So won't prop 8 end up costing California tons of money?

[Duer 157099]

I wonder if the fiscal aspect could finally be it's undoing?

What I'm thinking is that when it comes time to get another proposition to amend this amendment (ie, to permit the use of the term "marriage"), how about framing it in terms that the tea bagging right can get behind -- that it is costing the state of California, which is virtually bankrupt, millions of dollars to have to print up all sorts of new papers that omit the word "marriage" and that there would be X amount of tax payer dollars SAVED if only we could just use ONE word for all cases of (marriage).

Similar to how the right just cannot STAND using tax dollars to pay for all of the bilingual stuff that has to be printed - appeal to them on that basis, that it's a waste of money and an increase in bureacracy.

From what I understand of today's ruling, it's very narrowly focused on the use of the word "marriage" - nothing else. Which sounds like something that will result in having to print up new documents, ones that use a different term.

Surely, if it were framed that way (think about last week's election) then I would bet that some people who really don't care either way would be moved to vote in favor of overturning prop 8.

Yes? No?

[tavalon]

1. Yep