Federal trial on same-sex marriage to be broadcast on YouTube (generation, attorney)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Supporters of Proposition 8 opposed public dissemination of the trial video, arguing that witnesses might be intimated speaking before an audience of millions of people. An attorney for the Proposition 8 supporters declined to comment when asked if he would challenge Walker's decision.
This seems like a decent compromise between those who wanted the trial televised and witnesses for Prop. 8 who wanted to hide their faces from the public.
YouTube is the product of a younger, more liberal generation. The very idea that the court 1) Agreed to review Proposition 8 after passing by popular vote is evidence that it has a more liberal stance , and 2) hopes that a liberal YouTube viewership will create a nationwide stir after hearing Proposition 8 proponents' arguments.
This is intended to create a groundswell of support for the gay agenda under the guise of "compromise."
YouTube is the product of a younger, more liberal generation. The very idea that the court 1) Agreed to review Proposition 8 after passing by popular vote is evidence that it has a more liberal stance , and 2) hopes that a liberal YouTube viewership will create a nationwide stir after hearing Proposition 8 proponents' arguments.
This is intended to create a groundswell of support for the gay agenda under the guise of "compromise."
And that's a great example of the type of paranoia that drives conservative thinking these days.
YouTube is the product of a younger, more liberal generation. The very idea that the court 1) Agreed to review Proposition 8 after passing by popular vote is evidence that it has a more liberal stance , and 2) hopes that a liberal YouTube viewership will create a nationwide stir after hearing Proposition 8 proponents' arguments.
This is intended to create a groundswell of support for the gay agenda under the guise of "compromise."
What BS. Just because the people voted for it dosen't mean it was the right thing to do. If slavery had been on the ballot, then we would be still having slaves today! Basic rights should never be on any ballot. There are still too many haters out there, and people with an IQ of 1.
YouTube is the product of a younger, more liberal generation. The very idea that the court 1) Agreed to review Proposition 8 after passing by popular vote is evidence that it has a more liberal stance , and 2) hopes that a liberal YouTube viewership will create a nationwide stir after hearing Proposition 8 proponents' arguments.
This is intended to create a groundswell of support for the gay agenda under the guise of "compromise."
It's actually proof that the system can work. No doubt that these judges will use the logic of law rather than the base sentiments and prejudices of the masses.
It's actually proof that the system can work. No doubt that these judges will use the logic of law rather than the base sentiments and prejudices of the masses.
True and that is what has the pro-Prop H8 crowd so p****d off.
Oh and the only gay agenda is equality.
And that's a great example of the type of paranoia that drives conservative thinking these days.
Apparently this judge feels that the whole world needs to see the preceedings, not just California, the only place that will be effected by the Court's ruling. There's something more than just wanting to be transparent here. Otherwise, he'd let the newspaper headlines and local reporters do the talking.
In fact, he's quoted as saying he believes the preceedings will be "highly informative." Highly informative to who exactly? Highly informative to Jimmy or Jane in San Bernardino is completely different than being highly informative to Jaun and Margurite in Miami. There's more to this than meets the eye.
Last edited by AeroGuyDC; 01-06-2010 at 05:39 PM..
Apparently this judge feels that the whole world needs to see the preceedings, not just California, the only place that will be effected by the Court's ruling. There's something more than just wanting to be transparent here. Otherwise, he'd let the newspaper headlines do the talking.
If you were right the Mormon Church wouldn't have funneled retarded amounts of money from Utah to the pro-Prop 8 campaign, so I guess they disagree with you there.
YouTube is the product of a younger, more liberal generation. The very idea that the court 1) Agreed to review Proposition 8 after passing by popular vote is evidence that it has a more liberal stance , and 2) hopes that a liberal YouTube viewership will create a nationwide stir after hearing Proposition 8 proponents' arguments.
This is intended to create a groundswell of support for the gay agenda under the guise of "compromise."
i would rather see the health care procedings on c-span like obama promised.this is pure deflection BS
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Basic rights should never be on any ballot. There are still too many haters out there, and people with an IQ of 1.
