if so, then i think it's fair to say that none of the rights embodied in the constitution is safe.

...the general public may propose via the initiative, either amendments to the state constitution or the creation of new statute laws, which is done by writing a proposed constitutional amendment or statute as a petition, and submitting the petition to the California Attorney General along with a submission fee (in 2004 this was $200), and obtaining signatures on petitions from registered voters amounting to 8% (for a constitutional amendment)...

You may want to familiarize yourself with the process before going off on anyone.

As for hijacking I stay on subject just as I did in this thread. In todays Rahm thread I was on subject and also talked about Obama in relation to Rahm which was also on topic. There is no way I dominate a thread because others have way more post in a thread than I do, many being off-topic. I may actually have something to say in my posts where others may not but saying something and providing facts is not against the rules.

It seems to me you are ignoring other peoples breaking of the rules and trying to single me out for something that don't exist. Your piling on here doesn't intimidate me nor does you rule cop routine. If people attack me first then I will respond in kind. If you don't like that then I suggest you talk to them because when they stop I won't have anything to respond in kind to. If they can't respond to things I post that are backed up by what is being reported in the news and is on topic then they shouldn't respond at all if their sole intention is to stir up trouble.

Today's megachurch anti-gay distortions of the Bible are reflective of what they've always done:  Identify and denigrate "the other" to consolidate their base and increase membership and donations out of fear and/or hatred.  Unfortunately, bigotry works.  Catholic, Mormon and other Christian organizations will continue to use fear to consolidate their base and generate funds.  We give these organizations tax breaks and tell them not to do political work, but clearly they are not abiding by those rules.  Dubya's faith based initiatives have actually increased their ability to organize and communicate with their followers and funders (federal money was used for "capacity building" which includes developing mailing lists, web sites, buying office equipment, etc.).  $73 million was spent on Prop 8, mostly from out of state resources.  Anti-gay political action is a big money maker for these organizations.  They're not going to stop using this wedge issue unless we act to limit their political work.  

One way to mitigate their negative effect on society is to undermine their ability to drive regressive political change.  We can try to do that by removing the tax breaks for each and every religious group that is behind these despicable ballot measures, but they'll simply create non-church organizations using the same people, equipment and communication paths, but with a separate paper trail.  

A better way to pull the rug from under the anti-gay bigotry is to (re)establish equality at the federal level.  We need to not just repeal DOMA, but to create an anti-DOMA, If states can't create second class structures for gays, the churches can rant and rave all they want but they won't be able to effect bigoted change.  As I've said many times on this topic, it's up to mainstream Dems to decide they're fed up with this wedge issue increasing the political power of our opponents.  Take a stand now, or expect this issue to still be hurting our party for the next hundred years or so.  If you don't feel a personal attachment for marital equality, perhaps you should consider your future children and grandchildren, some of whom will undoubtedly be homosexual.  (Memo to Jeralyn:  your descendents may have to fight for equality if you don't do it. :)