Larry Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Link. A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down Proposition 8, finding California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional because it deprives gay and lesbian couples of the equal right to wed.With a decision that pushes the gay marriage issue a step closer to the U.S. Supreme Court, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld former San Francisco Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who invalidated Proposition 8 in 2010 after an unprecedented trial. "Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote, joined by Judge Michael Daly Hawkins. More at link. Oh, near as I can tell, the court ruled Prop 8 unconstitutional, but did not order it removed, pending appeals.. So it's been ruled unconstitutional, but apparently it stays in effect, anyway. (No, I have no idea why.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I can't believe this is still an issue anywhere. It's to the point of absurd. I don't care who people want to marry and most people that I know don't care either. It's ridiculous that so much time, energy, money and resources go into fighting this type of stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I just want to say that Romney is positioned perfectly on this issue. Both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 It's only a matter of time till this was given the green light in California. It is sort of odd that it hasnt been made legal here yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 It's only a matter of time till this was given the green light in California. It is sort of odd that it hasnt been made legal here yet. California Supreme Court did make it legal. Then the right wing decided to make a fundamental right into a referendum for a majority vote. Then the Mormon big dollars waged a fear campaign and a fundamental right was taken away from the people. If it can happen to same sex marriage, it can happen to any of our rights. We need to fight to keep fundamental rights away from majority voter referendum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I now know why Eli was going to Disneyland. Thank you 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals. BTW - this might be one of two topics that the GOP panders for the largely Dem hispanic vote in California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 California Supreme Court did make it legal. Then the right wing decided to make a fundamental right into a referendum for a majority vote. Then the Mormon big dollars waged a fear campaign and a fundamental right was taken away from the people.If it can happen to same sex marriage, it can happen to any of our rights. We need to fight to keep fundamental rights away from majority voter referendum. I honestly dont view it as being that dire in 2012 for us, but I still respect the vigilance you mention. Things like this happen over time and prevailing attitudes change afterall. Now we just need the Feds to respect the medical marijuana law passed here and then walked upon but heck, that's a debate for another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramdizzle Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Wouldn't want to uphold what people voted for. That would be..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Wouldn't want to uphold what people voted for. That would be..... Some might argue that it doesn't matter what the people voted for, if what they voted for was ruled unconstitutional (or illegal). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Wouldn't want to uphold what people voted for. That would be..... Fundamental rights are not to be put to a vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Some might argue that it doesn't matter what the people voted for, if what they voted for was ruled unconstitutional (or illegal). Then it should not get to the point of being voted for to begin with... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Wouldn't want to uphold what people voted for. That would be..... The majority do not have the right to oppress the minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Then it should get to the point of being voted for to begin with... I agree. But the absurdity of the proposition system and the failure of the majority party (Dems) to squash this in the first place are at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 The majority do not have the right to oppress the minority. How would same sex marriage be considered oppressive ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 The majority do not have the right to oppress the minority. I wish more people believed in this. ---------- Post added February-7th-2012 at 03:36 PM ---------- How would same sex marriage be considered oppressive ? I suspect his statement is that not allowing same sex marriage, while allowing other marriages, is oppressive to homosexuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 How would same sex marriage be considered oppressive ? Maybe the same way that mixed race marriages were once outlawed in the United States. Read the Loving v. Virginia decision. Last full paragraph states that marriage is a fundamental right. I've quoted that decision numerous times on this forum, now I'll just point to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I agree. But the absurdity of the proposition system and the failure of the majority party (Dems) to squash this in the first place are at fault. I agree. The system wastes too many resources. It can easily be fixed. This whole thought process of "I have an idea" should be double and triple checked to make sure it is all within our rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I agree. The system wastes too many resources. It can easily be fixed. This whole thought process of "I have an idea" should be double and triple checked to make sure it is all within our rights. It's mainly a joke..but I would vote for a proposition to end the proposition system in California. Of course, now the people are wanting a part-time legislature. One that will probably do even less than what they do now - thus forcing the people to vote on and have propositions that affect the big changes. Back on topic - I hope that today's ruling sticks. It's about damn time that this state joined the 7-8 other states that recognize gay marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I suspect his statement is that not allowing same sex marriage, while allowing other marriages, is oppressive to homosexuals. Exactly. It is their/your/our private personal lives that rarely have any effect on day to day life. Maybe the same way that mixed race marriages were once outlawed in the United States. Read the Loving v. Virginia decision. Last full paragraph states that marriage is a fundamental right. I've quoted that decision numerous times on this forum, now I'll just point to it. I was shocked the other day when I saw something about some controversy involving a mixed couple in an ad. Get over it already people. It's simple. Let people live their lives happy. It's none of my business unless it is somehow hurting other people or myself or family. Gay marriage certainly does none of those things to me, and most people if they actually thought about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 I was shocked the other day when I saw something about some controversy involving a mixed couple in an ad. Get over it already people. It's simple. Let people live their lives happy. It's none of my business unless it is somehow hurting other people or myself or family. Gay marriage certainly does none of those things to me, and most people if they actually thought about it. Attempt to lighten things up some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 How would same sex marriage be considered oppressive ? I suspect his statement is that not allowing same sex marriage, while allowing other marriages, is oppressive to homosexuals. what he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Funny thing is, the attorneys on the pro-gay-marriage side are David Boies and Ted Olson. Not only was Olson W's Solicitor General, but the 2 faced off in Bush v. Gore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 As long as someone doesn't try to marry a horse who gives a ****? it's amazing that this crap is still going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 interesting reasoning,especially the inferior reference when the same rights are availiable. If they required the listing of it as same sex marriage would it still be inferior? hurry up and get to SCOTUS and put this to bed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 As long as someone doesn't try to marry a hose who gives a ****? it's amazing that this crap is still going on.Hey, I don't care if someone marries a hose :pfft: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.