Dartblog

A novice to her vital proposition process, I have been following the California ballot—on which are no fewer than three essential questions—with interest. The proposition banning homosexual marriage, which was passed years ago in referendum form but was struck down by a court on the grounds that it was contrary to the inclinations of the judges sitting thereupon, is there again, in a fresh and inviolable form. It seems likely to pass, as this post reveals. More, perhaps, on this, since I am in the midst of a correspondence on same.

ZAK Adds: I would cast my vote for Joe (and Jenn?) casting his vote for “No” on Prop 8. As much as I think the judges on the California Supreme Court might need a lesson in judicial humility, the very fact of the referendum means that, whatever the result, the dictates of popular democracy will have won out. The best solution might be government getting out of the marriage business altogether and leaving it solely to religion (and whatever other private secular organizations might choose to take it up). Short of this, while I certainly understand reservations against redefining what “marriage” means, on grounds of individual respect I would vote No.