COVERITLIVE.COM

12:00

William Osborne - Good afternoon and welcome. I am Bill Osborne, senior editor of the editorial and opinion pages here at the U-T. I'd like to take your questions on the recent state Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage, the seals at Children's Pool beach in La Jolla, or whatever else is on your mind. Fire away.

12:05

[Comment From Guest]
Good afternoon Mr. Osborne:

12:05

William Osborne -

Hi there. What's on your mind today?

12:07

[Comment From Guest]
In your opinion, how long will it be until same-sex marriage will be completely legal in California? Basically at a point when it the work to make it illegal stops. Gays have been trying to get equal rights since the 70s. How long is too long?

12:09

William Osborne - I believe there is a better-than-fair possibility that a ballot initiative overturning Proposition 8 and legalizing same-sex marriage would pass in California next year if it gets on the ballot again. But that hardly means the end of the issue. As you know, it is extremely divisive, and will likely continue to be for some time to come.

12:10

[Comment From Guest]
I am concerned with the lack of scientific basis for the theory of man caused global warning and the consequent empasis on wind and solar energy as viable replacement energy sources for an industrialized nation. What research has the U-T done on these questions?

12:12

William Osborne - Well, the U-T is a newspaper and does not conduct scientific research. But members of the editorial board do try to stay as current as possible on the state of the science. Among mainstream scientists, including those in the previous administration of President Bush, there was no doubt that global warming is caused at least in part by man's activities. The question, and the real disagreement, is what to do about it.

12:14

SignOnLiveChatModerator -

In Feb. 2008 the U-T held a special Opinion chat about climate change with UCSD professor Jeff Severinghaus. If you'd like to read it, visit http://tinyurl.com/q75xmg

12:15

SignOnLiveChatModerator - William, going back to the subject of Prop. 8. What was the opinion of the U-T Editorial Board on the Supreme Court's ruling to uphold the vote but keep all same-sex marriages performed before Prop. 8 passed valid?

12:21

William Osborne - We published an editorial the morning after the court's ruling. It said that, while we support same-sex marriage and believe that it will be legal in California some day, we thought the ruling was legally correct. And not, that is not a contradiction. It is critical to remember that the Supreme Court was not ruling on the legal validity of gay marriage. Rather, it was ruling on the narrowly focused question of whether Proposition 8 was a simple amendment to the state constitution, or whether it was a substantial revision to the constitution. If it was simply an amendment, then it could be approved by a majority of voters. If a revision, then it would have first required a 2/3 vote of the Legislature. The court, with many, many cases of precedent, ruled it was an amendment. At the same time, it ruled that gay marriages performed during the months when same-sex marriage was legal, could stand. Awkward, but legally correct, in our view.

Page 1 Next >