Calfiornia Supreme Court Upholds Gay Marriage Ban

Recommended Videos

Thanatos34

New member
Mar 31, 2009
389
0
0
What do you guys think of this?

Article can be found here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090526/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage

SAN FRANCISCO ? The California Supreme Court upheld a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage Tuesday, but it also decided that the estimated 18,000 gay couples who tied the knot before the law took effect will stay wed.

The 6-1 decision written by Chief Justice Ron George rejected an argument by gay rights activists that the ban revised the California constitution's equal protection clause to such a dramatic degree that it first needed the Legislature's approval.

The court said the people have a right, through the ballot box, to change their constitution.

"In a sense, petitioners' and the attorney general's complaint is that it is just too easy to amend the California constitution through the initiative process. But it is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it," the ruling said.

The announcement of the decision set off an outcry among a sea of demonstrators who had gathered in front of the San Francisco courthouse awaiting the ruling. Holding signs and many waving rainbow flags, they chanted "shame on you." Many people also held hands in a chain around an intersection in an act of protest.

Gay rights activists immediately promised to resume their fight, saying they would go back to voters as early as next year in a bid to repeal Proposition 8.

The split decision provided some relief for the 18,000 gay couples who married in the brief time same-sex marriage was legal last year but that wasn't enough to dull the anger over the ruling that banned gay marriage.

"It's not about whether we get to stay married. Our fight is far from over," said Jeannie Rizzo, 62, who was one of the lead plaintiffs along with her wife, Polly Cooper. "I have about 20 years left on this earth, and I'm going to continue to fight for equality every day."

The state Supreme Court had ruled last May that it was unconstitutional to deny gay couples the right to wed. Many same-sex couples had rushed to get married before the November vote on Proposition 8, fearing it could be passed. When it was, gay rights activists went back to the court arguing that the ban was improperly put to voters.

That was the issue justices decided Tuesday.

"After comparing this initiative measure to the many other constitutional changes that have been reviewed and evaluated in numerous prior decisions of this court, we conclude Proposition 8 constitutes a constitutional amendment rather than a constitutional revision," the ruling said.
 

Jumping_Over_Fences

New member
Apr 15, 2009
978
0
0
It makes sense to me, why should we let two people who love each other get married. Gay marriage truly is an abomination.

/sarcasm
 

Not Good

New member
Sep 17, 2008
934
0
0
Sucks. But eh. I'm not gay, and I'm not married, or Mormon. So why should I care?
 

SilentHunter7

New member
Nov 21, 2007
1,652
0
0
You can't blame the judges. They're there to uphold the law, even if the law is discriminatory. It's not their job to decide if a law is right or not. I don't even know why they went to a state court. They're bound by the law the plaintiff disagrees with.

The case has to go to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is the only body that deals with constitutional matters. If there's a good argument that the California law violates the US constitution, there's a good chance they will hear it.
 

traceur_

New member
Feb 19, 2009
4,181
0
0
MusicalFreedom said:
proposition 8 should never have even existed. why do the worthless social conservatives have any fucking power whatsoever? put them all up against the wall and fucking shoot them like the dogs that they are

im literally mad about this and I don't even live in America
Absolutely.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
I like how one sides the opinions are here. So long as California stays as conservative as it is, gay marriage isn't going to happen. If this is the new fight for equality, I'm sure it will happen eventually but it will take some time before Californians are ready for it (it might also take a few more states approving it). As for me, I'm lawful good and the church says no, so my opinion has been decided for me.
 

CastaliaMoirae

New member
Oct 22, 2008
28
0
0
MusicalFreedom said:
proposition 8 should never have even existed. why do the worthless social conservatives have any fucking power whatsoever? put them all up against the wall and fucking shoot them like the dogs that they are

im literally mad about this and I don't even live in America
RAGE!!! If California can do this, other states may believe they can too. Maybe one day Canada might decide it's a fun plan. We never thought it'd happen in California, right? Granted that seems a bit far-fetched, but good god people, those who love members of their sex are people too. Let's refuse to allow them to marry the one they love, because THAT makes sense! (/sarcasm) Last I checked, we live in the 21st century. I'd like to think that after all this time we're no longer totally barbaric.
 

Wyatt

New member
Feb 14, 2008
384
0
0
i told you so. the voters spoke, the court rightly upheld their voice, if you dont like the way it ended than get the votes to change it next time. thats how things work in a democracy in case you didnt know.
 

SoonerMatt

New member
Apr 18, 2009
280
0
0
Considering my uncle can't get married now, fuck you California. And a gigantic fuck you to the Mormons; if there is a god he'd better make sure all your kids are gay because of this.
 

MusicalFreedom

New member
May 9, 2009
456
0
0
Wyatt said:
i told you so. the voters spoke, the court rightly upheld their voice, if you dont like the way it ended than get the votes to change it next time. thats how things work in a democracy in case you didnt know.
are you saying that it is okay to put civil rights up for a vote? really?
 

Nmil-ek

New member
Dec 16, 2008
2,597
0
0
Have i mentioned recently I think your consitution sucks and is highly contradictory, no well I just did. If you uphold equality as a virtue it should be iron clad, public dissuasion should not be allowed to factor in regardless.
 

solidstatemind

Digital Oracle
Nov 9, 2008
1,077
0
0
...

This isn't about about whether or not the law was just or not, it was about whether or not the law that was written was legally implemented. That's it.

It is very important that judges not engage in activism-- so-called 'legislating from the bench'-- because that would undermine the concept of Seperation of Powers.

Yes, Prop 8 is narrow-minded nonsense. But don't go asking the judicial system to subvert the legislative process just because people are myopic. Fix it the same way it was broken: via a legislative initiative.