SubscribeCA Court Overturns Voters On ‘Gay Marriage’
From California’s top court overturns gay marriage ban - Yahoo! News:
California’s top court overturns gay marriage ban
By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO - In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation’s biggest state to tie the knot.
Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in striking down the ban…
The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted the monthlong wedding march that took place when Mayor Gavin Newsom opened the doors of City Hall to same-sex marriages.
“Today the California Supreme Court took a giant leap to ensure that everybody — not just in the state of California, but throughout the country — will have equal treatment under the law,” said City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who argued the case for San Francisco…
California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support.
But, “Our state now recognizes that an individual’s capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual’s sexual orientation,” Chief Justice Ron George wrote for the court’s majority, which also included Justices Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Marvin Baxter agreed with many arguments of the majority but said the court overstepped its authority. Changes to marriage laws should be decided by the voters, Baxter wrote. Justices Ming Chin and Carol Corrigan also dissented…
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has twice vetoed legislation that would’ve granted marriage rights to same-sex couples, said in a news release that he respected the court’s decision and “will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling.” …
The last time California voters were asked to express their views on gay marriage at the ballot box was in 2000, the year after the Legislature enacted the first of a series of laws awarding spousal rights to domestic partners.
Proposition 22, which strengthened the state’s 1978 one-man, one-woman marriage law with the words “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” passed with 61 percent of the vote.
The Supreme Court struck down both statutes with its sweeping opinion Thursday…
Yes, what a “monumental victory” for our black-robed dictators over the lowly voters.
The media and the rest of the left have so much to celebrate.
We are throwing away our freedoms with both hands — and for what?
(Thanks to Graybeard for the heads up.)
Related Articles:
- Obama's Church: Bush Versus Black Churches
- Chelsea Does More Homosexual Pandering
- Chelsea At Party With 2,000 Men In Dresses
- SF Ads Promise City Services To Illegal Aliens
- Hillary Camp: Obama Plays 'Gay Bigot Card'
- Obama Is Pushing Harder For Homosexuals
- Washington Times Plans To Ape The NY Times
- Hillary To Save The Economy, Homosexuals
- Boy Scouts Lose Phila HQ To 'Gay Rights'
- Spitzer To Make 'Gay Marriages' Top Priority
- New Gay Protection Law Called "A Betrayal"
- NYT Says Old Age Hits Homosexuals Hardest
- Homosexuals Mock 'Last Supper' In Sex Ad
- MD Court Upholds Homosexual Marriage Ban
- What's On Before, After Dem "Gay Debate"
- ACLU Gets Homosexuals Conjugal Prison Visits
- Meehan, Frank Want Homosexuals In Military
- NJ Supreme Court Wants Homosexual Marriage
- Dean Will Go To The Mat For 'Gay Marriages'
32 Responses to “CA Court Overturns Voters On ‘Gay Marriage’”
Leave a Reply
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
This can also be seen as another victory for divorce attorneys of California. The divorce courts will be filled to capacity in a very few years just as they are in Massachusetts.
The California Supreme Court has thumbed its nose, no, given the finger to the people of California and is telling them whose opinion really counts in the Peoples Republic.
I wonder where in the states constitution or what law or precedence the “Supremes” pointed to in order to bolster their ruling.
The heterosexuals of California should take to the streets, riot and burn the cities to the ground just as every other “oppressed” group does after a court decision out there.
It would only be fair.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
I bet they cited recent precedent in WA State, where the Supreme Court overruled a number of voter approved measures on the 2006 Ballot. If this were 1797, each and every one of these justices would be de-robed immediately for overstepping thier boundaries. Hell, Jefferson might have just shot all of their asses himself.
My sincere appolgies if my rant has offended anyone.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
My sincere appolgies if my rant has offended anyone.
I, speaking only for myself, don’t find anything offensive about the truth. And I am unanimous in this.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
It’s horrible that the “courts” can decide what laws they like and don’t like and that’s all that matters, not what the voters want. The CA supreme court seems to only care about the voters who are for gay marriage and not the rest of the state. I don’t have much of a problem with the idea of gay marriage but I do have a major problem with courts deciding and making laws; that’s a job of the voters to decide on ballot questions, not the courts to decide which laws that the voters’ have passed that can stay laws.
Just another reason not to live on the west coast.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
I understand a set of judges over-ruling laws made by representatives as a check to power but this type of action lays the foundation for a revolution. Some excerpts:
It is the saddest irony that establishing a free and fair judiciary was a fundamental reason for the war and yet now we face the same tyranny but this time from the bench. My prayer is that it will cost less American lives when we finally throw off this yoke and once again pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor!
May 15th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Well, a gang of intellectual idiots has just guaranteed that the Islamic terrorists have a valid moral basis for being at war with us.
Let’s see what B. Hussein Obama has to say about this. Any ideas from among the sweetness & light crowd?
May 15th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
“Any ideas from among the sweetness & light crowd?”
Hussein Obama will in my best guess say that:
“This will bring about hope and change by removing barriers and divisions that have isolated so many misunderstood people, People that only wish for love and a chance to be counted as equals.
People that wish to marry and divorce like other Americans, raise families and listen to the Village People on the radio or watch the Wizard of Oz while snuggling on the couch.
People that dress like Liza Minnelli and meet Senaters in the mens room at rest stops.
People that dance like roosters while clucking any-cock-ill-do”
He will then french kiss John Edwards!
May 15th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Whew! That’s a lot more than I thought I’d get!
Sadly, I bet it’s pretty close to reality. We’ll see.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I’m starting an office pool, when may Californians marry their dogs?
May 15th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
This is just another example of out-of-control -unelected -self-righteous- people attempting to destroy America from within by destroying the very values, strengths and foundation that has made America great, free and strong. . .And of course it is liberals who bray constantly about the will of the people while working overtime, in closed rooms, behind the curtain to do exactly the opposite of what the people want, to tax them to do it and to make their voice, but more importantly their vote worthless.
And people want to elect Obama The Movement to the office of POTUS - so that he can nominate and put onto courts people just as extreme and just as ignoring of the will of the people.
We The People need to remember this - A People afraid of their Government is a tyrany, A Government afraid of its People is a Democray. . .
May 15th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
““Any ideas from among the sweetness & light crowd?”
My guess, he won’t stray far from his Roots
“Under Iran’s Islamic Penal Code, homosexuality between consenting adults is a capital crime and official Iranian sources express hostility to homosexual practices. A state radio commentary on March 7, 2005 criticised gay marriages in Western countries. Ayatollah Ebrahim Amini, an influential cleric, said in his Friday-prayer sermon in Qom that gay and lesbian marriages reflect a weakness of Western culture, state television reported on July 13, 2002.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
For the record, I used to car pool with a gay man, forty years ago. He had been in the seminary but left because, as he said, there should not be a queer on the altar. Times have changed.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Michael Savage is on a tear, rip, or perhaps a shred.
May 15th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Hey, the California flag has a red star on it, remember Dr. Zhivago anyone?
May 15th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Pager, I agree, He won’t stray far from his roots, (Bwahahaha) However I think he will try and spin this to his advantage if he addresses it at all.
He of course will not mean nor believe what he says, But he has two rights to lie.
He is a politician, plus an islamic background!
May 15th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
The dissenting opinion, written by associate justice Marvin Baxter, is worth reading.
A tiny excerpt from the PDF file of the full decision filed May 15, 2008 [S147999]:
It is especially interesting to read in light of the fact that the majority decision is based on the unconstitutionality of the law the voters recently passed. The majority court decision argues that there is an implied constitutional right to same sex marriage in the California constitution.
May 15th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Noyzmakr said, “This can also be seen as another victory for divorce attorneys of California. The divorce courts will be filled to capacity in a very few years just as they are in Massachusetts.
The California Supreme Court has thumbed its nose, no, given the finger to the people of California and is telling them whose opinion really counts in the Peoples Republic.
I wonder where in the states constitution or what law or precedence the “Supremes” pointed to in order to bolster their ruling.
The heterosexuals of California should take to the streets, riot and burn the cities to the ground just as every other “oppressed” group does after a court decision out there.
It would only be fair.”
Excellent post. And as others have written, “the courts overrule the voting public, yet again.” LaRaza can have California, in my opinion, and the sooner the better. Unbelievable. Maybe the 60%+ that voted the other way will vote the jerks out? Somehow, I think they like their abortions, etc… too much to worry too much about it.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
This ruling will be challanged. The California court ruled not on the California constitution but instead used the 14th Amendment of the United States constituion as the basis for it’s decision. Basically, to put it in simple terms, the CA court ruled on a “race” factor using the basis that the 14th amendment did not prevent laws against interracial marriage. So welcome to the world of Loonafornia; homosexual is the new race.
This decision came in total opposition to the voter’s in California. Now a “defense of marriage” change in the CA constitution will appear on the November ballot. Californians will vote on changing the California constitution to read that marriage refers to “one man, one woman.”
States and the federal government have an interest in trying to perserve marriages. Children who live in households with two parents do not normally wind up on welfare (unless they are children of illegals). And have a better grasp in how to interact with members of the opposite sex because they have watched their parents interact. Heather may have two mommies, but you can bet that Heather has had her childhood cut short because of the questions that have arisen from having two mommies.
This is a push by the gay/lesbian activists to force acceptance. Not being content with tolerance of their lifestyles, they want to make their livestyle mainstream. That means that there will also be a push to teach children about homosexuality at a younger and younger age. Activist gays will tell you that they want the same right to marry as anyone else. Fact of the matter is that gays already have the same right to marry as heterosexuals, to someone of the opposite sex. There is NO law stating that gays cannot marry. The law only states that they cannot marry a member of the SAME sex.
The communist, Antonio Gramsci, knew fully the advantages of indoctrination children at a young age. He made the observation that if you waited until a child was 12, communism would be lost to that child and the child may, because of developing opinions of it’s own by then, reject the communist view. So it was important to indoctrinate children as young as possible.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Nancy Pelosi’s press release on the California State Supreme Court ruling on homosexual ‘marriage’:
May 15th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
“Today is a significant milestone for which all Californians can take pride.”
Not this californian, lady - and 60 some percent who made it clear, that marriage was between a man and a woman.
Tolerating mentaly ill sexual deviants has become one thing. Changimg our history, traditions, and culture for your perverted butt-ruttin cumdrunk voting block is quite another.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
What the F is Pelosi talking about? The court rules using the U. S. Constitution’s 14th amendment, NOT the California constitution. Hell, she is clueless about what is even in her own’s state’s constitution. Me thinks that when she broke the marble ceiling she did it with her head and it caused some serious brain damage.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Well, no doubt, those of us that feel this way will be hauled off for re-education after they close down our churches and take away our children because we dare to be politically incorrect or adhere to religious beliefs.
This is a blow for religious freedom, for democracy, and for America.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:08 am
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2.....the-party/
May 16th, 2008 at 12:17 am
Since the 14th Amendment was used as a basis, does this mean that this decision can now be appealed to SCOTUS?
May 16th, 2008 at 1:32 am
This news wasn’t surprising to me, since gay marriage is legal in my state. Something came to my attention a week or two ago that may be of interest, especially to retire05. I haven’t seen reference to it on this site. A fellow named Ryan Sorba was engaged to speak at Smith College about “The Born-Gay Hoax”. He is writing a book. The lesbians shouted him down so much he was forced to leave without completing his speech. The college did nothing to allow him his right to speak. You can view the shameful videos by going to LifeSiteNews.com or massresistance.org. It reminded me of what happened to that poor Minuteman fellow (was it at Columbia?). I listened to more than an hour of Mr. Sorba addressing Framingham State U. online to determine if he was trying to spread a hateful message, and he didn’t appear to be. He mentioned alot of interesting evidence of how it was all planned to desensitize people to homosexuality, and they had to emphasize that they were born that way ( even if some of them have admitted amongst themselves that their sexuality was “fluid” or changeable). He talked about his evidence and about philosophy, which was the least convincing part of his talk. The main thing that bothered me about the incident is that freedom of speech in academia seems to fly out the window if the subject can be categorized as Christian and/or conservative. I really recommend people trying to find the videos. You’ll see what it’s like living here-this college is right across the street from my church.
May 16th, 2008 at 3:35 am
Great post retire05!
englishqueen01 writes… “Well, no doubt, those of us that feel this way will be hauled off for re-education after they close down our churches and take away our children because we dare to be politically incorrect or adhere to religious beliefs.”
That is essentially happening already through hate crime legislation.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg.....11-109.stm
May 16th, 2008 at 6:44 am
He will then french kiss John Edwards! That post DEZ, was one of the best examples of “dry” humor…..which made me wet myself. Too bad it is so true. Everyone at S&L’s posts reflect the real thoughts of the real people…..not like those who choose to ruin this country.
May 16th, 2008 at 6:53 am
More, from a triumphant Los Angeles Times:
Not like anyone hasn’t known that Ahnold is now as left as any of the other members of his wife’s family.
Not to miss out on the limelight:
Of course the San Francisco Chronicle is also elated:
Remember when Pelosi was asking what was wrong with “San Francisco values”?
May 16th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
There’s a fine line between liberal arrogance and total insanity. Marriage transcends nations and even cultures stretching back to beginnings of civilizations. But the liberals seem to think they can redefine things like marriage and what man, woman or whatever is. They act as if they are their own Gods. Even from a secular viewpoint I can’t explain this arrogance.
Did the liberal create himself? When he looks at all the miraculous wonders throughout the universe does he believe he had anything to do with them? Did he deliver himself on his birthday or have anything to do with constructing the human body? Where does he get the notion that he may redefine or judge these things? Being your own moral authority will lead one to have no morals.
This attack on marriage is just part of the process of tearing down everything that unites us, makes us strong and keeps us safe. Communist methods are well known and we can check them off daily as they occur in America. It’s a cowardly way to fight a war but it is nevertheless, a war. Politicians in Washington are now part of that problem and any hope for their help is wasted. You say the word communist around them and they’ll take a political step away from you. Many of them will gladly sell us out for cash and some just out of hate.
Does anyone still believe democracy is alive in America? Does your one pathetic vote count for anything? Special interest groups, lobbyist and foreigners with cash determine policy in America. Political checks and balances don’t work without the balance and we have only one party left, the liberal/communist party. Our children’s children have arrived.
BTW- Marriage is a religious sacrament and the state has no business ruling on the issue.
May 16th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
“He will then french kiss John Edwards! That post DEZ, was one of the best examples of “dry” humor…..which made me wet myself. ”
Well we have taken a new step, away from monitor cleaning to dry cleaning! ;-)
May 16th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
“BTW- Marriage is a religious sacrament and the state has no business ruling on the issue.”
Exactly, if we couldn’t file joint, oops, returns there would be no desire to extend the definition of marriage.
May 17th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
“Does your one pathetic vote count for anything?” Well, apparently not here in California since, even with 60% in agreement, the Court overturned our will.