March 5

1:12 PM Tory: I heard on the radio that it is very rare for the Cali court to overturn a prop Drew: Yeah1:13 PM But the key here is that the proposition revised the constitution of the state The court says “this part of the Constitution says they have the right”1:14 PM the prop takes away that right, but the language doesn’t reflect a revisionary change Tory: It is a leetle open to interpretation whether the definition of marriage implies man+woman Drew: Oh, but that’s not what the prop’s about Tory: O RLY? Drew: that’s what it is in other states1:15 PM but in california, the equal protection clauses were interpreted as defining marriage for everyone Prop 8″ eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry”1:16 PM Tory: isn’t the idea that they never had it to begin with? Constitutionally-speaking? Drew: Nope They did have it. Then the prop took it away.1:17 PM Tory: oh yah Drew: And also, it unmarries all the gays Tory: that part is krez1:18 PM Drew: which is kind of a violation of due process well, definitely a violation of the spirit of due process Tory: there’s no doubt it is a ridiculous situation Drew: but there’s nothing in place to deal with something like this, because it’s really outside the powers of a ballot initiative Tory: the end of the end1:19 PM Drew: hopefully the end of the beginning. Tory: change is constant the only constant faw! All absolutes are dangerous, including this one. faw faw!1:21 PM Drew: fa! fa! If this passes, i’m gonna start getting signatures for a ballot initiative that says Chinese people can’t go swimming