California Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Same-Sex Marriage

[Cricket]

The California Supreme Court upheld a ban on same-sex marriage today, ratifying a decision made by voters last year that runs counter to a growing trend of states allowing the practice.

The decision, however, preserves the 18,000 marriages performed between the court’s decision last May that same-sex marriage was lawful and the passage by voters in November of Proposition 8, which banned it. Supporters of the proposition argued that the marriages should no longer be recognized.

Resource Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us...ge.html?ref=us

How do you feel about the California Supreme Court upholding the ban on same-sex marriages?

Why do you feel that way?

[Cricket]

One more important quote from that same article:

Today’s decision, written by Chief Justice Ronald M. George for a 6-to-1 majority, said that same-sex couples still have the right to civil unions, which gives them the ability 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.” But the justices said that the voters had clearly expressed their will to limit the formality of marriage to heterosexual couples.

[krahmaan]

It seems that those 18,000 marriages got threw a bit of a loop hole. "Whether we like it or not." But every since we voted on the issue, and it was then banned in California the law should stand. These 18,000 marriages will undermine what was voted on by the people, and possibly will cause a stir in the gay community for other couples who wish to be married.

I think that they'll try and find another way around the laws to make gay marriage legal. But this is what happens when the Government takes the power away from the people. What the people voted on should stand, and to allow those marriages to stay preserved undermines what was voted on by Proposition 8.

Looks like a compromise was found by the California Supreme Court. But a hypocritical one at that. Contradicting what has now been officially banned and illegal, making exceptions for 18,000 of them? They might as well make it legal. It's either one or the other. But then they would possibly have to take away our rights to vote as well.

Well, that's my opinion.

[corneo]

Originally Posted by Cricket

How do you feel about the California Supreme Court upholding the ban on same-sex marriages?

WOOHOO!

Why do you feel that way?

Just to piss off the [removed].

[Atom]

Civil unions seem an acceptable compromise to me because I think that same sex couples are radically different enough from a basic fundamental of traditional marriage (man/woman) that I think to change the subject matter rather than simply divide and conquer would be folly in this situation. People seem too polarized on this issue for now, however, that may easily change in 20 years, or 50 years or w/e, and I think that ultimately the change within the ruling government will equal complete equality in every aspect including the name of the unionous event. (A little Atomism at the end there, sorry.)

[homebizseo]

The voters voted on it and it should have never went to the supreme court. Gays are intolerant of other peoples views.

[Atom]

After gays are finally accepted I wonder if they'll get reparations.

[Atom]

I think that our current views will be heartily laughed at in the not too distant future. I'll be long dead of course.

[Atom]

I think that human gayness is such a societal abnormality that I would estimate that genuine gayness does not and can not exist by personal choice.

[corneo]

Considering there has been no scientific proof of the "gay gene" any person who claims to be "born gay" should be looked at as a mental abnormality.

Via means of voting and population is seems only white Christians have an tolerance for this issue. Meaning the black vote in CA shot this issue down. (but the gays don't want to bash head with them. I wonder why.) Also the only countries that allow anything for gays is in countries dominated by white Christians. Islam countries put anybody claiming to be homosexual to death.

The Federal government really doesn't care if your married or not because they don't have a federal laws on it.

I'm not a person who feels "guilty" nor "ashamed" for being white. Give me better proof claiming to be a homosexual isn't a mental issue and I'll look once again at my views. Until then, grow some gonads and quit blaming your self or letting others blame you for things that are not your fault.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by corneo

Considering there has been no scientific proof of the "gay gene" any person who claims to be "born gay" should be looked at as a mental abnormality. (...)

Most scientists disagree with you.

The American Psychological Association, considered to be the largest association of psychologists worldwide, wrote the following information on its website APA.org (accessed Jan. 30, 2009):

"There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality. In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many reasons for a person's sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people."

http://borngay.procon.org/viewanswer...stionID=001335







.

[corneo]

Thanks for the proof. I'll stand on my last statement

Originally Posted by Atom

Most scientists disagree with you.

The American Psychological Association, considered to be the largest association of psychologists worldwide, wrote the following information on its website APA.org (accessed Jan. 30, 2009):

"There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality. In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many reasons for a person's sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people."

http://borngay.procon.org/viewanswer...stionID=001335

"Theories, most likely, suggest, probably" (really means) They don't know and can't prove anything.


Everybody has an opinion but has no facts to back that opinion.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by corneo

(...) "Theories, most likely, suggest, probably" (really means) They don't know and can't prove anything. (...)

I agree, and I'd like proof myself, but until then I'll stick with the people who are actually qualified to make an educated guess in the matter, thank you very much.

[undez]

Same-Sex Marriage, the bible doesn't accept that. I think it is a disease.
[Don't try that again! This is a family friendly site btw.]

[ranter]

Originally Posted by corneo

Considering there has been no scientific proof of the "gay gene" any person who claims to be "born gay" should be looked at as a mental abnormality.

You mean like Nazis looked at Jews?

Lets make something clear in here
This issue is not about right or wrong, this is rather about if you like it or not
the same way
when vegetarian argues that eating meat is wrong whereas in reality it's only about his/her personal likes or dislikes, the rest of us don't mind to indulge in eating juicy steak now and then without feeling guilty.

Once again: this is about how you personally feel about gay people and right or wrong has nothing to do with this subject.

[Allen Farlow]

Sorry to learn just how 'small-minded' you seem to be, Corneo.

By the way, the word 'fag' is a derogatory name and I've been advised in another thread that using derogatory names is not something we should do on this forum.

Now then, might I ask the men in this discussion to explain to me exactly what it is that causes them to be attracted to women?

Women, why are you attracted to men? (No, I'm not talking about how nice his car is or how good he smells!)

Was it some abnormality? Was it something in your genes? Was it a personal choice? Was it the way your mama dressed you or the toys you played with as a child?

I am a man and I am attracted to women, sexually as well as in a 'love' way. I simply cannot fall in 'love' with a man. My heart won't let me. (Not that I try to.)

So what is it exactly that makes you prefer women over men?

If you can figure that one out, you'd be one of the first to really have a clue about homosexuality!

It is hardly a 'lifestyle choice'.

Equality should be a foregone conclusion but unfortunately it isn't. Is a 'civil union' really the same as having a marriage officially recognized by the government? I don't think so.

Not only is it unjust to deny anyone the right to marry whomever they please, it interferes with directives in the event of severe illness of your 'partner', powers of attorney documents, the division of personal property and real estate in the event of death, custody of minor children and other things of that nature. I believe the vast majority of gays and lesbians are monogomous by nature and are involved in long-term relationships, just as much as heterosexual couples, and they deserve the same rights, without discrimination. Nothing less.

It's against the law to discriminate against someone because of their sexual orientation when it comes to jobs and housing, so why this continued discrimination when it comes to marriage?

Because 'the church' says so? I am a Mormon by faith and I have left the church because of their stance against gay marriage, even though I am not gay. Discrimination against gays is just patently wrong. Yet Prop 8 was passed, banning gay marriage in California, only because of the funding from the churches. I choose to not allow my tithes to be used in such a disgusting manner! It is hardly 'God's work' to discriminate against his own children!

If it were not for the funding from the churches, there would not have been so many television commercials against Prop 8, nor billboards and other media, nor as many good-hearted God-fearing church members in the streets running grassroots campaigns against Prop 8. The public who voted for or against it would not have had it 'in their face', would not have been confronted with such a horrible smear campaign as that run by the churches, and Prop 8 would have failed. The churches resorted to smear and fear tactics.

But churches preach that marriage is all about procreation and should be between a man and a woman. Why? Because the Bible says so? Hardly.

If people stop going to church, the church doesn't reap the benefits of the millions of dollars each year in tithes. In some churches, such as the Mormon church, a lay ministry, everyone has their own jobs and careers and nobody but the 'top brass' lives off of the church. Everyone supports themselves. But I know in many other religions that is not the case. I see many houses of worship that have an entire home sitting next door, where the minister, pastor, preacher lives, supplied and paid for by the church.

Gay people do not get pregnant by one another in the normal sense. There fore they have fewer children, resulting in fewer children growing up as God-fearing church members, paying their tithing faithfully to the church every Sunday without fail.

Before I joined the church I heard someone say that the Catholic Church invented the idea of hell back in the middle ages as a way to get people to come back to church on Sundays. The people stopped going, the tithes fell and there was little money to feed the clergy. So they told everyone if they don't go to church, they will go to this place called Hell or Hades and live through eternity in torment and suffering...

Is it not much different from what gays must feel when denied the rights granted by the church and government to everyone else?

Let me ask you this: If the world was predominantly homosexual, if homosexuality was the norm, would you suddenly turn gay to fit in? Would you ignore your primal urges to love someone of the opposite sex, knowing everyone would hate you for it?

[Allen Farlow]

This just in: Bush v. Gore lawyers launch new same-sex marriage appeal

SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- Opponents of California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriages launched a new court challenge Wednesday, led by lawyers who were on opposite sides of the case that settled the 2000 presidential race.

Attorneys Ted Olson and David Boies have asked a federal judge to block California from enforcing the ban, known as Proposition 8.

"We are two lawyers from opposite ends of the political spectrum who have come together to support one of the most important issues of our time," Olson told reporters.

The case "is not about liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. We're here in part to symbolize that," he added.

Wednesday's lawsuit was filed on behalf of two same-sex couples who have been denied marriage licenses under Proposition 8. A federal judge in San Francisco has set a July 2 hearing on the matter.

"Our Constitution guarantees every American the right to be treated equally under the law," Boies said. "There is no right more fundamental than the right to marry the person you love and to raise a family."

Read full article here: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/...urt/index.html

I find it interesting that two people can have a relationship and nobody really cares...until they want to get married. If they happen to be gay/lesbian, all of a sudden it's a big deal and suddenly strangers are sticking their nose into the couple's business, as if they suddenly have the right to tell others how to live.

It's a sad commentary on our supposedly civilized, advanced, modern society as a whole, isn't it?

[Cricket]

Playing devil's advocate here . . .

Doesn't the vote of the people count for something though?

[corneo]

Originally Posted by Cricket

Playing devil's advocate here . . .

Doesn't the vote of the people count for something though?

Yes, the people vote do mean something. The losers of the fight are trying everything they can to win. Most of the time they try "the wording was confusing, there for we need a re-vote." or the bill was improperly presented.

Unfortunately this move is most likely done to give 2 lawyers a name for themselves. When the state supreme court gives a 6 to 1 vote in favor of something, it's hard to change their minds.
One of the argument I can see them doing is: if you leave these marriages stay together, how can you ban others?

(then again I haven't been following this story too well.)

[Allen Farlow]

Good one, Cricket...

Yes, the vote of the people should count for something, the will of the land and all of that, but I must ask how will gays being finally given the right to marry, just like anyone else, make a difference in the lives of all of those people who voted in favor of banning gay marriage?

How will it effect the lives of those vehemently opposed to gay marriage? Other than the fact that they will be furious for a couple days, I don't think it will make much difference at all to them. It won't raise their taxes, won't cost them anything out of pocket now or later, won't mean anything other than they fought against it and they lost.

But to the gays it will make a huge difference.

I have trouble understanding why people are so actively up in arms at allowing others to have a fundamental right that hetrosexuals so often take for granted. Look at the divorce rate, for crying out loud.

All they want to do is legally be allowed the right to swear allegiance to each other in the same manner as anyone else, not go out and change the world.

Again, I believe the voters were influenced by the power of the church and religion and believed the (false) doom and gloom scenarios painted by them.