Well, the ballot boxes have barely been put away in California and the gay marriage crowd is now looking to that state's liberal, activist high court [5] to overturn the will of the people.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California's Attorney General on Monday urged the state Supreme Court to consider whether a gay marriage ban passed by voters this month was legal.
The state's top lawyer, former governor Jerry Brown, said the court should keep the ban in place while it considers the issue -- and it should rule quickly.
California's ban marked a major reversal for same-sex couples, who had won state Supreme Court approval to marry in the trend-setting state in May.
Only a handful of states, provinces and European countries recognize same-sex marriage and gay marriage advocates have demonstrated vocally around the country since the November 4 vote.
Isn't it interesting that these people are always looking to the courts to enact their agenda? So far the people of California has spoken twice on this issue. Once in the '90's with a state law (passed via referendum) that defined marriage as one man and one woman...which was recently thrown out in a 4-3 decision by their Supreme Court; and now in a statewide vote on a constitutional amendment (trumping state law and the Supreme Court) doing the same thing. A vote which passed by the way with the same 52%-48% margin of support that Obama had nationally.
Now gay marriage supporters (including govt. officials such as Gov. Schwarzenegger and AG "Moonbeam" Brown) want the court to say a constitutional amendment is, well, "unconstitutional". If that's declared to be the case, then most people would be forgiven for thinking that their input means nothing.
In other words, the government wants everyone to vote, just so long as they don't actually take this self-governance thing too seriously and think that anything this important is actually up to "the people".
