Prop 8 Is Not Over...

A shout out to Dissenting in Part.

From Equality California:

"We would be making a grave mistake to view Proposition 8 as just affecting the LGBT community," said Eva Paterson, president of the Equal Justice Society. "If the Supreme Court allows Proposition 8 to take effect, it would represent a threat to the rights of people of color and all minorities."

In a brief filed on January 14, 2009, the California Council of Churches and other religious leaders and faith organizations representing millions of members discussed the harm Proposition 8 poses to religious minorities.

"Proposition 8 poses a grave threat to religious freedom," said Rev. Rick Schlosser, Executive Director of the California Council of Churches. "If the Court permits same-sex couples to be deprived of equal protection by a simple majority vote, religious minorities could be denied equal protection as well—a terrible injustice in a nation founded by people who emigrated to escape religious persecution. If the Court permits Proposition 8 to take effect, religious discrimination similarly could be written into California's Constitution."

And from former LDS 1st Presidency member, J. Reuben Clark Jr.

"The Constitution was framed in order to protect minorities. That is the purpose of written constitutions. In order that minorities might be protected in the matter of amendments under our Constitution, the Lord required that the amendments should be made only through the operation of very large majorities--two-thirds for action in the Senate, and three-fourths as among the states. This is the inspired, prescribed order." (J. Reuben Clark, Conference Report, April 1944, pp. 115–116; quoted in "Political Thought and Life of J. Reuben Clark, Jr.", speech given by Marion G. Romney at BYU, 21 Nov. 1972).

Herein lies the problem with Prop 8. Are the minorities being protected? According to J. Reuben Clark, the citizens of California in amending the Constitution by a 50% +1 vote are not following the Lord's "inspired, prescribed order." Amendments should only be afforded when "very large majorities" ascribe them to be so.

And religious groups, of any denomination but especially the minority groups, should see the gravity of this situation. What happens when one religious group begins to dominate? All they will need is a 50% +1 vote and then who is next to be discriminated against?