Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Court Rejects California Same Sex Marriage Ban !!!

1.  Judge says no new same-sex marriage  ceremonies until all the appeals are heard.

2.  Ban on S>S>Marriage is "Un-Constituttional".


JustinO'Shea said...

Perhaps one positive step: this judge ruled that banning gay marriages is actually un-Constitutional because it creates 2 classes of people: those who can and those who cannot marry.

This decision will definitely be appealed before the next higher court, and then likely even go to the US Supreme Court. And. . .

If the Supremes choose to hear this case it is possible this ban could be over-turned again.

You can be sure those who voted for Prop 8 are not yet giving up the fight. Because if the Supremes uphold this CA judge's decision it will legalize same sex marriage thru-out the entire USA.

J said...

Remember, there is still a 5-4 conservative majority on the court, and it doesn't look kindly on invading territory traditionally the province of legislatures, or the electorate through referenda like Prop 8.

Gary Kelly said...

Lemme get this straight. If a limp-wristed, lisping, gay man in fishnet stockings and high heels wants to marry a butch lesbian who wears cowboy denim and boots, rides a Harley, smokes cigars, swears like a trooper and takes hormones to make her voice deeper, will that be okay?

I mean he's biologically male and she's biologically female, so the people who voted for Prop 8 shouldn't have a problem with that.

Or am I missing something here?

Coop said...

Hooooray for California! The small victory should be celebrated.

"Gay" Marriage opponents get mad at the courts for "legislating morality". "Gay" Marriage supporters feel that the right to marry should not be subject to the whim of the voters.

Coops is caught somewhere in between. Obviously, marriage equality has my support.
I was hoping that the question would be put on the California ballots again and that the voters would listen to their own conscience and their own free will.

I was willing for marriage in Massachusetts to be voted on.
And, if asked, I would've signed the petition to put it on the ballot "Bring it ON." LOL.

The only way to shut up the opponents for equality is to show them the numbers. The vote on 8 was very close, if I remember.
The opponents don't want to accept that people's opinions are changing.

Go in peace. Amen. Hallelujah.

JustinO'Shea said...

You got it, "sweetie", it seems to me.
Loverly images you evoke. Enough to be good incentive for celibacy!

Something to be said for "good clear direction", hahahahaa


JustinO'Shea said...

J. . ..though I did not clearly say this in my first post here, I too think it is highly likely the Supremes will not support Judge Walker's [or is it Vaughn?] position.

In fact I'd be surprised if they did. Too many "Catholics" among the Supremes. . .hehehe Many/most conservative RCs do not see same sex marriage as a matter of social justice.

Sorry, I do not mean to offend. . .

Jabacue said...

I just posted about this on my blog.
I really hope the US government will see the unconstitutionality of this whole debate as did the Canadian government a few years ago.
The basic rights and freedoms of individuals far surpasses any religious belief of any individual or judge for that matter.
It is scary to me how the USA, the most powerful and influential country in the world, still hits a stalemate on issues of 'rights'. Will it take another 100 years to get this thing passed as it did on the rights of Afro-Americans?
Come on Americans!!!Smell the coffee on this issue. It has nothing to do with YOUR religious rights.
This really gets me frustrated!

Coop said...

One thing that struck me about Proposition 8 was that a "YES" vote =
opposition to Equal Marriage.
A "NO" vote = support for Equal Marriage.
Back asswards; don't ya think.

If I shut down my laptop and walk outside to finish lunch, will I get rained upon? Eh... yeah.
I'm feeling hot; and it's not a good "hot".

Stew said...

Coops is right, the vote is backward and you have to wonder how many people didn't read it right and voted the wrong way.

Many US citzens won't marry until it's available in the US. I went the other way, by getting married in Canada. I, along with thousands of others have sent a small message back home to the US that there are commited relationships already existing whether you like it or not.

Coop said...

'No, I am voting for equal marriage.'

Those who are upset by this ruling are Obsessed with the idea that the population should be allowed to vote on "marriage".
They accuse Vaughn Walker and Margaret Marshall of being activist judges.

They anti- Equal marriage crowd keeps saying today that the majority of Americans are opposed to Gay marriage. They cling to the "52% Yes-48% No" result in California.
It is a majority... but not by much. And I also think that the question confused some people.
I don't think the voting efforts are over. One of these days, the 'let the majority vote and the majority believes in traditional marriage' crowd will be sorry.

Stew, maybe my memory is wrong but wasn't there an effort in MI and the results were close? I think you mentioned something.

Jabacue said...

I don't feel it should come down to a vote. When it comes to something so vital to our basic human rights and freedom, the Courts should decide and make it law. But what do I know.

J said...

I can't see that you are offending anyone Justin. However, if Justice Kennedy, the only swing vote on the high court, upholds this judgment, Benedict may want to excommunicate him.

Stew said...

Right again Coop. It was a very close vote in Michigan. And there is hope for the near future. Even my elderly parents voted for equal rights for marriage. Or so they believe. As with California, it was a backward kind of thing. I wasn't even sure until just a week before the vote which was which.

Coop said...

The most frustrating part for me is the religion. '2 men or 2 women getting married goes against GOD's plan.' Okay, FINE. I respect their right to worship and to believe in their understanding of GOD. Why, then, are they trying to stop "Gay" marriages from being recognized in the eyes of the state? The "Gays" are not asking the Government to bully churches and other religious organizations into blessing "Gay" marriages.

Jabacque, I hope this will help you understand the situation here. The same folks who oppose equality also babble on about how the foundation of the United States was rooted in Christianity.


Lord, what a Pandora's box this is. Tee Hee! Which Christian teachings do these conservatives want this country to be founded upon?? In my opinion, the good answers are: the Baptist, the Pentecostal, even the Catholic ... ? Forgive me, Justin, for I have sinned.

I feel that some churches read the bible with the blinders on. They even fail to explore the origins of the good book. Let's be polite and not wonder if Fred Phelps believes that a complete King James Bible, written in English mind you, fell from the sky a couple thousand years ago.

Many of the founding fathers of the United States were deists, Unitarians, etc. etc. It is very hard for people to accept this. Even smart guys like my own father.

Writing this has given me a sense of happiness.
Go in peace. Amen. Hallelujah.

Coop said...

Stew, I felt the same way about California. I couldn't vote on it, but I wanted to lend my "moral support". I couldn't figure out if I was in favor of the proposition or against it.

Question to the world: Is there evidence that People would rather say "YES" to something as opposed to saying "NO"?
More shreds of cool stuff covered in dust in my mind. I'm only 28 too. GOD help me.

Coop said...

I hope that folks are still following this thread. I just remembered that Salt Lake City passed a gay rights ordinance that is endorsed by the Mormon church.

I find that very interesting, considering that the Mormon church worked overtime to pass Prop 8.

Remember too, that not all opponents of Equal Marriage are card-carrying homophobes.