written down. It's unenforceable, AKA, dead as a doornail.

 

[Silhouette]

I told y'all that this fascist cult was getting out of control. They are incrementally turning American democracy on its head. If you think this is something they mean to confine to Califorina, think again. They have used California as their testing grounds for how far they can and will push their agenda at the federal level.

Precedents and unbridled hubris have a funny way of burning out of control like a wildfire.

 

[Silhouette]

Prop. 8 is long dead. Move along now.

Proposition 8 is legally binding and on the California Constitution.

The 9th tossed it and the SC passed. It doesn't get any deader than that regardless of where it's written down. It's unenforceable, AKA, dead as a doornail.

Then why are they seeking to insert new language instead of simply removing it? Why? Because they know they legally cannot remove it. Neither can they amend it.

There will be a lawsuit about this. Mark my words.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Proposition 8 is legally binding and on the California Constitution.

The 9th tossed it and the SC passed. It doesn't get any deader than that regardless of where it's written down. It's unenforceable, AKA, dead as a doornail.

Then why are they seeking to insert new language instead of simply removing it? Why? Because they know they legally cannot remove it. Neither can they amend it.

There will be a lawsuit about this. Mark my words.

No one but you cares...

 

[KNB]

What part of "Fuck your God" is really so difficult to understand?

The First Amendment of the US Constitution says, "Fuck your God." It doesn't get any more plain than that. Your stupid fucking fairy tale does not dictate our laws.

Fuck prop 8, fuck your church, fuck your god, and fuck you. Why are all of you such hate-filled cretins? Honestly? What happened in your lives to make each of you SO fucked-up that you want to write laws that keep other people from being happy? Because you don't like to think about what they do in their own homes? Fuck you, fuck your bible, fuck your church, fuck your god and fuck you again.

Go back to Germany. Move to Uganda if you hate homosexuals so much. Move to Saudi Arabia or some other mangled religious shithole. Get the fuck out of our United States.

Your religion is a danger to our First Amendment.

 

[Silhouette]

What part of "Fuck your God" is really so difficult to understand?

The First Amendment of the US Constitution says, "Fuck your God." It doesn't get any more plain than that. Your stupid fucking fairy tale does not dictate our laws.

Fuck prop 8, fuck your church, fuck your god, and fuck you. Why are all of you such hate-filled cretins? Honestly? What happened in your lives to make each of you SO fucked-up that you want to write laws that keep other people from being happy? Because you don't like to think about what they do in their own homes? Fuck you, fuck your bible, fuck your church, fuck your god and fuck you again.

Go back to Germany. Move to Uganda if you hate homosexuals so much. Move to Saudi Arabia or some other mangled religious shithole. Get the fuck out of our United States.

Your religion is a danger to our First Amendment.

I think it was first quoted by a german in fact who said "Fuck your laws, fuck your God and fuck you". His name was Adolph Hitler.

Once you allow someone to dictate law and take away the initiative process from the voters' power, you have a fascist state. And when humans taste that rainbow, they go from zero to 60 in a nanosecond. They have no brakes. And the only thing that stops them is a civil war.

If you motherfucking LGBT cultists want gay marriage in California YOU DON'T GET TO REWRITE DEMOCRACY THERE. PUT A GODDAMNED INITIATIVE ON THE BALLOT LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO.

After all, you profess with unwavering confidence that a clear and convincing majority in California approve of gay marriage. So your initiative should pass in a snap. What the fuck are you afraid of if your bill of goods is such a savory buy?

 

[Silhouette]

No one but you cares...

So I'm the ONLY person in the United States who cares that state by state [always starting the trend in California] people are going to have their rights to self-govern removed by the LGBT cult?

Just one person in the entire US eh?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No one but you cares...

So I'm the ONLY person in the United States who cares that state by state [always starting the trend in California] people are going to have their rights to self-govern removed by the LGBT cult?

Just one person in the entire US eh?

You don't get the right to vote on the rights of others. It never should have been allowed to happen. You don't have that kind of authority, for good reason.

 

[Silhouette]

No one but you cares...

So I'm the ONLY person in the United States who cares that state by state [always starting the trend in California] people are going to have their rights to self-govern removed by the LGBT cult?

Just one person in the entire US eh?

You don't get the right to vote on the rights of others. It never should have been allowed to happen. You don't have that kind of authority, for good reason.

Then why did the US Supreme Court issue a stay pending appeal in the gay vs Utah case? The appeal made in Utah's case was identical in spirit and nature to the one made in California; which was denied. The US Supreme Court does not enjoy the luxury of playing favorites with the states. That is a constitutional FACT. So a stay in one state made on the same arguments de facto applies across all 50 that have formally posed the same request: as was what happened in California with county clerk Ernie Dronenburg.. His appeal for a stay was denied. Yet he also swears an oath to the People of California to uphold initiative law there. So he DEFINITELY had standing to challenge, but was denied by the same Supreme Court without explanation. Ergo, since lawmakers in California are aware of appeals pending before SCOTUS on the very question of if their voters are allowed to regulate marriage, they MAY NOT REWRITE DEMOCRATIC RULE BEFORE SCOTUS HAS DETERMINED THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF GAY BEHAVIORS WANTING PROTECTION AS SUCH UNDER THE 14TH . That Decision has not been made and it is pending, in question, and stays are in place banning gay marriage. California cannot escape the intent of the umbrellea of the Stay as these cases WITH BOTH SIDES CONSTESTING make their way for the final Decision.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So I'm the ONLY person in the United States who cares that state by state [always starting the trend in California] people are going to have their rights to self-govern removed by the LGBT cult?

Just one person in the entire US eh?

You don't get the right to vote on the rights of others. It never should have been allowed to happen. You don't have that kind of authority, for good reason.

Then why did the US Supreme Court issue a stay pending appeal in the gay vs Utah case?

Because they are stalling until the tipping point is so far gone that no one will give a damn when they rule it legal for the nation as a whole.

 

[Silhouette]

You don't get the right to vote on the rights of others. It never should have been allowed to happen. You don't have that kind of authority, for good reason.

Then why did the US Supreme Court issue a stay pending appeal in the gay vs Utah case?

Because they are stalling until the tipping point is so far gone that no one will give a damn when they rule it legal for the nation as a whole.

Oh, is that what trend you're predicting from the Hobby Lobby case?

I'll ask you again: why was the stay put on gay marriages in Utah when it was denied to California on the same legal arguments?

....why did the US Supreme Court issue a stay pending appeal in the gay vs Utah case? The appeal made in Utah's case was identical in spirit and nature to the one made in California; which was denied. The US Supreme Court does not enjoy the luxury of playing favorites with the states. That is a constitutional FACT. So a stay in one state made on the same arguments de facto applies across all 50 that have formally posed the same request: as was what happened in California with county clerk Ernie Dronenburg.. His appeal for a stay was denied. Yet he also swears an oath to the People of California to uphold initiative law there. So he DEFINITELY had standing to challenge, but was denied by the same Supreme Court without explanation. Ergo, since lawmakers in California are aware of appeals pending before SCOTUS on the very question of if their voters are allowed to regulate marriage, they MAY NOT REWRITE DEMOCRATIC RULE BEFORE SCOTUS HAS DETERMINED THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF GAY BEHAVIORS WANTING PROTECTION AS SUCH UNDER THE 14TH . That Decision has not been made and it is pending, in question, and stays are in place banning gay marriage. California cannot escape the intent of the umbrellea of the Stay as these cases WITH BOTH SIDES CONSTESTING make their way for the final Decision.

 

[Silhouette]

Besides, the fact that two republicans voted for this in California means that they're probably aware of how many democracy-smashing outrage votes they'll harvest from this little Hitleresque coup...

 

[Katzndogz]

This is so bizarre. Liberals so celebrate the changing demographics. They want more Hispanics, more Africans and more muslims. Without even realizing that changing demographics means, automatically, that gays will get no protection and same sex marriage will again be banned! How can liberals be so anti religion, yet want to help hundreds of thousands of very religious Catholics across the border?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Then why did the US Supreme Court issue a stay pending appeal in the gay vs Utah case?

Because they are stalling until the tipping point is so far gone that no one will give a damn when they rule it legal for the nation as a whole.

Oh, is that what trend you're predicting from the Hobby Lobby case?

I'll ask you again: why was the stay put on gay marriages in Utah when it was denied to California on the same legal arguments?

....why did the US Supreme Court issue a stay pending appeal in the gay vs Utah case? The appeal made in Utah's case was identical in spirit and nature to the one made in California; which was denied. The US Supreme Court does not enjoy the luxury of playing favorites with the states. That is a constitutional FACT. So a stay in one state made on the same arguments de facto applies across all 50 that have formally posed the same request: as was what happened in California with county clerk Ernie Dronenburg.. His appeal for a stay was denied. Yet he also swears an oath to the People of California to uphold initiative law there. So he DEFINITELY had standing to challenge, but was denied by the same Supreme Court without explanation. Ergo, since lawmakers in California are aware of appeals pending before SCOTUS on the very question of if their voters are allowed to regulate marriage, they MAY NOT REWRITE DEMOCRATIC RULE BEFORE SCOTUS HAS DETERMINED THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF GAY BEHAVIORS WANTING PROTECTION AS SUCH UNDER THE 14TH . That Decision has not been made and it is pending, in question, and stays are in place banning gay marriage. California cannot escape the intent of the umbrellea of the Stay as these cases WITH BOTH SIDES CONSTESTING make their way for the final Decision.

I nailed Hobby Lobby dead on, go read the thread for yourself, and Utah is on hold because they are buying time. Prop. 8 they already kicked because it had gone as high as possible. When Utah comes they will kick that as well, or use it to rule for the nation but I doubt it. They are simply letting the AG work his appeal while the public support builds. The court likes to be just a bit behind the public, if at all possible.