California | Dennis Herrera | Gay Marriage | News | Proposition 8 | Rachel Maddow | San Francisco

BigGayDeal.com

SF City Attorney Dennis Herrera on Prop 8 Hearings: Before and After

Herrera

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who with others filed the lawsuit challenging Proposition 8 that was heard yesterday, gave a rousing speech at a rally on the Eve of Justice Wednesday night.

Yesterday, Herrera appeared on Rachel Maddow to discuss yesterday's arguments.

Herrera said that "difficult questions" were asked but concluded: "What was clear —starkly laid out  — is what the stakes are. And that has implications not just for gay and lesbian couples but for women and other disfavored minority groups here in California as well as the broader population when it comes to the protection of their constiutional rights."

Watch both clips, AFTER THE JUMP...

Previously
Proposition 8 Argued Before California Supreme Court [tr]
Prop 8 'Eve of Justice' Vigils Held Across California: Round-Up [tr]

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Freedom of speech wasn't invented and granted by the constitution; the constitution simply declared/codified such a right. Free Speech, and other rights, existed before and outside the constitution. Such rights could not be taken away by a majority vote, contrary to what Starr postulates. otherwise any fundamental right would be at the mercy of the majority; witness 1932 in Germany. Perhaps that's what Starr wants ? What a pig !

    Posted by: Hephaistion | Mar 6, 2009 9:41:31 AM


  2. How is it living there in the place where rights exist before and outside of constitutions? Is that Heaven, or Iowa?

    Before "Free Speech, and other rights" were added to the U.S. constitution *BY AMENDMENT* the people who lived here were subjects of the British crown and had no such rights.

    Posted by: Patrick | Mar 6, 2009 9:56:33 AM


  3. But that is EXACTLY the problem Hephaistion. If the "majority" can take away a right, ANY right, it can take away ALL rights. If we sit by and let this happen, we'll be ruled by right wing nut job christians who believe a theocracy is best for the U.S. They are no different than the Taliban and will be just as destructive if allowed to continue on their course.

    Posted by: Bobby | Mar 6, 2009 10:18:20 AM


  4. What rights do you have that can't be taken away, and why can't they?

    Posted by: Patrick | Mar 6, 2009 10:23:34 AM


  5. i have a new hero.

    Posted by: nic | Mar 6, 2009 10:35:47 AM


  6. ya Patrick. So much for a free country then huh? I guess no one is allowed to leave their house unless they have to right to specifically defined in the constitution. Hey you know what. I want to hold a vote to not allow anyone who is a child molester to even be able to leave their home. I think that would easily pass.

    Posted by: Aiden Raccoon | Mar 6, 2009 2:00:10 PM


  7. Well, I know authorities (admittedly non USA) which have determined that there are "unenumerated" rights not in the constituition.....right to education; etc. I doen't have to live in heaven just to hold that there are rights antecedent to the constitution which are fundamental rights which cannot be abrogated by a majority vote.Bobby, the point I'm making (badly) is that the majority cannot take away fundamental rights of equality and freedom; they cannot do it to jews,gays,hispanics. I think Kenneth Starr is wrong......the vote of the people cannot defeat such fundamental rights as Free Speech. Patrick says that Free Speech was added to the Constitution by amendment.....no, it was declared by amendment.... it would still exist now even without such an amendment as a fundamental right unenumerated by the constitution.

    Posted by: Hephaistion | Mar 6, 2009 2:34:57 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Lawmakers: Marriage Equality Will Pass in Vermont This Session« «