Connect to your account and we’ll send your message to Twitter.
Twitter Account: Not authorized (update)
Billy Black Actor Gil Birmingham: ‘Twilight’ Is...
We’d never thought of it this way, but Gil Birmingham may be right: The Twilight series ...
Steve Guttenberg to Director Dr. Ravi Godse: Gimme More...
Funnyman Steve Guttenberg’s plea for more screen time came a bit too late. But Movie ...
BTR Launches New Premium Feature: Host Your Show Using...
Starting this week, as a premium host on BlogTalkRadio you can host your show using Skype, ...
Country: United States
Language: English
Follow on Twitter
Visit on Facebook
Visit on MySpace
Add to Friends
Send Message
No weapon form against me, shall Prosper Take a stand.
Date / Time: 6/2/2009 8:06 PM UTC
This same court ruled in May 2008 that the state's constitution required recognition of same-sex marriage. In November, voters narrowly repudiated that decision by approving Proposition 8, which amended the constitution to provide that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
Yesterday, three of the four justices who had originally ruled in favor of same-sex marriage nonetheless agreed with the three dissenters in the original case that Proposition 8 should stand. This outcome suggests that those challenging the legality of Proposition 8 had the weaker legal case, however wrongheaded the amendment's content. As the court found, those challenging the proposition, including private plaintiffs and state Attorney General Jerry Brown, essentially complained "that it is just too easy to amend the California Constitution through the initiative process." That's probably true, but, as the court noted, the people of California are free to adopt a flawed system.
In the course of voting to uphold Proposition 8, the court made important -- and just -- findings. First, it found that the marriages of the 18,000 same-sex couples who acted before the proposition was approved remain valid. Second, it emphasized that other same-sex couples still enjoy the right to civil unions, allowing gays and lesbians to "choose one's life partner and enter with that person into a committed, officially recognized, and protected family relationship that enjoys all of the constitutionally based incidents of marriage." Rather, said Chief Justice Ronald M. George, the measure "carves out a narrow and limited exception to these state constitutional rights, reserving the official designation of the term 'marriage' for the union of opposite-sex couples as a matter of state constitutional law, but leaving undisturbed all of the other extremely significant substantive aspects of a same-sex couple's" rights. In other words, the terminology is different for same-sex couples, but the rights remain the same as those of other married couples.Your right's are What you Choose not What someone Choose for you.
This is disappointing; words do matter. Yet we remain confident that the inexorable trend of history is to recognize equality for gay men and lesbians, allowing them to marry rather than relegating them to a separate-but-equal legal status. The recent moves in Vermont, Maine and Iowa in support of same-sex marriage, and efforts in that direction in New Hampshire, should offer some comfort to the disappointed citizens of California, gay and straight alike, that their state will before long un the world todaydo this unfortunate proposition.Let gay Marriage stand as anything else in the world today,A person can not help who they love or who they fall in love with that is human nature.Let Gay Marriage rule and allow these people to love who they want to love(spititout1@yahoo.com)Essie Rerun Berry.
You are not logged in. Please log in to write a comment.