Court overturns same-sex marriage ban

Joi 05-16-2008

The California Supreme Court struck down state law's same-sex marriage ban Thursday, finding the state's constitution "properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples."

In a 4-3 ruling, the majority — with a 121-page opinion authored by Chief Justice Ronald George, joined by Associate Justices Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno — found California law's assignment of a different name for the official family relationship of same-sex couples compared with that for opposite-sex couples "raises constitutional concerns not only under the state constitutional right to marry, but also under the state constitutional equal protection clause."

Deborah Hart and Janet Wallace of Oakland, together for 17 years, were among couples who brought this case in 2004. "I'm happy, I'm astounded, I'm thrilled at the decision," Wallace said Thursday.

Stuart Gaffney of San Francisco said he and his partner of 21 years, John Lewis, are "feeling boundless joy. "...Today is the happiest and most romantic day of our lives."

But the ruling — which can't take effect for 30 days, and then will require lower-court action before marriage licenses can be issued — sets the stage for a hard-fought, high-profile political battle. Same-sex marriage foes have submitted signatures to place on November's ballot a constitutional amendment saying "(o)nly marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," thus rendering Thursday's ruling moot.

The ruling could ripple beyond California; American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California executive director Maya Harris said California's Supreme Court "influences the rest of the nation" as it's often cited by other state judiciaries.

And the issue is likely to be presidential-election fodder: Candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and John McCain issued statements Thursday supporting states' rights to decide the issue for themselves, McCain stressing a decision against same-sex marriage, and the Democrats expressing support for civil unions.

Raven

Just like the Edwards and Obama thing, wow would you look at the timing. Anyone noticing a pattern or is it just me?

Nina

Well there already said everything is going to start coming out until Sin's b-day so for the next few weeks its should be getting pretty interesting.

hugo281

right!! yeah and I noticed that timing too Raven hmm I wonder what's next???

Hsoolien

This is something that will keep rearing it's head any time political battles happen, and it will keep coming up till gay marriage is legalized. Even the conservatives up here will no longer touch the issue, saying you will touch it's pretty much a promise to not be voted in.

hugo281

yeah it could happen I wouldn't be surprise if sometime in the future congress and house of representatives pass a bill like this .

Hsoolien

There is no practical logical reason to ban gay marriage that does not involve banning all marriage

Raven

The arguement is that is destroys the santity of marriag, I guess they didn't notice the devorice rate and just don't ant to know of it.

Hsoolien

The first married gay couple in Canada had to get some additional laws changed so they could actually divorce.

That said, it's mostly Christians, especially bible belt US Christians (and any other country controlling church) that prevent gay laws cause "it's a sin" FFS, 90% of people that go to church regular like and consider themselves good Christians have sinned worse (lying)

Nina

Same thing in the US the first married gay couple got devoriced I think within the first 3 months. That really doesn't help the cause any bit.

Hsoolien

In the end it will be like slavery, we will move on, anyone can marry that wants to and our future children will wonder why it was ever an issue, except a few fringe fanatics (much like the neo-nazis of today) that try to change things

Raven

I agree with Hsool with that statement. Eventually is going to happen and everyone knows that it just really depends on when its going to happen.

Hsoolien

It'll likely be a century plus in some countries (middle east theocracies), Probably close to that for federal wide recognition in the US, short of some very odd changes in the way voters vote down there.