State Supreme court lifts the gay marriage ban.


Arnold had this to say:

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has twice vetoed legislation that would have granted marriage to same-sex couples, said in a statement that he respected the court's decision and "will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling."

And in addendum:

"I think we have bigger fish to fry than do people have a right, if they are gay, to get married or not," Schwarzenegger said. "I think that we should think about fixing the budget system and think about fixing the health care system and rebuilding California."

Of course, Arnold is a "maaanly maaaaaan, not some guuuuuurly maaaaaan!!" :P

ROTFLMFAO!

It's interesting that the last time this was voted on by the citizens of California, 61% felt that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California".

It just proves the authority that activest judges wield over this country.

That legislation will get voted down AGAIN by California voters who overwhelmingly voted it down 8 years ago. If they wanna "create" a new companionship or marriage-like law then fine but by the nature of the word/institution defines marriage as between a man and a woman. I don't care if your a state, country or anyone else you cannot just re-define an ageless institution and tradition.

I don't think they are voting again, are they?

quote:

It's interesting that the last time this was voted on by the citizens of California, 61% felt that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California".

Well, the state courts rule simply on the legality or illegality of a given law under that state's constitution, as they interpret it. Whether a majority of the state's voters favor or oppose it it is irrelevant to its constitutionality. Unless the voters can convince their legislature to rewrite the act in constitutionally acceptable terms, or to begin that state's constitutional amendment process, the popularity of the law is moot.

whats the big deal ? I dont understand, let them marry if they want to.they will divorce like "normal" couples

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:
Unless the voters can convince their legislature to rewrite the act in constitutionally acceptable terms, or to begin that state's constitutional amendment process, the popularity of the law is moot.

Exactly - I don't think the judges were intent on going against the "will of the people" so much as challenging them to come up with a law that will pass constitutional muster.

That is a legitimate exercise in judicial power - acting as a constitutional restraint against legislative and executive over-enthusiasm.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:
Well, the state courts rule simply on the legality or illegality of a given law under that state's constitution, as they interpret it. Whether a majority of the state's voters favor or oppose it it is irrelevant to its constitutionality. Unless the voters can convince their legislature to rewrite the act in constitutionally acceptable terms, or to begin that state's constitutional amendment process, the popularity of the law is moot.

Don't know how it works in CA, but here in CO the people passed a constitutional amendment a year or two ago defining marriage as a strictly hetero institution - thus they actually altered the constitution of the state.

Anyway, I'm curious to hear from those opposed to gay marriage as to why you care whether two dudes or two women marry each other? What does that have to do with your life or your marriage? Also, so long as A) they're in love the same way hetero couples are, B) they want to share their life together in perpetuity the same way hetero couples do, why would you NOT call it a marriage?

quote:

Originally posted by Scottological:

Anyway, I'm curious to hear from those opposed to gay marriage as to why you care whether two dudes or two women marry each other? What does that have to do with your life or your marriage? Also, so long as A) they're in love the same way hetero couples are, B) they want to share their life together in perpetuity the same way hetero couples do, why would you NOT call it a marriage?

I keep hearing the argument that marriage = children and therefore same-sex couples cannot meet this requirement...naturally, anyway.

Which I don't quite understand because many traditional couples who cannot or choose not to procreate, or decide to adopt, can have their union recognized.

quote:

Anyway, I'm curious to hear from those opposed to gay marriage as to why you care whether two dudes or two women marry each other?

The problem i have with it is they always seem to want to adopt children.
And sadly are allowed to do so.
In a society where we have all but done away with corporal punishment.
We allow different forms of crueler punishment IMHO.
Children should be raised in a loving home with a Mother and Father PERIOD!

quote:

Originally posted by Scottological:
Anyway, I'm curious to hear from those opposed to gay marriage as to why you care whether two dudes or two women marry each other? What does that have to do with your life or your marriage? Also, so long as A) they're in love the same way hetero couples are, B) they want to share their life together in perpetuity the same way hetero couples do, why would you NOT call it a marriage?

Scott, I am not opposed to gay marriage at all. I think a gay marriage should have most of the same benefits as a hetero marriage, i.e. tax benefits, hospital visitation, etc...

My only problem is the adoption issue. I'm not saying a gay couple would not make great parents and provide for their child any less than a straight couple would. However, a child with two dads is going to take some abuse on the playground. For those of you with kids on the east and west coast, this may not be as big of deal. But here in the midwest, it probably is not as common. And when kids see something that isn't "normal", they are ruthless.

quote:

Originally posted by KKL:

My only problem is the adoption issue. I'm not saying a gay couple would not make great parents and provide for their child any less than a straight couple. However, a child with two dad's is going to take some abuse on the playground. For those of you with kids on the east and west coast, this may not be as big of deal. But here in the midwest, it probably is not as common. And when kids see something that isn't "normal", they are ruthless.

Kids are ruthless anyway, aren't they? If it wasn't having two dads or two moms it would be a dad who was a drunk or a mom who was fat or something else.

quote:

Children should be raised in a loving home with a Mother and Father PERIOD!

Children should be raised in a loving home PERIOD.

I'm curious about your take, though. Assuming the household is stable and the parents are committed and loving to each other and to the child, what's your view of how children of gay parents grow up? Can you generalize what kind of adults they become?

quote:

Originally posted by SHEEPSHEAD BAY:
The problem i have with it is they always seem to want to adopt children.
And sadly are allowed to do so.
In a society where we have all but done away with corporal punishment.
We allow different forms of crueler punishment IMHO.
Children should be raised in a loving home with a Mother and Father PERIOD!

That's just ignorant, my friend. Punishment? Come on. I am friends with several gay and lesbian couples who either adopted kids or used a sperm bank to have them naturally. All kids are doing just fine. And incidentally, they have plenty of straight male and straight female influences around them - grandparents, cousins, uncles, aunts, friends. (One lesbian couple, with a kid of their own, are "godparents" to our oldest daughter. They've been together 14 years and have a far more stable home environment than anyone I know.)

I'm all for gay marriage, but borderline on the adoption issue. But when you think about it, gay parents are better than no parents.

quote:

Originally posted by Extensioncord:
Kids are ruthless anyway, aren't they? If it wasn't having two dads or two moms it would be a dad who was a drunk or a mom who was fat or something else.

Very fair point. I guess my only weak rebuttal would be that there are more drunk dads and fat moms than gay parents which makes it more "normal" (at least in the midwest anyway).

quote:

Originally posted by KKL:
My only problem is the adoption issue. I'm not saying a gay couple would not make great parents and provide for their child any less than a straight couple would. However, a child with two dads is going to take some abuse on the playground. For those of you with kids on the east and west coast, this may not be as big of deal. But here in the midwest, it probably is not as common. And when kids see something that isn't "normal", they are ruthless.

But the same is true for any unusual couple - black/white, disabled, whatever. Unfortunately, kids are cruel beasts.

A funny thing is I know lots of gays and lesbians who moved from the midwest to the coasts precisely because there was more acceptance.

I understand what you're saying, though. I'm not saying it won't be tough - just that kids are jerks universally. Unfortunately, somebody has to be a pioneer.

quote:

IMHO, children should be raised in a loving home PERIOD

Agreed. Who makes up the loving home does not really matter to me.