The state Supreme Court has just released its opinion on the Proposition 8 gay marriage ban, upholding the voter approved measure while also upholding the 18,000 gay marriages performed in California prior to the November vote. You can read the opinion here (provided you can get through the e-traffic).
The vote was 6-1, with Justice Carlos R. Moreno voting to invalidate Prop. 8.
Click here to read the lengthy press release from the Supreme Court, which I’ve downloaded so you should have no trouble getting. I’ll be posting some excerpts here momentarily.
And we’re collecting reaction to the decision from both sides, which you can read by clicking here. One of the primary groups advocating gay-marriage rights is already considering putting a measure on the 2010 ballot.
Sad day for equality and justice.
Looking forward to reversing injustice on the 2010 ballot.
maybe we can legalize incestuous and polygamous marraiges too.
We can also make christians happy by legalizing child marriage.
Dont be an oxygen pirate and pathetic
I see the infantile behavior comes out. I’m not surprised though.
Huh?
Your hatred is coming out johnadams. Do you make similar comments about the public schools? There have been a number of reports lately about teachers and others in public schools having sex with students.
Actually most of those pedophiles were in the Roman Catholic church which forced celibacy contrary to the teaching of the Bible.
My hatred is coming out? That statement, on this topic, with you stupid christians making your un-christian comments, is laughable. How come you people can say all your mean and negative comments about the gays, yet when I tell the truth about your child abusing religion, you get upset. What about public schools? At least they actually let the police do their jobs by going after the pedophiles unlike the christian church who uses your tax-free donation money to pay to hide the pedofile and pay the stupid parents off.
If that’s what you want, get enough signatures and try!
Don’t worry christians. You can still help support your local pedophiles by making donations to your church. I’m sure your $5 you donate in an attempt to save your soul will be well spent on ruining another childs life, attorney fees, hush money, and multi-million dollar mega churches with child events to lure their next victims.
WOW!!! The Court upheld the constitutionality of the initiative process. Notihng more. From the decision:
“… the principal issue before us concerns the scope of the right of the people, under the provisions of the California Constitution, to change or alter the state Constitution itself through the initiative process so as to incorporate such a limitation as an explicit section of the state Constitution.”
This is laughable and proves our State Supreme Court is as dysfunctional and incompetent as our legislature.
The decision was addressing a specific procedural issue, which formed the basis of the challange. The court did NOT decide the issue of whether this law is discriminatory.
But don’t worry; this issue will be in the courts and on the ballot for a few years to come, as neither side appears ready to concede. IMO - get the government out of the marriage issue altogether and limit government to issuing civil contracts. Marriage is a religious tradition and has nothing to do with modern civil rights. Any adult citizen should be able to form a civil contract union with another adult without any religious restrictions. How these people have sex or any other personal aspect of their lives should have no bearing on the decision to cohabitat or their right to the same legal rights afforded to any other couple.
This is a wonderful day for marriage between a man & woman. No you fanccios can shut up!!!!
Thats really sad. Even states like Iowa allow gay marriage… Thats okay when it comes up on the ballot again in 2010… there will be more voters which means more the ban won’t last long.
Don’t count on it.
Another lawsuit for sure. How can the courts afford privileges to only certain gays?
Please. this will go to court again just on other grounds.
Swooning - The courts ruling was not retroactive. I would bet that the reason they left those 18,000 marriages intact is that they were legal at the time (before Prop 8 was passed by the voters).
Would you expect other wise?
Should those that owned slaves prior to the 13th Amendment be prosecuted?
Should elections held prior to the 19th Amendment be null & void?
The point is, the courts just now created a sub-class within a minority.
Actually the proposition is pretty clear that those “marriages” should not be recognized. Just because the judges temporarily changed the definition of marriage from what it had always been. Prop 8 is very clear that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized in CA. Those those should neither be valid nor recognized.
The court opened a can of worms by their prior decision and refusing to stay it until after the proposition had been voted on.
The people who wrote Prop 8 wrote it before the justices had made their original decision and that’s why it is the way it is…
Imagine, letting those inexperieanced and uneducated judges make the decision instead of letting you do so. You obviouly are not only unbiased, but have much more educated and experience than that collectivel shared by the CA Supreme Court justices, right?
I’ve read Prop 8 and there is no specific clause addressing the existing, LEGAL marriages. Where exactly does Prop 8 spell out the disposition of the existing marriages? You’ve obviously read the whole thing and can quote from it, right?
im thankful but equally if not more saddened by the results. my marriage, along with 17.999 other couples in the state are “valid”……look at the population of CA…….thats the size of a small farming community………not even a metropolis (OC/LA/LB)………and to think the leaps and bounds, even more so now, that we will have to fight through to “prove” that we were and are one of THOSE couples. I love my wife, and like those that awaited in front of the court…….SHAME ON YOU SUPREME COURT for not having the sense to do whats right and whats equal……….thank you for taking us back to the Loving case and interracial marriage……………do i have to wait another 40years for the rest of my LGBT brethren to be treated and viewed as equal? SHAME on YOU…….I can go to bed with my spouse tonight with a clear conscious…………but the question is CAN YOU?
No, shame on you for having a twisted conscience and trying to heap shame on the wrong parties!
Shame on you for being an intolerant religious bigot! Who’s next on your list after the gays?
you have no spouse. Ca constitution only recognizes REAL marraiges.
Even if you don’t agree with same sex marriage, you’ve just shamed your entire cause by being as insulting as you were with this person, you know HUMAN BEING.
I’m sorry that something in your life has made you hateful and bigoted against someone who was just born to love differently. As a Christian, I know God still loves you with your bias and hatefulness.
And I apologize for this person for being insulting. Your marriage is valid and only as important as you make it, not some law.
That of course doesn’t take away the absolute shame that the State of California has legally discriminated against so many people merely for how they love.
Actually, the homosexuals have shamed their own cause by all their lying insults, re-defining words to suit themselves, name calling, etc.
And above all calling right what God has called an abomination and calling those who state that all sorts of lying names.
It is really ironic that the homosexuals and their supporters call those who state that homosexuality is wrong or who oppose homosexual marriage all sorts of hateful names, including haters, homophobic, bigots, etc. And yet most of the name calling and hate that I have observed has been by those against Prop 8. And this goes back to way before Prop 8 or Prop 22.
Stop you lying, hateful name calling!
So we’re bigots because we do not agree? Give me a break! I would bet only a gay male would say this. Now you can go start building another union that fits your principles because you’re not the same. You cannot create a baby with your spouse. This is why god made the opposite sex for the two to create a human life and you, as a gay couple cannot do this together as one.
The marriage was legal at the time it was performed. Therefore, it is a real marriage.
No, actually it’s a legal union. Marriage is now defined as between a man and a woman.
The CA Supreme Court says otherwise. Didn’t you read the article or are you saying the law only applies if you agree with it?
Yes I can. I am glad the the courts listened to the voters.
Why don’t you take your efforts to have civil unions viewed the same as a marriage for hetro couples? I would have approved that. Marriage is for a man and a woman. I object to you wanting to change what the majority believe. Your union is different. You and your wife cannot have children the way a man and a woman can. You need a third party. It is not biologically possible. That makes you different.
I agree that you should be able to be legally recognized as a couple just as I am with my wife but I object to the use of the word marriage.
And since when is marriage a constitutional right?
Lol. Poor judges they wanted to get re-elected now look what they’ve got themselves into.
And as for Jerry Brown, don’t expect him to be elected gov next year.
California politicians are sad.
This is a good day! The will of the people prevails !!!
Amen!
Sadly as history has taught us the “will of the People” is not always what is fair and just. We now have a system of Marriage that divides people into three classes. We have the “Traditional Marriage” group that has decreed that they have an exclusive “Right” to this state sanctioned recognition. We have the “Did it before it was Banned” group whose Marriage will be looked at as a sham and improper by the “Traditional” group. Finally we have those that nay have a “Civil Union” which they are told is just like “Marriage” except for all of the Benefits like survivorship, Inheritance, custody, and even being able to see your partner in the Hospital. It appears that our nation is still stuck in the early 1900s and many believe that Separate is equal as long as they get their way!
Stop trying to re-define marriage to suit yourselves!
The lies get tiring including all those claims that it was biological except that all those supposed indications that way have not panned out so that we are back to the American Psychological Assoc stating that they don’t know what makes a person gay.
And stop trying to force recognition of your immoral behavior!
OC4Truth - I’ll stop if you’ll stop trying to force your unbiblical immoral behaviours on us.
and the fight continues …
Sorry Tina, regardless of how one voted, it’s a misnomer to equate the issue of gay marriage with equality, or civil rights, because legalized marriage is an entitlement, not a right. It’s dispensed only to those who meet a strict criteria, and among that criteria is the requirement that those in a legal marriage be of opposing gender.
The state supreme court made the right decision, because Prop 8 was legally sound, and properly enacted. The court also correctly ruled that existing gay marriages should be valid, because they entered into a valid marriage at a time when same gender marriage was legal.
Yeah, and one of the “requirements” used to be that the parties entering into the marriage be of the same race…. Was that fair or just?
The court issued an unconstitutional decision in part when they decided to let those same sex marriages stand. Prop 8 is very clear that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid OR RECOGNIZED in CA.
It never should have even gone to the court in the first place. It merely confirmed the long standing understanding of marriage and all those who are so incensed about this are not being truthful or realistic.
The earlier court decision was the major change in the constitution by temporarily changing the definition of marriage. This restores it to what it has always been understood to be.
Wow OC4truth, you might want to go back to 8th grade civics class. The courts decision to maintin the 18,000 marriages is not unconstitutional, because they just determined this morning that it was consistitutional. Get over it…nothing can be done to invalidate the 18,000 marriages that are now, and forever, legally recognized in the state of California. I am happily–and LEGALLY–married to my husband who I have known for 15 years. And there is absolutely NOTHING you can do about it now!!
Californian’s don’t want gay marriage. How many times do we have to vote on this? It’s done gays. If you don’t like it move to a state that want’s it. You’ve lost and will never win. Remember hispanics will be the majority here soon and they are mostly Catholic and conservative on this issue. You can accept it and move on or continue to whine luck a bunch of babies and further irriate more people in the process. Maybe you’ll irritate us enough and will go after your domestic partnerships next. What a great day for California. Finally some good news.
wow…Californians huh? I think you mean 56% of people who actually voted. You may be part of that majority - but you do not by any means speak for all of CALIFORNIA.
Actually WOW…those that vote DO speak for California. That is the nature of VOTING. I see that this is too difficult of a concept for you to grasp. If people want to SPEAK for CALIFORNIA…then they should VOTE.
If people like Finally really believes what they say they’d stop pushing parental notification measures on the ballot which have been rejected three times already.
While a majority vote is defined as more than 1/2 it absolutely does not speak for this state as a whole. As you can see I’m a Californian and your opinion does not line up with mine…or the 46% of voters who voted against prop 8.
If California did not want gay marriage then all of this would never have happend and those who are married now would have never been offered the chance…. so think about the facts
The facts are:
1) In 2000, Californians passed Proposition 22 stating that marriage should be between one man and one woman.
2) Those who want to redefine marriage took the issue to court. And, in May of 2008, eight years later, 4 of 7 judges in the California State Supreme Court voted to overturn Proposition 22 and allow same-sex marriage. The State Supreme Court also denied a request to “stay” the decision until Proposition 8 was decided later in the year.
3) In November of 2008, Californians again declare that marriage should be between one man and one woman by passing Proposition 8.
4) In May of 2009, the State Supreme Court rules that Proposition 8 is valid. And, even though some disagree, the Court had no choice but to let approximately 18,000 same-sex marriages remain recognized because they did not grant the stay requested after their earlier decision.
Those are the facts.
Same-sex marriage is an issue in this State because a group of individuals who want to redefine marriage have made it an issue. And, the group has been successful in achieving their goals using the Court system. However, each time it has been presented to the voters of this State, the voters have been clear that they do not want marriage redefined.
Marriage is not a right. Historically, it is a religious ceremony joining one man and one woman in “holy matrimony”. Today, not only is it a religious ceremony for most, but the State uses it as a “legal instrument” to confer “benefits” to those who are “married”.
Personally, I believe the State should come up with another legal instrument to confer those “benefits” and leave marriage to the religious institutions. This will allow the State to grant the legal instrument to both traditional unions and same-sex unions without redefining marriage. I think this would best serve both sides of this issue.
Actually, I’m a Californian, heterosexual and one of the 48% of voters that do want equality in the law. Please do not be so arrogant to imagine that you speak for me or others. You can only speak for yourself.
Newsom for Governor in 2010 and a new proposition FOR gay marriage.
In time, all good things will come.
but i guess he will need a new campaign manager . lol
Regardless of how WE voted on Prop8, we should recognize that the state supreme court ruled correctly, because they ruled based on the law alone, and not on public opinion.
They already have more rights than I do as a straight guy living with my long-term girlfriend! get over it gays!
Bend over and take the Court’s ruling as a….well, er….MAN! DON’T FIGHT THE FEELING!
As for those 18,000 gay couples that slid in (so to speak) you are just a divorce lawyers dream! 36,000 potential new clients! Welcome to Divorce Court!!
Truth, justice, and the American way prevail … at least on the validity of the people’s voice: Prop 8. The judges wimped out by allowing 18,000 counterfeit marriages.
Nope, sorry. Those marriages are legal.
ca only recognizes man/woman marragies. It’s in the constitution.
Ca’s limit on marriage between a man and a woman was not in effect between may and november of -08. Hence, the sourt ruling to recognize those marriages as valid is not only legally reasonable, it’s the only ruling that’s legally appropriate.
True, with the exception of the 18,000 performed when they were legal. You can argue it all you want, but today the Supreme Court interpreted the consitition and its amdended structure with Propostion 8 that the existing marriages ARE constitutional. You lose and tonight I’ll go home to my LEGAL husband
Good for the judges. The ruling is fair and it’s what the people have voted for…TWICE!
All they did was follow the law. You can’t expect the state Supreme Court to rule against the will of the people all the time.
Sorry fruits you lost again.yes on prop 8..stay in the closet….and repent and be saved..
Jesus weeps for you!
You can’t have it both ways. This court is trying to appease both sides.
What happened to equal protection?
If you uphold prop 8 you must invalidate the marraiges and vice a versa.
Now instead of trying to appease all, everyone pissed off and those supreme court judges are just ripe for a recall.
And protets tonight in Long Beach, in Santa Ana at the Old Court House and all over the state and nation!
Prop 8 passed by a narrow margin, so it’s only a matter of time.
The judges’ ruling actually helps gays because for SURE someone will sue based on their inability to marry yet other gays are married.
Swooning Moon says, “Prop 8 passed by a narrow margin, so it’s only a matter of time”…based on the cowardly conduct of many gays and their sympathizers since their defeat at the polls….. they will lose by an even larger margin. You would have been much smarter to try honey versus vinegar and you bit off your nose to spite your face….the next time I’ll open my wallet against prop 8…and I’m far from the only one…oh well
What cowardly conduct are you referring to?
Protesting?
oooooo!
I am glad the supreme court upheld the prop. It is a SAD day when the majority of CA votes on something a the court feels they can over turn it. We live in a democracy not a totalitarian society. People vote and that is what stands. If the court can over rule the people then what else with they change and over rule? No matter what your beliefs are NO ONE should be happy with the supreme court having the power to over rule a majority vote. Think if the shoe was on the other foot. All you would be singing a different tune. This all boils down to the rights to vote and right to have the vote counted and the result upheld.
So if we decide to put a measure on the ballot to take away the rights of religious groups (like tax-exemption status) and it passes, you will be ok with that? If the growing Hispanic population decides to approve “Spanish-only” language requirements or that “white folk” shouldn’t have certain rights you will be just fine with that? Do you really think that the majority of people in California approve of your Bible thumping ways? They may agree by a narrow margin for now on this one issue, but I’d love to see your rights put to a vote cause I think you’d lose. let’s start with eliminating your tax-exemption. Tax the cults to pay for the budget deficit.
Actually we live in a constitutional republic.
Well its a good day in part in that part of the will of the people prevails, although the court had opened a can of worms with their original wrong-headed decision re-defining marriage.
Homosexuals seem to have a problem with the meaning of words. They seem to change the meaning as it suits them, trying to redefine marriage, trying to make this a civil rights issue rather than what it actually is the fundamental definition of marriage and their attempts to undermine and change it. Not to mention all the name calling and calling anyone who disagrees with them a hater, etc.
100% true!!!
This may come as a shock to oc4truth but words often have multiple meanings. As proof, oc4truth, often confuses the colloquial meaning of theory with the scientific meaning. This issue is not, nor has it ever been, about a definition. It is about civil rights and marriage, according the United States Supreme Court, is a fundamental right. People like oc4truth will only be happy will all rights are taken away and we live in a theocracy.
That’s because people such as yourself cannot admit to anyone and even yourself that you hate homosexuals, and that makes people like you the real cowards. You are motivated primarily by hate and fear, but you are afraid to admit it. Why don’t you just admit that you hate homosexuals? You might feel better and if you would quit lying to yourself and everyone else.
the courts ruled on the legality of prop. 8 not for or against gay marriage. the will of the people was upheld.
woot!
those darn activist judges! *rolls eyes*
so while states like iowa are being more progressive than california (who would have thought, seriously!) we’re stuck in the 1950s.
change is inevitable. this is just a speed bump
Move to Iowa if you don’t accept the people votes!
The war is not over. Looking forward to the next round.
“Although the court split 6-1 on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the justices were unanimous in deciding to keep intact the marriages of as many as 18,000 gay couples who exchanged vows before the election.
The case for overturning the initiative was widely viewed as a long shot. Gay rights lawyers had no solid legal precedent on their side, and some of the court’s earlier holdings on constitutional revisions mildly undercut their arguments.
But gay marriage advocates captured a wide array of support in the case, with civil rights groups, legal scholars and even some churches urging the court to overturn the measure. Supporters of the measure included many churches and religious organizations.”
The majority wins
The majority wins….Accepted-If you don’t agree to just move to the states that accepted that way you don’t waste time and money…Stop the protests we need that energy to move forward and have a better State..
And So the people of the state of California has Spoken one more time, And again we will have to vote on this matter next year, and again the voices will be heard and again will go to the supreme court and well you get the picture where I’m going with this.
Try to do this in South Korea or Cuba - you wish….
I can’t help but feel that we are reliving the early 60’s again. I am a straight man happily married to my wife of 20 years, and watching this unfold like the civil rights movement. I see the position of allowing gays a “civil union” instead of marriage as the same position taken by the bigots of the 60’s who felt that blacks also only deserved “separate, but equal” facilities.
Thank you! Again, it used to be that one of the criteria for being allowed to legally married was that both parties had to be of the same race… just as bigoted and narrow minded…geez…
The judges respect the peoples vote… I am glad for that!
100% Agree - The majority wins!!!
No, judges respectected the law. Regardless of how we voted on Porp8, we should be grateful that we have a supreme court that rules as a matter of law, and not a matter of public opinion.
Well, I guess Jedrow who lives in the farm will have to let Betty the sheep go. The marriage is null and void as of today.
Good!
I guess I’ll just have to BBQ some more ribs this weekend. Or maybe I’ll smoke a nice brisket with some ranch beans and a salad.
If the pro gay marriage group would simply campaign on the truth which is “WE WANT SPECIAL RIGHTS” they might actually be able to make a legitimate argument.
Everyone currently has EQUAL rights. We all have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. NO ONE has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. Pretty cut and dry, equal rights!
The issue here is that they want special rights, rights that no one else currently has in this state.
It’s not a right if there are stipulations. Once there are stipulations, it becomes a privilege.
Well I guess marriage is a privilege not a right. So now we all have the same privileges. except those 18,000 who have a special privilege.
Or they might want the rights other couples have.. huh
The federal government denies same-sex couples 1,138 benefits because of marriage inequality.
Yes the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NOT STATE does deny those BENEFITS.
Individuals have rights not groups. In order for there to be equality all individuals need to have the same rights. Philosopher is dividing people into different groups by gender and advocating special rights for each group. His comment is self contradictory.
Blacks started their fight for equal rights in the 20s. The fight really didn’t get started until the 40s. The fight reached its height in the 60s.
Gays have the right to fight for their rights as American Citizens. If you people (Marco) don’t like it, you are the ones who should move because the fight will continue until gays have equal rights.
Could you tell us what rights gays don’t currently have?
Section 879 of Title 18 is just one of the 1,138 federal laws that apply to Americans who are married. Taken together, these statutes offer substantial lucre to anyone who weds. For instance, the law allows Phil to give his wife Liz all the money he wants, tax free — even if the money is part of a divorce settlement. But gays who get gifts from their partners (or exes) must pay taxes on the goods as though the partners were mere acquaintances. This disparity is most searing at the end of life. According to figures from the Human Rights Campaign, a gay-rights-advocacy group, if Jane dies and leaves a 401(k) worth $162,000 to Heather (who makes, say, $30,000 a year), Heather’s tax bill will rise from $3,000 to more than $49,000. If Heather were Heath, however, he would pay nothing more.
Those are FEDERAL laws not STATE.
However, since a gay man can marry a gay woman, those same benefits apply.
It is currently the gay community that doesn’t want to apply themselves to the rules of society. There is no discrimination based only on one sexual preferences.
I think your post was wonderful and lucid, but unfortunately wasted on the anti-SSM crowd here. They basically don’t care about us or our relationships and pretty much wish we would just go away. You will find that, while many of them claim to be tolerant, they wish that pretty much everyone else unlike them would go away, too. They long for the days when it was clear who was “right” and who was not, the “right” sort of people being white, heterosexual, and Protestant.
The judges respected the peoples vote, they upheld the law, and will of the people, plain and simple. The people of this state voted, and they said yes to a ban. Whether it is fair or unfair, the will of the majority spoke! I am gay man, and while I feel that all consenting adults should have the right to marriage, I have to respect the will of the people, and the ruling of the court. I am sure I will be attacked for feeling this way, but I fear the day that the courts will start overturning the will of the people, then where are we?
So you don’t fear a country that allows citizens to eliminate rights?
Neat!
Do not spin this Swooning Moon. I fear a Government that ignores the will of the people, and that would not be “neat.”
Their were no “rights” eliminated with the passing of Prop 8.
Gay marriage is still allowed. A gay man can marry a gay woman. It will be recognized on both the state and federal levels.
To say that the gay community has been deprived of rights is a blatant lie.
Just because you don’t like the rules doesn’t mean that your ‘rights’ have been eliminated. It just means that you don’t like the rules.
These “rights” are given to all of us by our Constitution. The Constitution can be amended by the vote of us citizens. So in answer to your question, I don’t fear a country that allows citizens to amend their constitution.
By your standard, Our Constitution could never be changed and many in the U.S. would still own slaves, and women and minorities would not be allowed to vote (13th & 19th Amendments to the Constitution).
Swooning, I would fear a country that doesn’t allow citizens to amend their Constitution.
BTW, I voted No on 8, but I respect the process and results.
That is what I am screaming. People need to put their opinion of the subject to the side and look at what they are wanting the court to do. They want the court to take away the right to vote basically. We have the right to vote and because CA voted for prop 8 those who oppose 8 want the majorities rights taken away for their “equal” rights. Well then we should all rise up and have the courts take away our right to drive a car, to eat in a restaurant, to go to school. People are so blinded by their emotions over the issue they are willing to give their US consitutional rights away.
In one of the most liberal states in the Union, the liberal voters who overwhelmingly elected Obama, overwhelmingly defeated same sex marriage TWICE. Part of a democracy is letting the voters decide. Enough already. Iowa needs you!
Thanks to Obama, who galvanized all Californians, including Blacks, to vote. Unfortunately about 90% of Blacks voted Yes on Prop 8. Isn’t that something ? Next time like 2010 we need more Black leaders to occupy the legislators offices in Sacramento.
You see even blacks KNOWthis is not a civil right issue.
I wonder whose rights will be stripped away the “Christian” mob? Hatred begets hatred. Insensibility leads to injustice.
Asking that the definition of marriage stays between a man and a woman is hatred? Why? No one is denying the right of the gay community to exist, survive, thrive or go about their way.
There is no intolerance shown. If you say that this is intolerant, couldn’t the same be said that you are intolerant to an opposing viewpoint as well?
Ok, let me get this straight… (pardon the pun)
-Homosexual marriage between two consenting legal US citizens is illegal in California by the courts views.
-Free social services for illegal immigrants, the right to give jobs to illegal immigrants without giving them legal benefits or a living wage, and using the identity and social security number of other US citizens, without the risk of prosecution, is LEGAL in California by the courts views .
California is on the brink of collapse, and people here wonder why (rolling eyes).
THANK YOU!
First of all, I don’t understand why there is such a fuss about letting gay people get married. If you are opposed to it because of beliefs, great, tell your church / synagogue / whatever that you want them to refuse to wed these couples. But it’s not the states place to make these decisions.
Second, to me it’s more than simply not allowing people to get married. It’s banning people from doing something based on who they are. By definition, that is discrimination. And discrimination is wrong, regardless of whether people vote on it or not. So now, our State Constitution contradicts itself. Think about this, what would happen if there was a Proposition on the ballot that said that people under 5 foot tall could not get married? What if that proposition passed? Would it not be considered discrimination?
One of two things needs to happen now. We either abolish this new ban on gay marriage, or we get rid of the non-discrimination laws in our state constitution.
A great day indeed. Too much money was wasted on an issue that could have easily been decided to by what God has to say in the his bible about marriage.
marrige is not a fundamental right. This is NOT a civil rights issue and if I were black, I would be pi55ed that you are comparing it to that. When have homosexuals been treated like sub-humans? When have been salves? When were they forced to sit at the back of the bus, drink from separate water fountains, and go to separate bathrooms, etc, etc. The commercials before the election compare the gay issue with the Japanese internments during WWll. How ridiculous was that? Gays have never been put in camps. Now the name calling will be louder and the accusation of bigotry will be louder. And yes this will be on the ballot again and will probably pass, but the argument will never be over.
Yours are common examples, but if you have ever been a member of a minority, you know that there are as many forms of discrimination as there are bigots. Have you ever been accused of lying about who you are, of leading a “lifestyle” you have chosen even if it is as natural to you as breathing? Have you ever been compared to a pedophile or called a “deviant” because you are not like everyone else? Have you been told that you are going to hell because of who you are, or that you are a whiner and complainer because you have the supposed audacity to demand equal rights?
Open your eyes, if you dare. There is hate all over this board and all over the world for that matter. Issues change, but people don’t.
Remove your emotions from the conversation and look at the premise of the debate.
The gay community said that by not allowing gay marriage, they were being discriminated against.
In truth, any gay person in the US has always had the right to marry. A gay man can marry a gay woman in any state of the union and it will be federally recognized as a valid marriage. As such, there is NO discrimination due to an individuals sexual orientation.
This is not discrimination. This is one group of individuals who don’t like the rules and have manipulated the public in order to change them. The gay community has every right to want to change the rules. But it should never be done through blatant lies and pure manipulation.
Moreover, had the gay community not gone to such extensive lengths to replace traditional definitions in the schools, the backlash from the public probably wouldn’t have been near as large as we saw. Pushing the issue on children is an especially bad idea considering that 99% of the children in school are children of heterosexual couples. But the gay communities intolerance to opposing viewpoints caused additional anger that led to prop 8.
Prop 8 had nothing to do with schools.
It did. By legalizing gay marriage, they demanded the that gay marriage be taught in schools.
If you think it didn’t, you really need to go back and read the newspapers over the last 12 months. That is what made some of the biggest headlines.
If your going to make progress with people that have opposing viewpoints, you discuss the real issues at hand, not force it down their throats.
Seriously your only response is it “has nothing to do with schools”, what about the rest of the comment. You have nothing to say about it because it valid, right.
And yes it has everything to do with schools. That is why a majority of the voters between 18 & 27 voted against prop 8. We are being taught that it’s okay to be Doubting of our sexuality and if we oppose this view we get bad grades.
“In truth, any gay person in the US has always had the right to marry. A gay man can marry a gay woman in any state of the union and it will be federally recognized as a valid marriage. As such, there is NO discrimination due to an individuals sexual orientation.”
This has to be the DUMBEST analogy ever…
Perhaps is you understood the definition of discrimination, then you would better understand the truth of the current situation.
You don’t have to like it … but you should make your arguments based on fact, not emotion.
Why is it that you people cant just get over the fact that we won. Its just the way it’s suppost to be. Please tell me why you gays hate on us so much for our beliefs. It’s what we believe in. WE VOTED WE WON!!! It’s our beliefs. We are not going to change them.. most of you are hypocrites. Let me tell you just one reason I am so against it. A while back i heard a story about a gay couple that went into a drs. office and wanted to concieve a baby. The dr. nicely said it is against my beliefs but here is the name of a dr. that will be happy to help you. Instead of that couple walking out and saying thank you, we will check this dr. out. THEY SUED THE DR. for his beliefs. HYPOCRITES if you want us to respect you then you gays should respect us….
Because your beliefs violates their rights. It’s not that difficult. You can believe all you want but it shouldn’t dictate laws.
When it’s finally made legal you will have to understand that discrimination is not legal only because you believe it should be.
They had a right to sue, he had a right to refuse. It’s how the system works. You had a right to vote, we have a right to disagree and put it to vote again.
That’s how the system works. And another sad reality? Younger people don’t support your discrimination and it’s only a matter of time.
FINALLY, the Will of the People prevails!!! The judges finally ruled on law instead of legislating from the bench.
It is a disgrace to compare this to the civil rights movement. Back in the 50’s being openly gay was not tolerated, but as long as the person was white and stayed in the closet, nobody would bother them. Black people could not do that and it’s terrible what many went through. There are folks out there who used to be gay and are now straight (and vice versus), but does anyone know anybody who used to be black. Please don’t say Michael Jackson because the guy is whacked and even though he has light skin, he still considers himself black.
Ihroughout history just about every race and religion has experienced discrimination and oppression. I don’t think this is about so-called civil rights anymore.
Then don’t think of it like a black/white issue. Would it be ok if we said that Jewish people cannot get married?
People have stopped being jewish.
The law doesn’t state that gay people can’t get married.
It says that marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman. So again, a gay man can marry a gay woman. There is no discrimination in the current law.
2010. Ballot Measure. Nothing is EVER won, when it comes to civil rights.
Thanks!
What about our rights? I say stay with the same rights we have had for eternity. You can’t just change a definition of a word because you decided you wanted to be with the same sex.
The rights of over 90% of Californians that are heterosexual were not effected by same sex marriage.
wrong, they’re being infringed upon. go marry a goat
Yes they were. They were trying to get special right. Can we get special right to like Drivers licenses for illegal aliens?
Wrong, all heterosexuals are still able to do all the things they were before gays were allowed to marry. Gays were not given any special rights.
Regardless of which side you’re on - today’s decision is a good thing because “the will of the people” prevailed. When “the will of the people” changes the law will change. This is how America (and California) works. “We the People” When the courts start overturning the will of the people we will cease being free and cease being America.
The people of California have now voted and WON, as we require traditional marriage the way it has been for eternity between one man and one woman. So stop fighting the customary traditions that we would like to remain.
Marriage has not been between one man and one woman for eternity. Overly dramatic statements like the one from ingodwetrust show ignorance of the issues and prejudice of the person.
Prove me wrong then.
According to Ethnographic Atlas Codebook 85% of societies historically have been polygamous. A practice that is still common in many cultures today.
Hey Gays:
Just be happy that Hallmark is finally making gay greeting cards! Go buy your husband, wife, whatever, a few cards that tells him/her how much you would love a drive down Hershey Hwy tonight!
Hey Straight but Narrow,
Get over it. Your cheesy jokes can’t change the fact that our state just took one small step toward legitimizing same-sex marriage today…there are now 36,000 same sex people legally and constitutionally married and there is nothing you can do about it.
I haven’t seen a card yet that says to the bride and bride or the groom and groom. By the way they won’t be selling many in California now.
So let’s see: the ban on gay marriages is upheld but the 18,000 gay marriages are allowed to remain valid. This will create a wave of confusion and adminstrative nightmares in many public and private sectors. Our government really knows how to screw things up. As usual, they do not give any consideration to the practical implications of their decisions. This was a moronic decision.
The California Supreme Court did an excelent job!
straight as an arrow- Thats Pretty Funny LMAO !!!!
18,000 gay couples married before the election will stay wed
Can you right wing nuts handle this?
Who’s the hater here with your hateful name calling? Of course name calling is a sign of a weak argument.
To all the gays and lesbians and their supporters: CRY A RIVER…BUILD A BRIDGE…GET OVER IT!!!! It’s over. You lost.
The will of the people has prevailed. “WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT” Lol.
This is makijg baby Jesus cry!!! Friggin heathens..
Its not about equality folks. It’s about bowing down to the homosexual agenda or be called a bigot
SHAME ON YOU SUPREME COURT!!! , SHAME, SHAME, SHAME
My grandpa is a Mexican-American, born in the early 1920s and raised right here in Orange County. He had to face real discrimation like not being able to drink out of water fountains and he wasn’t allowed to go into movie theatres. It is absolutely appalling to see this whole gay marriage being equated to civil rights.
Everyone is able to get married (to the opposite sex). Let’s stop confusing the issue here. Marriage has always been defined as between a man and a woman for life. Not for money. Not for fame. Not to gain citizenship fradulently. Not in order to have an “open marriage.” I think gay couples should be able to have the same rights, but in a civil union, but that’s because marriage has always been definted between two people of the opposite sex. It’s a matter of definition.
P.S. I’m sick and tired of all these liberals trying to change the definition of EVERYTHING and trying to confuse every issue.
Very well said realoc!
I think gays would be willing to accept Civil Unions if they came with ALL the rights marriage does. Current Domestic Partnerships do not.
That’s actually not true. CA domestic partnership law expressly state that persons in civil unions are granted the same protections and benefits as legal marriage.
Except for all the laws and rules that don’t cover them. A DP can be forced to testify against his partner in court, but a husband can’t. That’s just one example. And you can’t get Social Security benefits, tax refunds etc. there’s lots of stuff out there you can’t get with a DP.
Except there are 1,138 federal laws that apply to Americans who are married. Those laws do not apply to californians in Domestic Partnerships.
“”Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ” is one of the most famous phrases in the United States Declaration of Independence. These three aspects are listed among the “inalienable rights” of man.”
While it is true that everybody has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, the right to the pursuit of hapiness is the issue the Federal Courts will have to address.
Nuf sed. Now shut up !!!!
Given the fact that half of hetro-marraiges end up in divorce, what’s the big deal, it’s only a word. The legal rights of common gender unions are the same. Why worru about a single word when the backers of Prop. 8 are hateful souls to begin with?
More lies by the same sex marriage supporters, accusing those who believe homosexual marraige is wrong of being hateful, homophobic, etc.
Actually most of the hate that I have seen displayed about this issue is by the homosexuals and their supporters. I do not hate homosexuals, nor am I afraid of them. And I do not try to force words to be re-defined to suit myself.
I don’t hate you. I pray for you, OC4Truth. God knows you need it….
You might not be hating on OC4Truth but what about all those protesters who are out in the streets right now.
Its not about equality folks. It’s about bowing down to the homosexual agenda or be called a bigot…….
Well said NoUCant!
Its not about equality folks. It’s about bowing down to the homosexual agenda or be called a bigot………………………………………………..
Freedom of religion only applies if you are the majority, no matter how slight the margin. I suppose this means voters can also ban interracial marriage as well. Maybe marriage should not be be recognized by government if it is not free?
Wrong. Freedom of religion applies to all. That was not the issue here. And it was not only religious people who opposed same sex marriage.
Quit trying to confuse the issue by re-defining marriage. Marriage has and is defined as between a man and a woman. Interractial marriage was still between a man and a woman and it being banned was a temporary phenomenon in the history of marriage.
When you try to claim that marriage should be re-defined to suit yourselves and that failure to do so violates equal protection then you also open things up to the same argument for polygamy and incestuous marriages, etc.
It had not been previously spelled out in the state constitution before that marriage was between 1 man and 1 woman because it hadn’t been considered necessary–that was just the definition of marriage.
Time is on the side of equality. Maybe not today, but soon.
Drew:
Bet your parents are proud of their daughter-in-law, what’s her name…..BOB?
I’ll bet that you could NEVER land a chick when you were younger so you jumped the fence! Studies show that most gay men, especially, were unable to find a mate of the opposite sex so they “stayed at home” or should I say homo?
Studies also show that gay do not “know” they are gay at early ages. We all played with barbie Dolls when we were young and had sisters. Difference is, when us normal guys grew up, we played with real life Barbies, not Kens!
Early age homosexuality is a cop out to “not able to get laid by a chick” syndrome! You freaks are, well FREAKS!!!!
Wow. Project much? Can you cite these “studies”. NO, because you pulled then out of your ass. Why not try doing the same with your head?
Actually my parent who is still living was in my LEGAL wedding held in 2008 and is proud to have a son in law. As were hundreds of other family members and friends in attendance.
Your personal attacks really do lessen your effectiveness on here. I would love for you to specifically cite any studies you have. Oh wait, you can’t, unless they were in a Golden Book. And by the way I was in our prom royal court so your assertion that I couldn’t land a “chick”…let alone a hot popular one…just flew out the window. And c’mon, using the word “chick”? Wow you really are a master of modern intelligence!
Bottom line, tonight I am opening up a bottle of wine with my legal husband, to toast our good fortune as one of the 18,000 constitutionally legally married couples, and to vow to help the others not so fortunate move on the path to equality.
Straight AS An Arrow
Apparently that arrow is sticking straight up your…. well, you get the picture. Please cite these “studies” and remember that I’m a heterosexual, Republican grandfather. I’m just not that big on intolerance, hatred and religious dogma being written into law.
What’s worse than a Somalian Pirate? A Butt Pirate!!!
Will you be here all night? What are you, 12?
Great day.
What the no on prop 8 people should be fighting for is the forcing of employers to give them the same benefits. If they did that then they would pass with a land slide.
Leave marriage where it is. Just call it a civil union and everyone gets along.
YES ON 8!
Separate but equal is so 1950’s. Give it time, you soon will be in the minority. Progress sucks huh?
Separate but equal is not even an issue here. They want special rights in support of a depraved lifestyle.
Legal documents can be drafted to make up for any perceived deficiencies in their civil unions. They are denied nothing. If they want to deviate, they can, but don’t expect people to roll out the red carpet for them to do so.
There is no way for a homosexual couple to draw up documents that would rewrite tax law!
Gays who get gifts from their partners (or exes) must pay taxes on the goods as though the partners were mere acquaintances
Melanie I don’t roll out the red carpet for your depraved lifestyle, but I supported a law that says we can’t fire you for your depraved beliefs. Yes, Christians like you can’t be fired from their jobs even though you weren’t born that way, you have to recruit to increase your membership, and go after our children to get more converts and seek public tax dollars and special rights to protect your “lifestyle.’ You chose to be the way you are and while I disagree with your “lifestyle” the constitution does provide you the equal rights to pursue that and I will leave it to God to judge you for the Biblical laws that you are breaking. (Speaking of which, Paul says women are to be silent in public and should ask their husband for permission to speak. Did you do that? If not, then please follow the Bible and wait until you have that permission, please)
According to estimates. If you ar not Hispanic, given time, you will be in the minority too. Hispanics and Blacks overwhelmingly supported Prop. 8.
Marriage is for losers! Gay or straight.
Who wants deal with the same person day after day after day after day after week after week after week after week after month after month after month after month after year after year after year after year after decade after decade after decade after decade…and some of you married nuts think it goes on for ETERNITY! F that!
quite funny, actually.
Even Laguna Beach has gotten rid of most of the prostate pushers in town as well as their semen gathering bars/clubs.
The people voted on this twice.
Woo Hoo!
No what are the Nancy’s going to try now?
GOOD!!!!
Lovely. The State of California has passed and upheld an ILLEGAL ruling.
And if gay marriage is a threat to YOUR marriage then I am so sorry about your marriage.
Wow schoolboy johnadams you are in fact a piece of work.
Straight as an Arrow - I am strong strong supporter of prop 8 but you to chill out.
Your remarks are not helping anything. Grow up please.
Even though we may not agree on how they choose to live thier lives we can still show respect to everyone even though many from the other side did not return the favor. You are just like those people from the no on 8 side that we retarded in thier comments towards us.
I hope you can see what a tool you are making yourself out to be.
I think that is “STRAIGHT’s” intention
Now can we finally move on the real issue… let’s make sure gays have equal rights.
I recommend an update to the domestic partnership laws.
Dave’s not here!
Not here?
People should be given a psychological exam prior to being given a marriage license.
The exam should have one question; WHY would you want to spend every freaking day with the same person? Are you nuts?
Well, now it is official there are 18,000 same sex couples out there that prove that marriage isn’t just for one man and one woman.
The next battle is in 2010.
By 2010 that number of 18,000 will more likely than not be around 9,000.
it only proves that the state by way of some activist judges went crazy for 9 months, until a proper ballot measure could be raised for the fall election. that is all it proves (ask any legal expert).
It is a sad sad day for the people of CA. I am straight and appalled. It is sad to see that some people don’t want others to have their own happiness.
I don’t really understand why gay marriage is getting precedence over polygamous marriage.
Same sex marriage is a recent invention but polygamy has been around as long as marriage commitment ceremonies have been, and all over the world.
Correction to the polygamy laws should be addressed before we even begin to debate the same sex thing. This is nothing more than religious and cultural discrimination.
another sad day in american justice, where u uphold a decision that adheres to a unconstitutionality, where as we decide it is ok for these people to marry but not anymore so it is ok before but not know and it is not the majority that ruled on this only those that voted. We have to look beyond our prejudices and look at it as a civil rights matter.
there’s nothing unconstitional about modifying the state constitution to protect our common sense instututions from those with some crazy mad agenda.
Ok, first of all, the church official who likened this decsion to Apartheid is being ridiculous. Secondly, even if gay marriage was legalized (which I’m sure it will be some day as all traditional values are going to eventually become historical footnotes), it doesn’t mean everybody is going to suddenly be accepting of the gay lifestyle — a good chunk of this country will never be ok with it, nor do they have to be. I’m sure it’s going to take a long time for people to change their thinking about a thousands year old institution like marriage. Even though plenty of heteros have made the institution of marriage a joke, a lot of us still take it seriously. And I personally don’t want to have to qualifiy what I’m married to, a man or a woman. It doesn’t mean I’m anti-gay, but this is a sea change being requested and it takes time. I also think it is going to be confusing for children. “You mean I can marry a boy or a girl when I grow up????” I don’t really want to have that conversation with my kid. And if you’re living in a place like California, are you really telling me with a straight face that you can’t get into the hospital to see your partner, or get benefits? Get the right lawyer, set up a trust, you can get whatever you want. Find another way to join that isn’t “marriage” and get all your “rights” with my blessing, but let traditional families hang onto our little slice of society.
I don’t want or seek your approval because chances are I don’t approve of yours. It’s not about approval, but about the fact that we both have the right to marry the person of our choice. The right to live your life according to your own religious beliefs, even when they clash with others, is the whole point of the Freedom of Religion. You can’t pass laws that deny me the right to live my life according to my intepretation of the Bible - so long as that interpretation does not harm others. Divorce, adultery, parents molesting their children, and all the other things that destroy marriage have been around a lot longer than gay marriage so you can’t claim that gay marriage causes any individual harm. gays are simply going to clean up marriage the way we have so many of the crappy neighborhoods you left behind. We’ll gentrify marriage the way we do those run down neighborhoods.
I don’t know if your reply was to me or somebody else — I don’t get the “crappy neighborhoods” thing. As for the other things that have destroyed the institution of marriage, I don’t deny there are many negative influences that have hurt marriage. But where does it stop — everything’s going to hell so what’s one more thing???? It’s that whole slippery slope thing. Gays can marry, why can’t I marry my 14 year old cousin? I mean, that’s who I love, so why can’t I do it. My main concern is how it changes our society, just as your main concern is your rights under the law. Who knows, maybe the world will be a better place with gay marriage. I’m just saying it’s going to be a source of confusion for kids for the foreseeable future and that could be construed as harmful. It’s a mental hurdle for a lot of people, obviously including me.
I’m sure there were lots of white kids confused when the black kids started to come to their schools (or weren’t out picking cotton anymore), and kids were confused when Mommy went to the polls to vote too. And no one is syaing kids have to be taught about gay marriage. that was a red herring. They can be taught TODAY about that according to law. having marriage doesn’t change that.
Wow I feel bad for you kid(s) if you have any. Supportive parent of the year right here.
Colleen, what exactly is the “gay lifestyle”? I feel like there is some identical way of life that all gay people are supposed to be living but for the life of me I can’t get an answer. Does is have something to do with housing, automobiles, or china patterns? Please enlighten me because I want to make sure that I am truly adhering to the “gay lifestyle.” I’ll await your answer. Thanks.
P.S. If you could also tell me, by contrast, what is the “heterosexual lifestyle” then that may provide a basis for comparison.
Schoolboy? Why am I a piece of work? Because I tell the truth about your child molesting religion? The same relgion that used tax-free money to sway an election with lies? I can back this claim up with thousands of years of proof. Just ask for it.
You just believe you’re so clever. You may have been brainwashed through out your young years but you cannot change the fact that we the voters have made a decision here in California and that should be the end. By the way- if you’re going to bring up the Priest that have embarrassed the catholic religion don’t bother as we Catholics don’t put up with that. There are always going to be some piece of work somewhere in our lives.
Unconstitutional? Oh brother the vocabulary just keeps getting better and better.
Since the court says it’s ok to vote to take away rights. I propose an amendment to eliminate the tax exempt status of the faux religions like the Mormons, Scientologists and Hare Krishna. (My Bible and church taught me that these are cults and if the Bible says so, then it must be enshrined in law) That would go aways towards helping to get more revenues to pay for prisons and schools. All it takes is a majority. Let’s have the Mormon’s find out what other Christian groups really think about them after they leave the anti-gay marriage meetings. Once you open the door, you just have to hope that there is a majority that agrees with you or you can find out what it means to be part of a minority.
And for all those talking about special rights, the right to not be fired for being a Christian is also part of the same law that says you can’t fire someone for being gay. So you have a special right that non-religious people have. But it guess it’s not so “special’ when it’s a law that protects you.
Sharona, this is NOT a civil rights issue and if I were black, I would be pi55ed that you are comparing it to that. When have homosexuals been treated like sub-humans? When have been salves? When were they forced to sit at the back of the bus, drink from separate water fountains, and go to separate bathrooms, etc, etc. The commercials before the election compare the gay issue with the Japanese internments during WWll. How ridiculous was that? Gays have never been put in camps. Stop saying that we, who believe in traditional marriage are prejudice. And how do you know it wasn’t the majority? Are you saying that all of the people who didn’t vote were for gay marriages?
It’s a complete double standard. No on 8 people can rant and rave and scream and shout, isulting the beliefs of those that are different.
But the second we say something that differs in opion to thiers; we are the intolerant ones…
Go figure.
AND WELL SAID!
Actually, gays were put into concentration camps and gassed in WWII. They have been fired, arrested, beaten and killed without any legal protection (which they now have). You are speaking from ignorance. While the argument may be overstated, the fact is the kinds of things you are denying really did happen here in California and everywhere else. And I hope your views aren’t Biblically based, because if so are you then advocating that blacks should be slaves again? (Paul says “Slaves obey your master.”) And I hope you’re not a woman, because Paul also says women should be silent in public.
Can’t wait for the next election when this is on the ballot again.
Come to think about it, this ruling will have an interesting effect:
Gays that are married legally (36,000 of them) will be pitted against gays that are NOT legally married. Can you imagine protests amongst the gays at City Hall? Capitol Hill? In our streets!
WOW! Talk about a few thousand cat fights! It’ll make the NHL look like cub scouts meeting. LA/OC gangs BEWARE! There’s a new group of gang members in town!
When they gays get mad, they get REALLY mad! I’m talking, hair pulling, purse-slugging, semen spitting mad! They can turn on each other as quick as they can turn over on each other!!!!! Their break-ups are much worse than War of the Roses!
Just like the gangs in so Cal, we should throw the married gays and the non-married gays into a huge vat and let them have at it while the gang bangers beat and kill each other over cocaine and meth territories!
Maybe Charlie Manson was right: The minorities will riot, kill themselves off, with the remaining few tool dumb to rule and the white man will conquer all!!!!
Gotta love your history!
Yeah, I love history, Because there has never been a civil rights movement in this country that has failed yet. But the ignorant that have opposed them have been reduced to small pockets of teeth gnashing, breast beating circle jerks of frustrated losers.
The gays won’t be pitted against each other. We actually, will all be protesting tonight as one, not against each other.
those people that judge will be judge on their own, like yourself, straightasanarrow, orwhatever your name and you know what is said about that those that protest too much, homosexuality has been around for ages and it is not choice, did u choose to be straight, we are in the 21st century and our country is more tolerant and the new generation does not believe in this and your world of exclusivity will and is coming to an end, we have denied the blacks, and interracial marriage for decades and it was only since the 60’s that we allowed more tolerance and made these 2 issues legal. we shall not seperate this any further, when one part of this special class is given rights and the other is not and this is clearly unconstitutional when you have seperation.
Hey, My Sharona!
Learn to spell correclty! Use spell check!
Take some time to learn history and how to read and write before you go spouting off! Or are you too busy trying to look like a guy!?!?!
religion should have nothing to do with marriage, atheists (much like myself) can get married.
someone elses personal/love life is nobody elses business.
equal taxes, equal rights.
i’m surprised we’re still such an ignorant country.
Straightasanarrow—-Your posts are without class and you do a disservice to those who have legitimate reservations about same-sex marriage.
As a supporter of same-sex marriage ,I welcome your counter-productive comments as good p.r. for my side of the debate.
may I push your stool in
“18,000 gay couples married before the election will stay wed”
Can the bible thumpers handle this?
Nope. BTW: which law school did you graduate from?
Background Info for this who will disagree with me: Not a church goer. Not even for Christmas or Easter although I went to a wedding last year in Tucson and a funeral a couple of years before that. Not a homophobe and I have quite a few friends who are gay.
This is not about civil rights because when you distort the argument to make it a civil right then everything can be called a civil right and once you deem it a right then you have to win every argument. Sadly, this is what the opponents of Prop 8 sought to do. Their premise was/is that if it’s a right I can’t lose and I deserve to win. That’s the fault with their arguments and that’s the extent of my pity party for them.
There is no sexual orientation marriage protection or right. It doesn’t exist and you can’t conjure up a marriage right when one doesn’t exist. There is no Federal interest in who can or cannot get married therefore it’s a State’s rights issue. The citizens can vote to allow same sex marriages or then can vote otherwise. In this case the vote was not to recognize them or stated another way, the citizens of CA have had their right upheld to amend the State constitution to define marriage. That also means they have the right to lose if the definition of marriage is challenged again. This decision means that law meant one thing which allowed 18,000 people to get married and then the law changed. The 18,000 are unquestionably valid because of the changes in the law and for those who are opposed to gay marriage you’ll just have to learn to live with it. That’s the extent of my pity party for you folks.
I’m not opposed to gay marriage and I truly believe there are horribly wrong hetero marriages that on their best days wouldn’t be as loving, caring or filled with devotion as some gay couples in know however I do believe the citizens of CA have the right to define marriage.
As long as the government is the gatekeeper to whether or not you are able to access the rights, responsibilities and benefits of something it is by definition a civil right. The civil government provides the stamp of approval that companies, schools, courts etc look to when determining things as basic as “Can I be compelled to testify against my husband.” So yes, it is a civil right. Civil rights are granted by the voters, the legislature and the courts. A vote of the people only signifies that a majority of the people are now willing to accept that group should have the rights, not the fact that those were valid rights in the first place. And the danger of rights be dependent upon a majority vote is that the majority can change. If san francisco were to vote to abolish straight marriage, should they be allowed to do it simply because a majority said it was ok? By your definition, marriage isn’t a right and so should be subject to the results of a vote.
2 words, civil union. it even has the word civil in it, which should make it even more clear for you.
James,
So many issues in your post that it isn’t possible to address them all except to say that yes, SF could decide to abolish straight marriage however it wouldn’t be upheld because the state constitution supersedes local decisions on the issue. This is the same reason why SF’s restrictive handgun ban was tossed because there was prevailing state law that superseded it.
Civil rights don’t exist merely because you say they do. They specifically carved out in legislation or the constitution. If the legislature wanted to change the law to say that husbands can be compelled to testify against their wives then yes, what was a right can be taken away. The Code of Civil Procedure and the Evidence Code didn’t just magically show up on the bookshelf.
If 10,000 people stood on a street corner and said they were protesting for their right to make blue the color for all cars in the state does that make it a right just because they call it “their right”? Of course not but to them it reflects their belief that it’s a right and once a right is conferred there is this false view that it will always be treated as such.
States are free to define marriage and that definition can change but it’s not a right. There is no right to a hetero marriage just as there is no right to insist that all of us drive blue cars. Right are conferred through either constitutional or legislative process and not because someone has feelings and preferences.
I think you are confusing the definition of rights. Anytime the state can give or take away something, it is a right. There may be an element of privilege to the right, but it is still a right. And those rights can be taken away. i agree with you there. I am saying that you are trying to say marriage isn’t a right, when it is. It has even been called an inalienable right by the courts (under Loving v. Virginia for example). And I am pointing out that rights are a two way street and your right to take away my rights will not mean I don’t ahve the ‘right” to take away yours. So be careful what you wish for lest you end up in the minority when it comes to something you think you have the right to do.
Thank goodenes that Majority Rules still applies somewhere!
Heading out for a few cold beers then I’m going to have sex with my OPPOSITE SEX girlfriend!!!!
Have fun, prostrate plungers!!!!
Is there such a thing as a same sex girlfriend for a Straight as An Arrow male?
weird.
What a class act. I can only imagine the kind of girl who would go out with this loser.
Are you old enough to drink or even drive? Based on your post, I would place your age at about 12.
James says:
“Actually, gays were put into concentration camps and gassed in WWII.”
Really, James? This happened in the USA? Wow, I guess I don’t know my history.
“They have been fired, arrested, beaten and killed (so has any other group) without any legal protection (which they now have).” No legal protection? Where did you get this “fact?”
This is why we cannot take you seriously.
so were the Americans of Japanese heritage, in much greater numbers. this has nothing to do with that. heck, even the Irish (my father’s side) were persecuted if you back far enough. get over it, we did.
Are you saying that Japanese Americans “got over it” and never pressed for laws against discrimination based on race or nationality? That they didn’t work to reverse the laws that said asians couldn’t get married in California? If so, you need to check the law and hisotry books a bit more closely. (And if I misunderstood what you were trying to say, my apologies)
The point was about apartheid and other things that happened worldwide. I’ll keep it to second grade level for you next time. And as for fired, beaten etc. yes, they happened right here in California and in our lifetimes. And I pointed out that there are now legal protections from being fired, arrested without cause etc. Again, I apologize if I was talking over your head or education level.
Prop 8 passed by only a bare majority, and public sentiment is continuing to change. An initiative to legalize gay marriage might well pass in 2010, and if it doesn’t it certainly will by 2012 or 2014 at the latest. Time is on the side of the good guys.
So let the religious bigots enjoy this small victory, it will be the only one they have for a long time.
plus all the old farts die off and new, young voters roll in!
Hey, some of us “old farts” are on your side.
55, Republican, heterosexual and I believe in equality under the law.
Why is it considered intolerant if I don’t believe the view of someone who is gay, but it is not intolerant if someone who is gay doesn’t believe in my views?
Seems a bit hypocritical and backwards.
There is a differencde between ‘I disagree with you and will prevent you from having your rights” and “I disagree with you and will be vehement in expressing my viewpoint while allowing you to keep your rights.” I don’t need your approval, just as you don’t have mine.
True, but those for prop 8 didn’t say that gay couples couldn’t have the same rights as a married person, only that marriage is between man and woman. Marriage is considered a Cermony established by God by those of Christian belief. So, by saying I have to be tolerant of the homosexual lifestyle and allow gay marriage is taking away my right to believe in my religious views.
The rights of a gay couple/union is not part of the proposition. Maybe if the movement by gay couples was to get California to view a civil union with the same “perks” as a marriage of a man and a woman, you would have less uproar.
James stop blogging you are losing credibility with every post
People: 2, Queers: 0
New scoreboard: Bigots 2, Educated people 0
Today is a good day for traditional marriage. I’m still confused, however, as to why gay people want to get married? most all the gay people I know are not believers in God so why would they want to get married in a ceremony that was created by that God and continued by that God’s believer’s as a necessary ceremony? You would think they would prefer a civil union as that has no religious beginnings.
People in Europe who are non believing don’t get married anymore. They see it as a useless religious tradition and its also cheaper on taxes in some countries to be single and living with someone (i.e. Sweden). I don’t get the big deal?
I do understand the ramifications of Gay marriage that pro prop 8 people are concerned about - i.e. gay marriage talk in schools, law suits for people not agreeing with taking pictures of gay weddings or doing invitro for gay couples, and preaching it is morally wrong from a church pulpet, etc. So, I don’t understand why we can’t just have civil unions for gay people and keep traditional marriage for those it was created for (man and woman)?
We want to get married for the same reasons you do. And you must not travel in the right circles of gay people as most of the ones I know are believers and active church goers. And there are no such things as civil unions in California and even if there were they should have to be for all people and then (like Europe) if you want a religious marriage you can go to the church of your choice.
Because most states and Federal law do not grant civil unions the same legal rights, including those associated with tax laws. It’s called discrimination and it’s something we’ve traditionally fought against in this country, remember?
It is the same reason the LGBT movement has adopted the rainbow as thier flag to attack GOD and everything He stands for.
I love watching all the racist bigot christians spewing their hate.
Remember folks, christians are the example of love and tolerance LOL. Maybe if your Hitler.
Funny, I see a lot of gay people who are screaming tolerance, love, and peace, but are just as bigotted as anyone else. So what is your point?
Plus, what does race have to do with this context?
Bigot - definition:
one who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; one who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion …
So… a bigot can be a religious person or a gay person. I don’t see the point of providing the definition of a bigot.
Let me get this straight…
If all the gays were to marry, who would be around to:
(1) Design the “wife’s” wedding dress?
(2) Prepare the flower arrangements?
(3) Make the cute little thingies on the table?
Sounds like the gay weddings would be boring and no very well attended!
PERFECT! Put a huge fence around Palm Springs and let them run rampant naked and doing each other all day long until Henry the Fourth kicks in.
Henry the Fourth=HIV
WTF
can anyone make out what this person is trying to communicate?
no not really.
it’s called “live and let live”, people.
these people just want the right to be MARRIED, not the legalization of methamphetamine.
California…
The West’s refuge for rednecks, bigots and psuedo Christians.
What a joke.
Let me get this straight 2 men or 2 woman who love each other cant get married yet we have how many 24 yr old blondes married to an old rich business man, or thousands of drunken people get married in vegas, or we allow a shitload of 20yr olds get married before they are not even allowed to drink, yeah great work, it totally makes sense! united we stand? equal rights took a punch to the stomach today!
FYI- disagreeing isn’t hate.
When homosexuals can Procreate, I will change my vote on Prop eight. It seems to me, a simple man, that the purpose of sex is procreation. If you cannot procreate in your sex life, than what’s the purpose? Is the fact that our Creator did not create same sex couples to procreate make Him homophobic?
I happen to believe that procreation requires a man and a women because kids require a male and female influence in their lives. If they don’t have that, society is harmed. Just look at all the divorces and what has happened to the children of divorced parents. That’s why the majority of people don’t want gay marraige. You can blame Christians and others all you want, but your rights are the same as mine. Marraige is the same for everyone, not want you want to make it. 5,000 years of marraige between a man and a woman doesn’t all of a sudden make those who support the only definition of marraige there ever has been homophobes. It makes us people of values.
i can honestly say that the upheld was a fair decision cuz it was voted by the people for the people. overturning the people vote could really hurt our system. but gays and lesbians please continue your fight for gay marriage, you will preveal and makes us all equal.
Very sad that I can claim myself married to my man and new folks can no longer do the same. This sets up a system that faghaters love! They want to pit us against each other. I, along with 19,000 others, can use the term marriage. Others as of yesterday can not.
Uh…it’s time Homosexuals (we ARE born this way…it’s not a choice but a reflection of our natural way that GOD granted!) moved to California, changes the constitution, then moves to Oregon, changes the constitution, then moves to Nevada, changes the constitution, then moves to Arizona, changes the constitution, then moves to New York, changes the constitution, then moves to New Jersey, changes the constitution, then moves to Georgia, changes the constitution, then moves to …… you get the idea.
Time for homosexuals to use the system instead of being the upstanding citizens we are. We have to fight those who would send us to constitutional hell. God won’t do that! Jesus won’t do that. And fair minded citizens won’t do that.
Time to smote those who would enforce their will on others for the sake of their 15th century beliefs!
Down…all of you who would impose your system on others. This is NOT Russia. Time for y’all to get over it and feel the desire of those that live in the grand ole’ USA!
Bye bye! Losers!