Gay Marriage in CT was no ACTIVST JUDGE RULLING

R

Robdawg

Junior Member
I've been reading on the other thread about how it was "activst judges" however it was actual a measure on the ballot that all were able to vote on. It was a vote for a constitutional convention in connecticut where there would be a convention to amend the constitution.

This comes up every 20 years in CT and is voted on by the citizens. This was basically like a prop 8 which failed here in CT.

Watch the Video!!



There were two statewide ballot questions. Voters approved a measure allowing people to vote in general elections if their 18th birthday falls between the primary and general election, and rejected a proposal to call a convention to consider changes to the state constitution.

http://www.courant.com/news/local/statewire/hc-04232953.apds.m0166.bc-ct--elecnov04,0,1055308.story


Gay marriage was approved in CT by the people no activist judges, so i guess he'll get to keep his gift southern man
 
Nice stretch, but this is definitely activism.

The decision came as a surprise after previous courts upheld the ban and lawmakers wrote specific language into a civil union measure defining marriage as between men and women.
Connecticut was one of four U.S. states that permits same-sex civil unions that grant rights such as insurance coverage, tax benefits and hospital visitations. But these lack the full, federal legal protections of marriage.
Opponents of gay marriage said they would seek to overturn the ruling by persuading voters to support a ballot measure next month that would open a state constitutional convention to address the issue of same-sex marriage.
"Then we will put a question on the ballot to allow the public, not our robed masters, to decide once and for all if marriage will be protected in our state constitution as the union between a man and a woman," said Peter Wolfgang, president of the Family Institute of Connecticut, a conservative Christian group.
Click to expand...
And because of this liberal activism, here is what you likely have to look forward to in 2010 or nationally in 2012:
When Massachusetts' top court overturned a ban on gay marriage in 2003, opposition was so strong that it drove religious conservatives to the polls in 2004, a factor in the re-election of President George W. Bush.
Click to expand...
… just like in California. Don’t say that I didn’t warn you.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE4996BE20081011
 
Dixie said:
Rob, I don't know where you get your information, but CT did not vote on Gay Marriage. It was a ruling by the Supreme Court (aka: Activist Judges)

http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-m0465.ct--samesexmarriage-roct10,0,7774912.story
Click to expand...

They voted to have a constitutional convention to revise the constitution to include marriage. All churches were for the measure. It failed. If people wanted to vote against gay marriage they would have voted yes on the measure.

Then they would have an opportunity to have a constitutional convention to revise the constitution to ban same sex marriage. CT voters rejected the convention.
 
Robdawg said:
They voted to have a constitutional convention to revise the constitution to include marriage. All churches were for the measure. It failed. If people wanted to vote against gay marriage they would have voted yes on the measure.

Then they would have an opportunity to have a constitutional convention to revise the constitution to ban same sex marriage. CT voters rejected the convention.
Click to expand...

LMAOoo... So a court makes a ruling to 'legalize' gay marriage, and because the voters don't vote to have a constitutional convention where the legalization could be overturned, it means they voted for gay marriage? I don't think that is legitimately how democracy is supposed to work, Rob.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top