Personal Focus as Same-Sex-Marriage Trial Opens in California

One tact lawyers opposing prop 8 are using are to use personal stories. This debate seems to be lasting a while. The opponents pushed that prop 8 is a violation of equal rights. the proponents of prop 8 are saying that it would tarnish traditional marriage. They also questioned lessons on same sex marriage should be taught in schools. that our children need to be protected.

this is turning into a very interesting debate. All the different points being expressed are very interesting. One would think this wouldn't be to different from other equal rights issues. But this is uniquely different because of a whole different element,

whats your take on this debate?
are the reasons for either side valid?

href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/us/12prop8.html?scp=26&sq=prop%208&st=cse">

Two Ideological Foes Unite to Overturn Proposition 8

David Boies and Theodore B. Olson are taking charge of the respective sides of the same sex marriage issue in court. David Boies advocates that this is very much an issue of equal rights, and that the other sides only real argument is that "this is how its always been". AT this point the trial will be televised.

I think its good that this issue is getting all of this attention. SO in the future similar issues can be compared and put under the microscope. Its very interesting how the two sides of the argument are proceeding in the debate.

what re the reasons behind the two sides of this argument? Are they justified"

California's Proposition 8 (Same-Sex Marriage)

In 2008 same sex marriage was outlawed. but on the 15th of the same year the supreme court of California coted 4 to 3 that a ban on same sex marriage was unconstitutional discrimination. Then on Nov 4 prop 8 passed again, and is being challenged in federal court by the proponents of prop 8.

I think its pretty crazy how many times this has gone back and forth. every time one group won, so to speak, the other launched back.

Even if this is solved in federal court would the same pattern repeat?
has this happened with other cases of equal rights?

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/californias_proposition_8_samesex_marriage/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=prop%208&st=cse

Prop 8 trial set up aids gay marriage side

This article is talking about what is going on with this issue. The case is being held in san fracisco where a judge is trying to determine wether prop 8 is constitutional or not. many think this should be the desision of the supreme court because it is a mattaer of equ8al rights. But even when put to a vote it would not pass, similar to the equal rights of minorities.

I think that this isnt going to be resolved in some court in san fransisco and should be decided by the supreme court. its also interesting how even though its a clear issue of equal rights voters still reject same sex marriage.


why do voters refuse same sex marriage?
should the supreme court decide?

www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/12/eastman.marriage.on.trial/index.html?iref=allsearch

First Week Of Same-Sex Marriage Trial Attracts Buzz

This article is basically talking about the first federal trial to challenge state laws banning same-sex marriage violate the U.S. Constitution. both sides on the issue are pressing their case. Some are saying that gays and lesbians should be treated as minority's when it comes to same sex marriage.

This is a very interesting debate. trying to decide on an equal rights issue. this effects many lives. there are those who think it should be a state by state dicision and those who think the supreme court should decide.

should this be the descision of the supreme court? should individual states decide?

Essential question: same sex marriage

Should same sex marriage be the decision of the voters in individual states or the decision of the supreme court as a question of equal rights.

We decided to choose this question because it gets to the roots of the debate. In california Prop 8 passed banning same sex marriage. Prop 8 provided many arguments to push its case. But now its being taken to the supreme court. So at the thick of the issue is deciding wether its an equal rights violation or letting states decide for themselves. This is a very controversial issue.