California passed its HATE constitutional amendment with only a simple majority. It sad to think something of such magnitude could pass with only a simply majority. California has officially spit on 48% of its voters. Where would California be with 48% less people?

California would not enjoy the clout it has, around the world.

Constitutional amendments should be required to pass with at least 60%, not a mere majority.

I doubt if the court-test will validate this unacceptable try at changing the idea of love.

In support of love between two people I am reposting, below, a piece I wrote a few year ago, aimed at separating religious beliefs from unions of love.

My piece:

It does not matter if you are for or against gay marriages. In the United States we have what is called, and is one of the foundation blocks of our nation, the separation of church and state.
(And it's not just gay marriage, its all state-approved marriage. The separation of church and state prohibit such.)
"Marriage" belongs to the church-side. Being a part of the church-side, there is no place for marriage in the state-side. For any state to issue marriage licenses goes completely against the basic law of "separation of church and state." Why is government issuing marriage licenses in the first place? Why is the church sticking it's nose into business of the state? Why does the church accept the state as an issuing body of a practice of the church?
(Up until just recently, I have always supported the motto "In God We Trust" as a standard upon all coin and paper money issued by the United States, a practice that has been thorough since 1957. Because of the inter-mixed problems, meaning the mixing of church and state, on the gay marriage issue, I can no longer support the mixture of church and state in the motto upon a state issued document.)
I've watched the anti-gay marriage protesters as they spit and scream and treat gay people as "sinners." They reminded me of the way the Nazis treated Jews, Gypsies, and Homosexuals as lesser than human. Other than being live and in color, these protests mirror the black and white newsreel footages of the taunting and physical abuses initiated by the Nazis upon others.
How pure and righteous many religious believers are. They are right and everyone else is wrong. They will pound their Bible, but will not initiate the practice of love, unless it fits their need. They will spit upon love between two people should that love not fit within their perfect model.
You can pound the Bible or you can choose not too. The Bible is a book written by and promoted by people. It may be devine, it may not be divine. But regardless of questioning the Bible, because the Bible is a human document, the considerations in regards to the planet, as a whole, and the other species, which live upon the Earth with humans, is not taken into the whole equation.
The whole equation is the Earth's ability to continue its life. The Earth's ability to evolve through time allows life to continue. To only follow the teachings of the Bible in regards to marriage and populate more upon the Earth, is certainly, a solution of grave consequences. This ideology of continued population upon the planet just adds to a population of over seven billion. How many more times can this planet take population growth.
Does every human being need to populate? Could it be that the old thoughts contained in the church-side "marriage" be out-of-date with the realizations of today? Let the followers of these out-of-date ideologies keep their belief in marriage.
As the planet evolves within the natural order, which propagates continuation of life , whether the Bible says it is right or not, this order will continue as it has for four billion years. Far greater than the Bible, is the natural evolution of the planet and that ideology is certainly devine.
So, who is to say that gay marriages are a "sin?" Over-population of the Earth has got to be more a "sin," than a simple union between two people of the same sex. A union of love should never even be considered a sin, but killing off, in regards to over-population, our ability to exist certainly is a sin.
At least, as Americans, we must honor the rule of separation of church and state and do everything within our power to keep the church and the state separate. Whether it be the removal of the motto "In God We Trust," from our money or pushing the word marriage out of our government and back to the church.
Issuing bodies of government need to issue documents for civil unions and not call those documents Marriage Licenses. The government has no right to be acting as agents for the church and the church has no right to be setting rules on how the government issues documents for unions of love.

___________________

WRITE & Earn $$$
http://www.xomba.com/referral/7777ea2e
Read all my posts:
http://www.xomba.com/user/bigpink