Prop 8 just got reveresed

[JoeT]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/04/california.same.sex.ruling/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

A federal judge in California on Wednesday overturned the state's ban on same-sex marriage, saying the voter-approved rule violates the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians.

The 136-page decision, issued by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco, is an initial step in what will likely be a lengthy legal fight over California's Proposition 8, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

At stake in the trial was whether California's ban on same-sex marriage violated the constitutional rights to equal protection and due process of two gay couples that want to marry.

The case was watched closely by both supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage, as many say it is likely to wind its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. If it does, the case could end in a landmark decision on whether people in the United States are allowed to marry people of the same sex.

 

[redXJ]

Take that LDS church. They better get out their check book and waste more money...

 

[TRNDRVR]

Take that LDS church. They better get out their check book and waste more money...

I was going to comment, but after this post I think I'll sit this one out.

 

[Brett]

Have to say that I agree with it being reversed. Just because your disgree morally with someone's life choices doesn't mean you get to impose your morals on them.

 

[Milner]

Have to say that I agree with it being reversed. Just because your disgree morally with someone's life choices doesn't mean you get to impose your morals on them.

X2!!

 

[Caleb]

Have to say that I agree with it being reversed. Just because your disgree morally with someone's life choices doesn't mean you get to impose your morals on them.

So...are we going to see an invite?


In all seriousness, I agree with what Brett says, but it goes both ways. You can do what ever you like with your life just keep it to your self and as long as it doesn't affect me and my family, I'll do the same

 

[Herzog]

Kind of a weird situation. I don't care about the gay & lesbian crap... but didn't the people in the state of California vote prop 8 in? And now a fed judge just overturns a majority vote as he or she pleases? Feels like something similar here... fed walking in & telling us what they are going to do with our lands even though the majority doesn't want them here. Funny how other organizations outside of the states are a factoring influence for both issues too.

Honestly, I know nothing of the issue anyways. Just thinking out loud.

 

[Tacoma]

Have to say that I agree with it being reversed. Just because your disgree morally with someone's life choices doesn't mean you get to impose your morals on them.

I think I get what you mean by this, but in point of fact, many laws do legislate and impose morality.

 

[Spork]

Take that LDS church. They better get out their check book and waste more money...

So spending money on the side that wins is wasting money?


You have a strange definition of wasting money...

 

[UNSTUCK]

Kind of a weird situation. I don't care about the gay & lesbian crap... but didn't the people in the state of California vote prop 8 in? And now a fed judge just overturns a majority vote as he or she pleases? Feels like something similar here... fed walking in & telling us what they are going to do with our lands even though the majority doesn't want them here. Funny how other organizations outside of the states are a factoring influence for both issues too.

Honestly, I know nothing of the issue anyways. Just thinking out loud.

This is just what I was thinking. Who cares what the issue is about. The state voted what they wanted and the majority won (does it ever not win?). A lot of us don't like Obama, but the majority voted for him, so he stays in the House.

 

[kmboren]

Take that LDS church. They better get out their check book and waste more money...

I do not see what this has to do with anything. I am pretty sure that all the yes votes where not LDS. Yes they supported it but so did over %50 of the state. I hate it when people try to bring religion into these things.

 

[Slangy]

I do not see what this has to do with anything. I am pretty sure that all the yes votes where not LDS. Yes they supported it but so did over %50 of the state. I hate it when people try to bring religion into these things.

X2

You know it will get overturned when the judge is actually a flaming cheeto as well.

Hell if a judge can overturn stuff the people voted against we need to get us a gun totin 4 wheel maniac judge

 

[cruiseroutfit]

...Hell if a judge can overturn stuff the people voted against we need to get us a gun totin 4 wheel maniac judge

Palin for Supreme Court?

 

[MikeGyver]

Hell if a judge can overturn stuff the people voted against we need to get us a gun totin 4 wheel maniac judge

Superdell.

 

[redXJ]

So spending money on the side that wins is wasting money?


You have a strange definition of wasting money...

Its a waste of money because it will never stand. Every state will one day allow gay marriage. They say history has a way of repeating itself. Womens rights then African American rights. Now its gay/lesbian rights.

I do not see what this has to do with anything. I am pretty sure that all the yes votes where not LDS. Yes they supported it but so did over %50 of the state. I hate it when people try to bring religion into these things.

You really think this has nothing to do with religion? WOW I still cant believe you wrote that! The only thing you wrote that is wright is not all voters were LDS. But the LDS church spent alot of money.
who knows how much money the lds church spent, they will never say?
http://coloradoindependent.com/2127...tly-outpaced-mormon-spending-on-proposition-8
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/01/top-officials-w.html
http://mormonsfor8.com/
http://crooksandliars.com/julia-rosen/mormons-and-prop-8-lies-and-blackmail

also if you didnt know, this is a big deal because of the bible. The bible is the start of most religions.
So please tell me how this has nothing to do with religion?

Have to say that I agree with it being reversed. Just because your disgree morally with someone's life choices doesn't mean you get to impose your morals on them.

I agree with you 100%

 

[DOSS]

but didn't the people in the state of California vote prop 8 in? And now a fed judge just overturns a majority vote as he or she pleases?

The Fed Judge overturned the ruling because what the people voted in was not legal within the framework of the constitution. The people would have to change the US constitution to get this to be legal (at least this Judge reads it that way). Such is why it will go to the US supreme court for them to decide once and for all of it is legal within the framework of the US Constitution.. Remember States laws have to match the state constitution and all laws have to be within the framework of what is legal within the US constitution.

 

[DaveB]

After doing some searching I found this on a legal website that was discussing marital privilege and testifying against a spouse: "The determination of whether a marriage is legal depends on state law." Marriage, at least in the past, has been the jurisdiction of the states and is NOT mentioned in the US Constitution. Marriage is a privilege granted by the states to those who meet the states requirements. States control who gets married based on the laws in the state. If the states laws allow gay marriage then so be it but if the rule of state law gets thrown out there would be nothing to stop you marrying your dog, your sister, ten other people, or whatever you are in love with.

 

[Ogre Palowakski]

I wanted to marry my dog but fortunately we lived together long enough for me to learn that she poops on the carpet.

I just can't commit when that's going on.

 

[DOSS]

After doing some searching I found this on a legal website that was discussing marital privilege and testifying against a spouse: "The determination of whether a marriage is legal depends on state law." Marriage, at least in the past, has been the jurisdiction of the states and is NOT mentioned in the US Constitution. Marriage is a privilege granted by the states to those who meet the states requirements. States control who gets married based on the laws in the state. If the states laws allow gay marriage then so be it but if the rule of state law gets thrown out there would be nothing to stop you marrying your dog, your sister, ten other people, or whatever you are in love with.

are you inferring that Marrying your dog is the exact same thing as homosexual marriage?
And you are right Marriage is not mentioned in the US Constitution but the US Constitution and Laws upheld by the Constitution such as Tax law do provide benefits to married couples so not allowing someone to be married based on Race, Sex, gender (Double gender in this case  ) would have some discrepancy with the US Constitution and the Laws that we have already agreed (as a nation) are upheld.

 

[X1994J]

Take that LDS church. They better get out their check book and waste more money...

May as well, They've obviously got the money to do it. I say they call up the peeps in Cali, ask em' what it'll take to make this stick, and write one big fat check. Done.