• Of course they should

    The United States Supreme Court should hold up Proposition 8 as being a good piece of legislation. The ban of marriage between 2 people of the same sex is nothing like a ban on marriage of people of different races.
    Look you know and I know that argument is bull ****!
    The court would find that prop 8 is what decent people want, but that lesbian judge Obama hired talked the other judges into doing a practical joke and now fake marriage is as good as real marriage.

  • Homosexual Behavior Should Not Be Accorded Special Protection

    Being gay is a sexual preference. Being gay is not a protected class under the Constitution. Being gay is not protected under the Bill of Rights or the 14th Amendment.
    "Sexual orientation" does not meet any of the three objective criteria shared by the historically protected civil rights categories. "Sexual orientation" should not be elevated to the category of a protected civil right. Recent public hearing in Orlando, Florida where the public was invited to speak about a proposal to add "sexual orientation" to the city code, the homosexual community could only find three people who presented potentially legitimate claims of employment discrimination. The rest of the comments focused on the desire to amend the code or hearsay of someone who faced discrimination twenty years ago! No one presented any information about discrimination in public facilities or housing. During the congressional debates over the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which now fills almost 9,000 pages of Congressional Record), the stories of real discrimination were not hard to find.
    Typically real discrimination results in economic disadvantage. This is so because people are excluded from the political and economic marketplace. However, a person's "sexual orientation", or more accurately stated, "sexual preference", has not resulted in economic disadvantage. To the contrary, the homosexual community maintains an economic advantage over the heterosexual community. In 1991, the Wall Street Journal published information from the Simmons Market Research Bureau and the United States Census data based on figures from 1988. The survey showed that the average annual income for homosexuals was over $55,430 compared to the national average of $32,144. Simmons Market Research Bureau's first survey was released in 1989. Their second survey, which was released in 1996, produced similar findings. The 1996 study found that 28% of gays earned more than $50,000, while 21% of gay households had incomes over $100,000. A gay research group known as Overlooked Opinions reported similar findings following a survey released in 1993. One internet census reported that 22% of gays and 20% of lesbians had an income of between $70,000 and $100,000, while 29% of gays and 16% of lesbians had incomes in excess of $100,000. This survey was based upon 2001 statistics of 6,351 individuals who identified themselves as gay, lesbian or transgender.
    "Sexual orientation" does not include immutable characteristics. One need not debate whether homosexuality is genetic or social. The definition of "sexual orientation" includes the status of being, or the perception of being heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual. The definition therefore includes the entire spectrum of human sexuality. The lack of immutable characteristics creates a moving target, one that can change from day to day. The lack of immutable characteristics warns against elevating "sexual orientation" to a protected civil rights category.
    Elevating "sexual orientation" to a protected civil right is economically, politically and socially divisive.
    Adding "sexual orientation" to a protected category causes political division. A number of cities throughout the country have repealed "sexual orientation" policies after they have been enacted.

  • I say no.

    I don't think that the United States Supreme Court should hold up Proposition 8 as being a good piece of legislation. I think that the ban of marriage between gay people is just as bad as a ban on people of different races being enacted against them. Both are wrong.

  • No, absolutely not.

    No, the Supreme Court should not uphold Prop 8. It is so incredibly wrong that same-sex couples are given so few rights. Same-sex couples should have the right to marry, among other rights. Anything less is discrimination as far as I am concerned. This is 2013 and people should have the right to marry the person they love, regardless of their gender.

  • The Supreme Court should not uphold prop 8.

    In my opinion, it is unconstitutional. Gay marriage should be a religious thing thing, not government. The government should not have any say on whom you marry or have sex with, or how you have sex. (unless it is with an animal) Everyone has the right to love and to marry. So having a ban on Gay marriage is just wrong!

  • Equal rights for all.

    Absolutely they should not uphold Prop 8. Everyone, gay or straight, should have equal human rights. This is just another example of people bringing in their religious beliefs into politics where they do not belong. If this is not removed, I can see a huge backlash from all corners of this country.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.