I’m not sure what was more fun: Watching Ted Olson make the media rounds before the Prop 8 trial, after closing arguments and before the ruling, or now — after Judge Vaughn Walker struck down the voter-approved law. It’s not that it’s “easier” for Olson to argue in favor of marriage equality now that he as the court ruling behind him, because it’s been easy all along. As Olson tells Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday, this whole stupid notion about the constitutional right to decide who gets to marry is an absolute farce.
teddy bear
Are People Still Stupid Enough to Argue California’s Voters Should Vote On Minority Rights?
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
Jimmy Fury
uhm… wrong vid?
B
The title doesn’t quite get it right – there have been a number of votes in California on minority rights that were quite legitimate: for example, the Unruh Civil Rights Act and its extensions (the addition of more groups deserving to be explicitly listed). These laws forbid discrimination.
Cam
The problem Wallace had with this guy is he kept trying to say “But you’ve been opposed to judicial activism” and the guy was basically explaining to him “Chris, what you think of as judicial activism, isn’t”. He was great, thank goodness he took this case!
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
Watchin Wallace and the rest of these conserative lunatics is like arguing with a three year old. Stubborn, infantile, and determined to get his way with zero chance of listening to reason.
I think the frightwing lunatics think that because of the strong ties Olsen and his late wife had with the Bush administration he would simply argue lockstep that Gays are not deserving of the rights that are granted to every other minority group not and subject to majority rule.
Ted Olsen is actually a sane person arguing simply what is actually in/b> the United States constitution. Not arguging what idelogical bigoted scumbags want to be in the constitution…………
Cam
@PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS:
Absolutly! I love the fact that this guys argument is basically…As a conservative who believes in the Constitution I have to believe that gays have the right to marry.
The wingers have no idea how to respond to that.
whatever
Crazy ass right wingnut conservative retards don’t respond well to civil rights/14th amendmendment aguments. Here’s a clue: they are opposed to civil rights for minorities so they don’t think anything of people voting to take their rights aways.
Instead, ask them whether voters in San Francisco or Berkeley can vote to ban all guns in their cities. Maybe then, the light will go on in these morons’ heads that there are certain constitutional rights beyond the capricious will of the majority.
Baxter
@PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS: Please don’t lump Chris Wallace in with conservative lunatics. He’s probably the smartest and fairest person on any news network today. He’s also a registered Democrat.
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
@Baxter: He wasn’t exactaly too fair when he gave Mike Huckabee an unopposed platform to spew his “Gay ick factor” vile comments recently on his show……………
whatever
@Cam: The teabagger constitution consists entirely and exclusively of the first amendment (the religion part applies only to talibangelical christianity), the second amendment, and the tenth.
Latebrosus
In the end, arguing over the Constitution has nothing to do with bigots’ problems with homosexuality, gay marriage, adopting children, etc. The two fundamental issues are these: (1) bigots believe that homosexuality is a choice, and so by their reasoning is not a legitimate reason to extend equal rights to us, and (2) bigots believe in the Bible. Until we can convince them that (1) is utterly invalid and (2) is at best relative, if not utterly invalid, then we are just going to keep going around and around endlessly arguing with these people.
Brutus
Technically, they can still vote to deny minority rights. They just have to garner overwhelming support and stamina to amend the federal constitution. And good luck with that.
Queer Supremacist
Are people still stupid enough to argue Californians should have the right to vote?
David K
Olsen: “Most people think judicial activism is when a judge makes a decision they disagree with, and-”
Fox: “Exactly!”
Olsen: “Sorry if I interrupted you…”
I love how Olson can just destroy somebody so casually.
John (CA)
Californians vote on everything. The legislature doesn’t do anything but collect their paychecks and pass a ton of meaningless, non-binding resolutions. What’s laughingly referred to as a voter guide in the Golden State is usually the size of a phone book and is written in such a way that can only be described as “Lawmaking for Dummies.”
California is America’s experiment in direct democracy.
An experiment that has gone horribly, horribly wrong.