Page 22 - Proposition 8 News Today

>> im sorry, where is that? >> there was a lawyer in front of the united states supreme court trying to base his argument on what he calls the marital norm of sexual exclusivity, and sadly, newt gingrich wasnt there to cheer him on. the point was laughable, if the court had time to laugh, but they ignored that nonsense to focus on the relevant issues. joining me for an exclusive interview, two of the founders of the group backing the challenge to proposition 8, dust in lance black, the academy a...

Trending this morning, a whole lot of red, white, and equal showing up on facebook profiles, and heres why. users who support same-sex marriage have been replacing their profile pictures to this equal sign in red, symbolizing marriage equality. the u.s. supreme court is hearing arguments this week over same-sex marriage in two cases. proposition 8, californias ban on same-sex marriage, and the legality of the federal defense of marriage act. and the new nike ad for tiger woods is triggering a ...

Republican stall. >> we got at this point to work up the political courage to do whats required to be done. >> i didnt get anything wrong -- >> michele bachmanns campaign is coming to terms with something called ethics. ethics violations. >> now weve moved into the realm of gangster government. north dakota clamps down on womens reproductive rights, passing the most restrictive anti choice law yet. cecile richards with the latest attack on the war on women. the fight for marriage equality bega...

But it changes the definition of what it means to be a friend. and thats it seems to me what supporters of proposition 8 are saying here. all youre interested is the label and you insist on changing the definition of the label. >> its like saying you can vote, you can travel, but you cannot be a citizen. there are certain labels in this country that are critical. you could have said in the loving case, you cant get married, but you can have an interracial union. everyone would know that was wron...

Glad to be here. >> after prop 8 passed, you said if you were elected you would not defend that ban in court. why did you make that decision? and how do you think its playing out? >> you are exactly right. i did, and we should also note that my opponent said he would defend prop 8 and my opponent was not elected. the reason i say that and has refused to defend proposition 8 is one simple reason. its unconstitutional and its found by a court to be unconstitutional and frankly, as the daughter of ...

After hearing oral arguments on proposition 8, californias ban on same-sex marriage, the nine justices were forced to confront the very meaning of marriage. the lawyer defending prop 8, charles cooper, says the ban doesnt violate the constitutional rights of same-sex couples, but cooper acknowledged that the countrys understanding of marriage is changing rapidly, he says evolution should continue without the supreme courts interference. as mother jones put it, cooper was supposed to argue that c...

Why are we treating anyone as a second class citizen, you know, why do we have second class marriages in some states and no relationship recognition in other states. that time has to stop. thats unamerican. i am so proud of this country right now for recognizing that, paying attention, and saying to their leaders hey, it is time to treat people fairly. >> i think tomorrow will be a better day for proponents of same-sex marriage. in the case of proposition 8, you have a case where justice kennedy...

Want the case, why did you take it in the first place? but seriously, whats the chance that they punt on this one? they dont make a decision that is formal? >> there is an argument that would give the opportunity to punt. this is an odd case in one important respect. the plaintiff here says the law sun constitutional. the defendant here which is the obama administration also thinks the law is unconstitutional. so there was a lot of discussion among the justices about why is this a real lawsuit w...

Supporters of proposition 8 are saying here. all youre interested in is the label and you insist on changing the definition of the label. >> so hearing that, what would you take away from that that frames how you think this is going? >> well, i think the confusion and ambiguity of yesterdays arguments really raises the stakes for today. because today is actually a somewhat more simple case. they dont have to worry about defining marriage or anything like that in this case. this is a case about s...

Court. justice kagan and others asked questions, and the attorneys on the anti gay side were unable to come up with a good reason and thats exactly what court after court and now state after state have found. >> eric, thats a great point that evan brings up, is that those who are in support of proposition 8 and against marriage equality have found themselves painted into the weird corner where they have to make the case where gay people getting married is somehow harmful to the institution of ma...