Proposition 8 Results

May 27, 2009

California gone ideological!

The California Supreme Court results upholding Proposition 8 to ban ‘Same Sex Marriage’ received with mixed reaction. Those behind the Prop 8 success were jubilant over the verdict, while the victims of flawed ballot initiative disappointed at the highest judiciary’s ruling against its own decision legalizing “Same Sex Marriage” a year ago.

Society has different forces working for and against various causes. Whenever certain members in the society isolated for reasons considered obviously discriminatory by the fair minds, all avenues explored to gain equality and justice. In this situation, the victims being the gay community relentlessly pursued the legitimate course for their equal rights. The opposition vehemently denied fairness to the segregated members of the society.

The recent developments since the California Supreme Courts’ ruling last year in favor of the issue followed by ballot measures with excessive propaganda particularly by religious institutions yielding marginal victory and subsequent action by the highest court deserve scrutiny.

Even though, the court maintained the earlier decision based on the constitutional law granting equal rights to all citizens regardless of race, religion, gender and sexual orientation, somehow this time, the same court claims the upholding of Proposition 8 initiated with blatant bias and fervent activism against the victims as justification for their backtracking in human rights.

The Proposition 8 mandate on November 4, 2008 was undemocratic and unscrupulous on all accounts. This in itself, demerit the consideration to honor the so-called will of the people by the justices of the California Supreme Court. Therefore, aptly qualifies for an appeal.

Justice is blind but at times ethics and integrity beckons reasoning for sound judgment to protect innocents’ rights. Power accompanied by wisdom and courage demonstrates notable actions.

The decision makers in the judicial system formally trained to follow the rule of law typically set in stones even going back to Stone Age. Unfortunately, such rigidity in the system fails to embrace and acknowledge the transformation via progress in the society. Therefore, creating opportunities for loopholes and pathway leading to an undesirable outcome forcing specific members to remain outcasts in the society as witnessed in the gay community matter.

Clearly, the judicial authorities obligated to the constitution and the will of the people in a democracy effectively shackled in the confines of the law protecting some most of the times, while neglecting the rest during the moment requiring diligence and rationality.

Hence, in the absence of due amendments to the procedures and applicable Bill of Rights, the existing laws do not always conform to the society’s progress. Similarly, the ballot initiatives and special elections misused for political agenda wasting taxpayers’ dollars in a virtually bankrupt economy reflects hypocritical action by those calling for fiscal responsibility and spending cuts hurting the weak and the vulnerable.

They only serve the special interest groups and religious institutions violating the constitution emphasizing the separation of Church and State.  Again, one should not ignore the double standards in this context with the entities’ selective demand to the victims to respect the constitution and the rule of law.

Interestingly, the Proposition 8 status quo ruling coincides with President Barack Obama’s announcement of the Supreme Court Nominee for the next Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. The President’s expectations in his nominee included empathy apart from fidelity to the constitution and the rule of law in reaching decisions affecting human lives. Not surprisingly, the term ‘empathy’ attracted criticisms from those unwilling to think outside the box, in this instance the legal framework.

Today, the Proposition 8 ruling would be honorable upon the judicial system requirement to display empathy where appropriate in addition to the exclusive practice of law. A legal system that strictly adheres to Text Books’ theory is contradictory to a society subscribing to pragmatism as genesis for new era culture.

As for the far right and the ultra conservative nexus celebrating victory over injustice to the targeted group of people, it’s time to rescue them from their own shortcomings with a subtle reminder that nothing is permanent in the eternal cycle of natural changes. Needless to state the once majority rule is down to a bare minority with representation threatened at every level of political system.   Possibly, confirming the reality in 2010 gubernatorial election in California.

Ironically, in the President’s choice of the Supreme Court Nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s personal and professional biography diagnosed and the New Haven, Connecticut firefighters’ matter brought forward as reverse discrimination and condemned by the moralists. Meanwhile, rejoicing the short-lived Prop 8 event inevitably to triumph in the immediate future.

In the case of the New Haven firefighters subject to verification of facts, discriminatory practices against individuals or groups regardless of them being the majority or minority better abandoned in recognition of equal rights for all and promotion based on meritocracy rather than reparation related to history will be in society’s best interest.

The religious segment on their part played a dominant role financing the favorable voting on Proposition 8. These groups under the guise of non-profit organizations violated the IRS code explicitly prohibiting political activities. Their negative propagation against “God’s beloved children” is unconscionable in spiritual and ethical sense. Deeds causing pain and agony to other human beings carried out in the name of religion or the representative are equivalent to sacrilegious in the highest order.

Using religion as a tool to promote inequality and injustice is the present norm and the prevalence attributed to ignorance of the laws of nature and general creation. Perhaps, the following message could be a revelation to all those conspicuously against the children of god, the gay community –

Homosexuality is natural with scientific evidence and not experimental as admitted by some heterosexuals since time immemorial. Homosexuality stigmatized as an epidemic and moral degradation of societal conduct, when religious scandals involving young children continue until date.

The intriguing aspect of the morality issue is the “people in glass houses casting rocks at others.”

Those religious institutions proclaiming ‘Epiphany’ and declaring homosexuality a preference rather than a unique orientation in the wide spectrum of natural diversity, owe explanation towards accepting variation in environmental species with a spectacular range in fauna and flora yet rejecting distinction in human species.

It’s tragic and an assault on human intellect by extreme ideologues to portray all loving and peaceful creator, the authority on malicious intervention in natural course of action.

Furthermore, it is twenty first century and United States, the modern democracy having engaged in democratization of regions with complex cultural heritage and inherent inequalities has a primary responsibility in setting an example of providing unconditional equal rights, privileges and justice to citizens from all lifestyles. Failure in doing so raises credibility issue for the nation regarded as the leader of the free world.

United States’ diversity and social progress truly reflected in the justice system following the constitution based on inclusive not exclusive rights.

Gay community as the children of God is an integral part of the society and “Same Sex Marriage” is their civil and constitutional right and unequivocally proven in the next and final legal battle in California.

Society fair well when all things are equal.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

The Irony of Equal Rights

November 12, 2008

The reason for my involvement in a political campaign of this magnitude — the Presidential race 2008, was to convey the message that United States is a nation of immigrants and democracy is truly represented when individual rights of every citizen is honored and valued in true spirit.

While it is a great moment in history to realize the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,

Whose sacrifice is symbolized with the election of the first African American candidate as the 44th President of the United States in 2008,

It is unequivocally demoralizing to note the outcome of the Vote for Proposition 8 banning “Gay Marriage” and,

The failure of “Touch-Screen machines for disabled voters”  in the California ballot and elsewhere —

(Ref. San Jose Mercury News, Thursday, November 6, 2008 Section 2B, by Karen de Sá ).

Like stated earlier, when individuals exercise authority with the voting power in the denial of civil and human rights as demonstrated in the two most tragic results, it is a sad day for democracy.

Nevertheless, my message to all my dear friends and fellow citizens in the gay community and the disabled voters is…

You never quit a half won battle, even if the opposition appears to be strong and forceful in rhetoric but fragile in essence.

It is noteworthy that, this mandate on Gay marriage was bargained in monetary terms by the religious institutions with highly questionable ethics and conduct especially against young children i.e. girls and boys alike.

Such mandate should be challenged again in the court of law for the constitutional and civil rights of all citizens to prevail in the land of justice, that is the United States of America.

Further, much to the dismay of the opposing religious order — this challenge is being remanded with the blessing of the same “Almighty God” inappropriately referenced in the debate as the shield for their orthodox and hypocritical philosophy.

Any democracy is active when disfranchisement of one by another is discarded for common good of all.

Otherwise, it is not a democracy, it is a hypocrisy.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

California Ballot

October 29, 2008

Prop 1A through Prop 12 in California Ballot –

There is a heightened debate over one Proposition getting more attention than the other does.

It is simply being diligent on issues represented in the ballot.

The electorate must uphold any issue in favor of protecting humans, animals and environment in the ballot.

It appears that, from 1A to 12 has a range of issues concerning children like the Valley Children’s Hospital, raising farm animals in a humane manner etc.

Please be discerning in your choice for common good and better future.

The citizen welfare is dependent on community services maintenance and development.

Voting is a fundamental right of every citizen and only process available in a democracy to bring about real Change in one’s life for a brighter tomorrow.

Please vote early and for the right cause.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Vote No to Proposition 8

October 26, 2008

There are many issues on the ballot in California that concerns life in general.

Among them, the contentious issue has been the Proposition 8.

What is Proposition 8? – Thank you.

“Fact: Prop 8 is simple: it eliminates the rights for same-sex couples to marry. Prop 8 would deny equal protections and write discrimination against one group of people—lesbian and gay people—into our state constitution.”

In simple terms, Proposition 8 is a State Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

The Separation of Church and State in the Constitution clearly defines the role of State and the jurisdiction within.

Simultaneously, the religious institutions like Church have a specified function as the non-profit organizations with tax-exempt status.

Although, it appears from the news articles… that Church functions beyond its jurisdiction and exercise liberty on moral issues.

By taking advantage of the ambiguity in the IRS code for tax-exempt status, Churches donate money to a ballot initiative like Proposition 8 without endangering status-quo.

However, the IRS restriction applies to any major activities by the Church in the legislation.

Since, the Church is involved in this particular issue, it deems right to highlight the fact that,

“God created all equal.”

Every one of us regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation and socio-economic background are entitled to the same rights, privileges and benefits in a democratic society as well as from the religious standpoint represented by God.

It is presumptuous to perpetrate such inhumane, unethical and undemocratic treatment towards gay and lesbian people, who are also beloved children of God.

The discriminatory practice is a human analogy to enforce one’s own orthodox in the name of religion.

It would be inappropriate to reference God in this equation.

If the reason behind such activities to ban same-sex marriage were from the preconceived notion,

That it would negatively influence young minds then,

All those religious institutions have adequate work to do within their own premise…

As children been the victims of highly immoral conduct by the religious order since the birth of religions.

To quote the article in San Jose Mercury News, October 25, 2008 – Thank you.

The Rev. Rick Mixon, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Palo Alto has eloquently summarized the solution to the vigorously debated issue of Prop 8:

Pastor Mixon said —

“The state should protect civil rights and civil contracts like marriage, while the church should be blessing and supporting all manner of loving relationships and families.

He further added –

“I just said, “Where would Jesus be on this?”

“It’s pretty clear to me where he’d be. He’d be in support of anybody who was trying to create loving, caring, compassionate relationships.”

The Gospel Truth delivered.

Prior to being judgmental, it is important for all human beings to view from the opposite angle for a rational thought, as human tendency is to love thyself before friends and neighbors.

The gay community deserves respect, love and honor.


Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. The article titled “Separation of Church and State” featured under Spiritualism category in , strictly relates to the theme “references to God in the public square”. The presentation is not for others to misinterpret or distort the message to convey their viewpoint to Vote for Prop 8 or other issues.