Prop 8 Constitutional.
05-26-2009, 10:07 AM
#1
iClub Silver Vendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Participating in some Anarchy!
Posts: 15,494
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Prop 8 Constitutional.
California Supreme Court has ruled:
1. Prop 8 is Constitutional, and homosexual marriage ban is law.
2. Existing homosexual marriages are legal.
1. Prop 8 is Constitutional, and homosexual marriage ban is law.
2. Existing homosexual marriages are legal.
05-26-2009, 10:24 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,808
Car Info: 2015 WRX
...
CA Supreme Court to Release Prop 8 Ruling Tues. May 26, 10am
SF Demonstrations at 10am and 5pm
The California Supreme Court has announced that it will issue its decision on the validity of Proposition 8 Tuesday, May 26. This proposition, which narrowly passed last November, overturned same-sex marriage rights in California.
In the event that the court lets Proposition 8 stand, or invalidates the thousands of same-sex unions that took place last year, there will be protests in San Francisco and across the state. Activists from the ANSWER Coalition will be participating in two events on Tuesday, May 26 in San Francisco.
The first will be a peaceful civil disobedience, meeting at the Supreme Court in San Francisco, located on McAllister between Polk and Larkin. This will take place immediately following the decision, scheduled for 10:00 am (Tue. May 26). More details can be found at http://www.onestruggleonefight.com/.
At 5:00 pm, there will be a mass rally at Civic Center Plaza (Grove and Larkin), followed by a march at 6:00 pm to Yerba Buena Gardens (Mission St. between 3rd and 4th Sts.). All are welcome to participate in or support both of these events. Should the Proposition be overturned, this victory will be celebrated and the community will press on for full equality and federal recognition.
More information is available by calling the ANSWER office at (415) 821-6545 or answer@answersf.org.
SF Demonstrations at 10am and 5pm
The California Supreme Court has announced that it will issue its decision on the validity of Proposition 8 Tuesday, May 26. This proposition, which narrowly passed last November, overturned same-sex marriage rights in California.
In the event that the court lets Proposition 8 stand, or invalidates the thousands of same-sex unions that took place last year, there will be protests in San Francisco and across the state. Activists from the ANSWER Coalition will be participating in two events on Tuesday, May 26 in San Francisco.
The first will be a peaceful civil disobedience, meeting at the Supreme Court in San Francisco, located on McAllister between Polk and Larkin. This will take place immediately following the decision, scheduled for 10:00 am (Tue. May 26). More details can be found at http://www.onestruggleonefight.com/.
At 5:00 pm, there will be a mass rally at Civic Center Plaza (Grove and Larkin), followed by a march at 6:00 pm to Yerba Buena Gardens (Mission St. between 3rd and 4th Sts.). All are welcome to participate in or support both of these events. Should the Proposition be overturned, this victory will be celebrated and the community will press on for full equality and federal recognition.
More information is available by calling the ANSWER office at (415) 821-6545 or answer@answersf.org.
05-26-2009, 10:52 AM
#8
The people who were legally married deserve to have that status retained. However...
As a "liberal" , I don't have a problem with this decision. This is definitely a states rights issue and thus belongs to the people. If the constituency was tasked with deciding what is right for itself via ballot initiative, then that is all she wrote. We cannot have the courts operating under a "We know you like your little democratic circle jerks, but we don't grant them authority" trajectory.
If the gay marriage rights supporters want to try again with the ballot, I say let them go for it. I'll do my part to support via voting, but I don't want said vote to be abrogated after the fact because of sour grapes.
As a "liberal" , I don't have a problem with this decision. This is definitely a states rights issue and thus belongs to the people. If the constituency was tasked with deciding what is right for itself via ballot initiative, then that is all she wrote. We cannot have the courts operating under a "We know you like your little democratic circle jerks, but we don't grant them authority" trajectory.
If the gay marriage rights supporters want to try again with the ballot, I say let them go for it. I'll do my part to support via voting, but I don't want said vote to be abrogated after the fact because of sour grapes.
05-26-2009, 11:07 AM
#10
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 2,585
Car Info: The Latest From WayneTech.
I'm interested to see how I will try to explain to my kids how the generation before me was stupid because they didn't allow whites to marry blacks whilst my generation seemingly can't allow people of the same sex to marry and not have my child call MY generation stupid.
05-26-2009, 11:09 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,808
Car Info: 2015 WRX
Our generation is horribly stupid, just like all others.
05-26-2009, 11:16 AM
#13
VIP Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vacaville
Posts: 9,542
Car Info: 2017 CWP WRX & 2007 SWP WRX
How is it legal for some gays to be married, but not the rest regardless of when they got married?
That's not consistent...
Nice try California...
That's not consistent...
Nice try California...
Last edited by medicSTi; 05-26-2009 at 11:41 AM.
05-26-2009, 11:20 AM
#14
VIP Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vacaville
Posts: 9,542
Car Info: 2017 CWP WRX & 2007 SWP WRX
Consistency ftw...
05-26-2009, 04:14 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
"So let it be written, so let it be done."
As far as the IBTL, if you won the state lottery last year and spent all of the money in a lump some, would it be right if the state said they ****ed up the drawing and wanted all of the money back?
Fair is fair. If the state ****ed up it's laws, it's not right for them to retroactively punish whomever benefited from it.
We're still a secular nation despite what many people think, so I wouldn't be surprised if this issue resurfaces in another form next election.
As far as the IBTL, if you won the state lottery last year and spent all of the money in a lump some, would it be right if the state said they ****ed up the drawing and wanted all of the money back?
Fair is fair. If the state ****ed up it's laws, it's not right for them to retroactively punish whomever benefited from it.
We're still a secular nation despite what many people think, so I wouldn't be surprised if this issue resurfaces in another form next election.