It
was a case of the public voting on public policy directly.
---
it's a good thing the USA is not a democracy

On Jan 6, 2:43 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Who tried to bribe the lawmakers - and what does that have to do with an
> electoral initiative.  This was not  a case of law by the lawmakers.  It
> was a case of the public voting on public policy directly.  The
> lawmakers had nothing to do with it.
>
>
>
> plainolamerican wrote:
> > Attorneys for Proposition 8 backers said television coverage would
> > expose their witnesses to further harassment and intimidation
> > ---
> > and expose those who attempt to bribe the lawmakers
>
> > On Jan 6, 1:40 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Home <http://www.washingtontimes.com/> News
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news> *National*
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/national>
>
> >> Wednesday, January 6, 2010
>
> >>   Gay-marriage foes slam plans to televise Prop 8 trial
>
> >> Rate this story
>
> >> /critic/1/1/79/407075/vote/?r=/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-lash-out-­
> >>  at-plan-to-televise-pro/
> >> /critic/1/2/79/407075/vote/?r=/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-lash-out-­
> >>  at-plan-to-televise-pro/
> >> /critic/1/3/79/407075/vote/?r=/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-lash-out-­
> >>  at-plan-to-televise-pro/
> >> /critic/1/4/79/407075/vote/?r=/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-lash-out-­
> >>  at-plan-to-televise-pro/
> >> /critic/1/5/79/407075/vote/?r=/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-lash-out-­
> >>  at-plan-to-televise-pro/
>
> >> Average 0.00
> >> after 0 votes
> >> Login or register to rate this story <javascript:registration_callback();>
>
> >>     Witnesses harassment feared
>
> >>     * Font Size -
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-las...>+
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-las...>
> >>     * Print
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-las...>
> >>     * Email
> >>       <http://www.washingtontimes.com/mailfriend/79/407075/154889f326/>
> >>     * Comment
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-las...>
> >>     * Tweet this!
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-las...>
> >>     * Yahoo! Buzz
> >>       
> >> <http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzz?publisherurn=washington_ti859&guid=http%3A...>
> >>     *
> >>       Share <http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&pub=washingtontimes>
>
> >>     * Article
> >>     * Comments (38)
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/gay-marriage-foes-las...>
> >>     * Click-2-Listen
> >>       
> >> <javascript:OpenC2LWindow('WashingtonTimes','news_2010_jan_06_gay-marriage-­
> >>  
> >> foes-lash-out-at-plan-to-televise-pro',m_nwamp3_file,'dfp_zone='+sitepage,­'
> >>  WashingtonTimes','','Production');void(0);>
>
> >>         More National Stories
>
> >>     * Obama: $250M in education initiatives
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/obama-announce-250m-e...>
> >>     * Vegas gunman had past of crime
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/vegas-gunman-had-past...>
> >>     * Massachusetts college bans face coverings
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/massachusetts-college...>
> >>     * Facility opens to help military families with bereavement
> >>       
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/06/facility-opens-to-hel...>
>
> >> By Valerie Richardson
> >> <http://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/valerie-richardson/>
>
> >> Supporters of traditional marriage are outraged over a California
> >> judge's efforts to bring television cameras into court next week to
> >> cover a trial challenging Proposition 8, California's initiative against
> >> gay marriage.
>
> >> Judge Vaughn R. Walker, chief judge of the Northern District of
> >> California, proposed a last-minute revision of the court's rules that
> >> would allow television coverage of the trial. Those who want to comment
> >> have until Friday, and the trial begins Monday.
>
> >> Attorneys for Proposition 8 backers said television coverage would
> >> expose their witnesses to further harassment and intimidation. Backers
> >> of Proposition 8 were targeted for harassment in the months after the
> >> initiative's passage in November 2008. Some donors received threatening
> >> e-mails, letters and phone calls, while churches and businesses were
> >> singled out for boycotts and protests.
>
> >> Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for
> >> Marriage, which campaigned for Proposition 8 but isn't a party to the
> >> case, said he is worried about the safety of witnesses, who could
> >> include contributors, campaign staff and volunteers.
>
> >> "The question is really whether Judge Walker can put people on the stand
> >> where they can be threatened," said Mr. Brown. "It's a question of
> >> people's safety."
>
> >> A hearing on the matter is scheduled for 10 a.m. Wednesday in San
> >> Francisco, said David Madden, a spokesman for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court
> >> of Appeals.
>
> >> He said the rules and parameters for any televised coverage were under
> >> discussion, including decisions on how many cameras to allow, where to
> >> place the cameras, and whose cameras would be permitted in the courtroom.
>
> >> "We're trying to work this all out," said Mr. Madden. "We want to make
> >> sure people know we're being very cautious about this."
>
> >> The court ordinarily bans television, radio and photography, but the
> >> Judicial Council of the 9th Circuit announced Dec. 17 that it approved
> >> on an experimental basis "the limited use of cameras in federal courts
> >> within the system."
>
> >> "We hope that being able to see and hear what transpires in the
> >> courtroom will lead to a better public understanding of our judicial
> >> processes and enhanced confidence in the rule of law," said 9th Circuit
> >> Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. "The experiment is designed to help us find
> >> the right balance between the public's right to access to the courts and
> >> the parties' right to a fair and dignified proceeding."
>
> >> Since 1991, the 9th Circuit has allowed some television and radio
> >> broadcasting of oral arguments with the approval of the judges hearing
> >> the case, according to a statement issued by the court.
>
> >> Those backing cameras in the courtroom include a consortium of media
> >> outlets as well as gay rights groups. The Courage Campaign on Tuesday
> >> sent an alert asking its members to sign a petition in favor of
> >> television coverage.
>
> >> "The case presents issues that are very important to the public, and
> >> will affect millions of people," said Rick Jacobs, chairman of the
> >> Courage Campaign, a group that advocates gay marriage. "However, if the
> >> case is not televised, only a tiny fraction will ever be able to watch
> >> the trial in person.
>
> >> "By televising the trial, the public will be able to see for themselves
> >> the arguments and evidence presented by both sides, and will therefore
> >> have more confidence in the outcome of the trial," he said.
>
> >> Meanwhile, opponents of same-sex marriage point out that the
> >> experimental use of cameras was intended initially for low-profile
> >> cases, while the Proposition 8 trial has generated huge media interest.
>
> >> The lawsuit, filed in June by two same-sex couples, argues that
> >> Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution. Representing the
> >> plaintiffs are high-profile lawyers Theodore Olson and David Boies, who
> >> argued on opposite sides of the U.S. Supreme Court case to decide the
> >> 2000 presidential election.
>
> >> Critics have accused Judge Walker of judicial bias, pointing to an
> >> earlier ruling against Proposition 8. Attorneys for the plaintiffs had
> >> asked to see internal Proposition 8 campaign communications, arguing
> >> that they might reveal attempts to create a "discriminatory animus"
> >> against gays.
>
> >> Judge Walker ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but a federal appeals
> >> court panel in December reversed his decision.
>
> >> "Judge Walker has not shown himself to be an impartial judge in this
> >> case," said Mr. Brown. "He has attempted to make this entire process a
> >> circus, and he wants to be the ringleader by putting it on television."
>
> >> The California Supreme Court ruled in favor of allowing same-sex
> >> marriage in May 2008, but the decision was overruled six months later by
> >> Proposition 8, which California voters approved by a margin of 52
> >> percent to 48 percent.
>
> >> [Get Copyright Permissions] Click here for reprint permissions!
> >> <http://license.icopyright.net/3.7280?icx_id=/news/2010/jan/06/gay-mar...>
> >> Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to