Dear Yes-On-Prop-8...persons,
Trust me on this one. You really, really, really do not want to go here. You really, really do not want to make this retroactively apply to the existing marriages in California. You really, really don't, even if you think you do.
After all, what would happen if you did? Other than, of course, a massive overturning of, literally, centuries of US jurisprudence? What about if homosexuals in CA decided to argue the anti-sodomy laws that were used to harass them during the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s? After all, by today's standards, such discrimination is illegal - so obviously it was then, too. Or what if the people in CA who were affected by the McCarthy blacklist decided to seek reparations against the studios and other persons who participated in their blacklisting? I mean, the argument could be made that that qualifies as discrimination of protected classes; certainly, that would tear up the courts for some time to come to determine that political affiliation or suspected affiliation was not grounds for discrimination, and then there's grounds to argue that because political affiliation is protected, the blacklist is retroactively illegal.
I don't know, maybe the thought of tearing up thousands upon thousands of legal rulings in California is what you get your jollies off of, now that you can't worry that the fag in the corner is gonna ruin your marvellous marriage. As an aside, were I married to any of these...persons, you can guarantee that their fear of gays would be the reason our marriage failed.
And by the way, Ken Starr, I didn't like you before, and I like you even less now. You and Cheney need to be on the special boat to nowhere.
Seriously, though, this is a friendly warning. Don't go there; you won't like it when you do.
Love,
Me
Trust me on this one. You really, really, really do not want to go here. You really, really do not want to make this retroactively apply to the existing marriages in California. You really, really don't, even if you think you do.
After all, what would happen if you did? Other than, of course, a massive overturning of, literally, centuries of US jurisprudence? What about if homosexuals in CA decided to argue the anti-sodomy laws that were used to harass them during the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s? After all, by today's standards, such discrimination is illegal - so obviously it was then, too. Or what if the people in CA who were affected by the McCarthy blacklist decided to seek reparations against the studios and other persons who participated in their blacklisting? I mean, the argument could be made that that qualifies as discrimination of protected classes; certainly, that would tear up the courts for some time to come to determine that political affiliation or suspected affiliation was not grounds for discrimination, and then there's grounds to argue that because political affiliation is protected, the blacklist is retroactively illegal.
I don't know, maybe the thought of tearing up thousands upon thousands of legal rulings in California is what you get your jollies off of, now that you can't worry that the fag in the corner is gonna ruin your marvellous marriage. As an aside, were I married to any of these...persons, you can guarantee that their fear of gays would be the reason our marriage failed.
And by the way, Ken Starr, I didn't like you before, and I like you even less now. You and Cheney need to be on the special boat to nowhere.
Seriously, though, this is a friendly warning. Don't go there; you won't like it when you do.
Love,
Me