Article Rebuttal BCOM275 Andrew Thompson April 15, 2013 University of Phoenix Article Rebuttal In this paper the subject discussed concerns the 2008 introduction of California Proposition 8. It will contest the statements made by the author and provide meaningful information that will rebut the misleading assertions documented in the article. Statement 1 According to Laura Brill, the author of the article – It’s time for Prop. opponents to re-engage” (Brill, May 26 2011, Pg 1) published in the OC Register, the majority of the population supports equal marriage rights. “Now, two years later, though a federal court has declared Proposition 8 invalid under the U. S. Constitution, it nonetheless remains in effect. This state of affairs persists even though most people now support equal marriage rights…. ” The hyperbolic statement that most people now support equal marriage rights is a gross exaggeration. The results from respected polling agencies continue to show the majority of Americans still do not agree with same sex marriages.
Recent polling results reflect that 46% of Americans do not favor acceptance of same sex marriages. The same polling figures documented 9% of the responses in the “Do not know” category with the remaining numbers for those in favor of same sex marriage to be the minority. (Pew Research Center, 2011) Statement 2 “The initiative proponents, however, have appealed. Now the California Supreme Court must decide whether unelected and unaccountable initiative proponents have the power to trump the judgment of the democratically elected attorney general. This statement is an attempt to stereotype the majority of the citizens who supported Prop 8 as renegades and attempting to operate above the law. The author fails to recognize that 52% of the California voters approved the clause “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. ” and is now officially part of the California state constitution. (Yoshino, 2009) In addition, the initial legal proceedings resulted in a federal judge ruling the amendment to the state constitution as unconstitutional. However, that decision was appealed. The 9th U. S.
Circuit Court of Appeals has yet to decide the case, which is known as Perry v. Brown. The result will more than likely be determined by the U. S. Supreme Court for a final ruling and not the attorney general. Statement 3 “That the scope of the fundamental right to marry may be resolved by such procedural niceties has some benefits: First, such a decision will essentially end this damaging fight and restore the right of same-sex couples to marry. Second, the risky strategy of placing the important question of equal marriage rights prematurely before a conservative U. S. Supreme Court will be gone.
Finally, declining to expand the power of initiative proponents may help contain the dysfunctional fiscal and political effects that the initiative system has caused the state as a whole. ” The author is assuming proponents for Prop 8 are ready to offer an olive branch and give in to the demands of the minority and repeal the constitutional amendment. In fact research has been conducted by such organizations as Pro-Choice America and the Greenlining Institute. “In 2009, a similar survey showed that 47 percent of voters would support repeal of Prop 8, 48 percent would oppose, and 5 percent were unsure.
In 2011, unsure voters doubled to 10 percent. Support for Prop 8? s repeal decreased from 47 to 45 percent, but opposition to repeal also decreased from 48 to 45 percent. ” (Baume, 2011) The desire of this group to overturn the approved amendment to the state constitution presupposes the majority of the individuals/groups who voted for Prop 8 are willing to succumb to the pressure and recall the election results. The author underestimates the passion of supporters, including religious groups which will never compromise their values.
In conclusion the author’s agenda to repeal the constitutional amendment is filled with false information and invalid information. The tactics of the author not only to use false or misleading information also attempts to stereotype supports of Prop 8 as fanatics and are operating above the law in an effort to validate their cause. This article should be viewed in the biased manner it was written with the attempt to gain support for a failed strategy. . References Baume, M. (2011, May 26), Obstacles remain for a Prop 8 repeal, Retrieved from http://www. reenlining. org/news/in-the-news/2011/obstacles-remain-for-a-prop-8-repeal Brill, L. (May 26, 2011), It’s time for Prop. 8 opponents to re-engage, Retrieved from http://articles. ocregister. com/2011-05-26/news/29591989_1_marriage-rights-initiative-basic-rights Pew Research Center, (2011), Most Say Homosexuality Should Be Accepted By Society. Retrieved from http://people-press. org/2011/05/13/most-say-homosexuality-should-be-accepted-by-society/: Yoshino, K. (2009). Prop. 8: Which way now? Advocate, (1022), 36, Retrieved from EBSCOhost.