Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Calif. court refuses to stay gay marriage ruling
AP via SFGate ^ | 6/4/8

Posted on 06/04/2008 9:34:04 AM PDT by SmithL

San Francisco, CA (AP) --

California's highest court has refused to stay until after the November election its decision legalizing same-sex marriage in the state.

Conservative religious and legal groups had asked the California Supreme Court to stop its order from becoming effective until voters have the chance to weigh in on the issue.

An initiative that would amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage has qualified for the ballot. Its passage would overrule the court's decision.

The Supreme Court says its ruling will be final at 5 p.m. on June 16.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: activistjudges; caglbt; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; judiciary; playinghouse; samesexmarriage; sanfranciscovalues
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

1 posted on 06/04/2008 9:34:05 AM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Won’t that cause a heck of a lot of confusion in November when gay marriage is banned again?


2 posted on 06/04/2008 9:36:58 AM PDT by HoosierHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HoosierHawk

Government by Sob Story depends on that.


3 posted on 06/04/2008 9:37:51 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

More fuel to the fire. This incenses me so much I think that will go over to http://www.protectmarriage.com/donate.php right now and make a donation. I suggest the rest of you Calfornia’s do the same.


4 posted on 06/04/2008 9:37:57 AM PDT by Smogger (It's the WOT Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Just wait until the couples move to other states, suing for married benefits.


5 posted on 06/04/2008 9:39:08 AM PDT by SmithL (Reject Obama's Half-Vast Wright-Wing Conspiracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

There has to be a way to get these legislating justices removed from the bench.


6 posted on 06/04/2008 9:39:11 AM PDT by Slapshot68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slapshot68

Californian voters do have the Rose Bird option. And I think it will be exercised on the Cali SCJs.


7 posted on 06/04/2008 9:41:15 AM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Slapshot68
"There has to be a way to get these legislating justices removed from the bench. "

We got rid of Rose Bird that way!

8 posted on 06/04/2008 9:41:24 AM PDT by Redleg Duke ("All gave some, and some gave all!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

By the way, you notice how the Libs love the courts when they push their gay marriage agenda, but hated them in 2000 during the general election?


9 posted on 06/04/2008 9:42:45 AM PDT by Slapshot68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Proof that the ruling was not legal, but political.
10 posted on 06/04/2008 9:47:17 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (We have people in power with desire for evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

They don’t want to stay the implementation of their edict because they know the referendum will succeed. They plan to invalidate the constitutional referendum on the grounds that it is illegally ex-post facto - effectively stripping individuals of rights they already have.


11 posted on 06/04/2008 9:48:26 AM PDT by Sgt_Schultze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Not a surprise at all

Everyone in the country I would have thought would be fuming at this decision, the ovters voted on what they wanted and the judges over turn the will of the people and make a law.Just what utter nonsense this is, imagine these homosexuals thinking they are married and then whe the constitution is changed word for word by the people the homosexuals will now not be married.
It’s like those in massachusetts, they think they are married and when they get out of the state they are not in most of the ocuntry.
One person who has a homosexual friend said that his woman boss is married , I had to correct him and say no they think they are but ion this state (Florida) they are not so they can dream all they want

Why also do we not see this being covered on the likes of hannity, on fox etc?


12 posted on 06/04/2008 9:48:50 AM PDT by manc (a normal natural marriage is between a man and a woman, MA has a perverted sham marriages)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Proof that the only way to deal with this is a federal constitutional amendment.


13 posted on 06/04/2008 9:49:25 AM PDT by Wally_Kalbacken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

just more gasoline on the fire...


14 posted on 06/04/2008 9:53:32 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Why is anyone surprised?

I do have a question on this request. Has any court ever postponed the effective date of a ruling until election day before ?


15 posted on 06/04/2008 9:55:54 AM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Total judicial arrogance!


16 posted on 06/04/2008 9:57:23 AM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Sickening display of arrogance by an effete corp of impudent judicial elites.


17 posted on 06/04/2008 9:57:25 AM PDT by Faith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

It will also generate even more lawsuits, if the ban goes into effect. They will say that any same-sex marriage from June to November’s election will still be legal and valid. Or the courts will be asked that specific question and will rule that they are valid, I’m sure.

I understand that Political Correctness says that gay marriage should be allowed. But has public opinion really shifted significantly on the issue? If voters in state after state had voted to allow it rather than to ban it, the debate would be entirely different. If same-sex marriage is so obviously a good policy or law, then state after state would vote to allow it rather than to ban it.

I know Calif. had passed a same-sex marriage law, which Arnold s. vetoed. I don’t like that they are both in court and trying to pass a law on the subject. If it’s true that it’s a “civil rights” issue not subject to a vote, then how can they be trying to change the law? If they try to change the law legislatively, they are admitting that it’s a legislative/policy issue, to be determined in a legislature or a referendum.


18 posted on 06/04/2008 10:02:18 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: HoosierHawk
Won’t that cause a heck of a lot of confusion in November when gay marriage is banned again?

Then the initiative will be overturned as being an ex post facto law. The courts have become something very sinister.

19 posted on 06/04/2008 10:03:38 AM PDT by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
RECALL HAPPENING!
20 posted on 06/04/2008 10:04:05 AM PDT by notaliberal (Christ Our Hope!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sgt_Schultze
Whoops, I just replied the same way before reaching your post. Great minds, and all.
21 posted on 06/04/2008 10:05:22 AM PDT by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Well, I think we owe the bigamists and polygamists an apology. At least their practices are more normal than gay marriage! And if the “judges” are so concerned about discrimination, then what about those who wish to marry dogs, or ponies? vDon’t THEY have rights, too? LOL.


22 posted on 06/04/2008 10:09:01 AM PDT by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HoosierHawk
Won’t that cause a heck of a lot of confusion in November when gay marriage is banned again?

That happened before when the mayor of San Francisco, Philanderer Newsom, promoted gay marriage in his city in defiance of federal law, and then those couples who fell for it had their licenses invalidated later.

23 posted on 06/04/2008 10:31:15 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (Poor people been voting for Democrats for the last 50 years, and they still poor. --Charles Barkley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Pathetic. The good thing about this is they're going to make butt-sex marriage a national issue this year.

Should help Republicans everywhere, assuming our guys aren't stupid enough to go wussy in the issue. Not a guarantee, I know.
24 posted on 06/04/2008 10:36:36 AM PDT by Antoninus (John 6:54)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smogger
More fuel to the fire. This incenses me so much I think that will go over to http://www.protectmarriage.com/donate.php right now and make a donation. I suggest the rest of you Calfornia’s do the same.

Excellent idea.

Bump!
25 posted on 06/04/2008 10:38:15 AM PDT by Antoninus (John 6:54)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Curious as to which, or who in this “Supreme Court” are in such a damned hurry to get married?


26 posted on 06/04/2008 10:38:20 AM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists...call 'em what you will...They ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
No surprise. The “judges” ruled in favor of allowing gay marriage because they knew they were under a time crunch. The petition was WELL on it's way to surpassing the number of signatures it needed when these tyrannical judges made their decision to strike down Prop 22. They knew damn well they would lose on this one if they didn't attempt to strike first.

Allowing these sham marriages to proceed is all part of the propaganda and PR campaign to fight the amendment vote. They will be broadcasting the “happy” couples nonstop between now and November, and accusing anyone who votes for the amendment as being a cold hearted bigot. They will show gay couples sobbing saying “We waited 18 years as a couple for this, please don't take it away.” etc. etc. etc.

The leftists will also put out more rigged polls, as they did last week, taken in places like San Francisco to try to prove why the “majority” of California is against the amendment. I heard that rigged poll used on the news on the radio news yesterday. The announcer said, “The ballot initiative will be put up for vote, but according to polls it isn't expected to pass.” B.S.

Ignore the liberal media's coverage of this and fight gay marriage.

27 posted on 06/04/2008 10:45:02 AM PDT by 444Flyer (Marriage=One man+One woman! Vote to amend the California State Constitution this November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
The court's contempt for Californians is outrageous! Its activist judges need to be taught a lesson.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

28 posted on 06/04/2008 10:47:30 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: notaliberal
The Four need to be recalled and tossed out of office on their rear ends... just like Rose Bird and her colleagues!

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

29 posted on 06/04/2008 10:49:34 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

“Has any court ever postponed the effective date of a ruling until election day before ?”

I’ve never heard of such a thing before. It seems like the court would have really sabotaged itself by doing so. Three of the justices were in favor of rehearing (the three who dissented in the first place), but I don’t think any were in favor of a stay until election day. Such a move would have been very awkward precedent.


30 posted on 06/04/2008 10:53:19 AM PDT by Kahonek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Supreme Court: WE ARE YOUR RULERS!! BOW DOWN TO US IMMEDIATELY OR WE WILL CREATE A LAW TO SMITE YOU FROM THIS LAND. YES, WE KNOW THAT ISN’T CONSTITUTIONAL, BUT THAT DOESN’T MATTER- WE ARE YOUR RULERS!!!


31 posted on 06/04/2008 10:54:02 AM PDT by Southerngl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saoirise; SoldierDad; truthkeeper; warsaw44; sandyeggo; xcamel; MonicaG; 1035rep; rogue yam; ...

Ping.

Let’s getter done and vote in this amendment.


32 posted on 06/04/2008 10:58:07 AM PDT by 444Flyer (Marriage=One man+One woman! Vote to amend the California State Constitution this November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Southerngl
I wish President Bush and Condi Rice would want to bring Democracy to people in California, Florida, and other states where judges force their agenda and whims on the people.
33 posted on 06/04/2008 11:03:10 AM PDT by apocalypto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: 444Flyer

You bet. Having this on the ballot will turn out the California Republican and Independent voters.


34 posted on 06/04/2008 11:21:35 AM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: apocalypto

Things will only change in California when the liberals are put down for good. The liberals occupy our coast, one good Tsunami and California goes red.


35 posted on 06/04/2008 11:28:18 AM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Maybe this and the prospect of President B.O. will motivate some conservatives to come out and vote. It should help some Republicans in state and congressional races on the November ballot in California.


36 posted on 06/04/2008 11:32:25 AM PDT by Bubba_Leroy ("Once again, the white man keeps us down. What's up with Whitey?" - Michelle "My Belle" Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

That’s what bothers me most about this. That and what happens when they start suing religious institutions who refuse to recognize them?


37 posted on 06/04/2008 11:33:51 AM PDT by messierhunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Wally_Kalbacken
Proof that the only way to deal with this is a federal constitutional amendment.

A federal statute prohibiting marriages except between one man and one woman would be sufficient. Only if the US Supreme Court overturns the federal statute would a federal constitutional amendment be necessary.

Of course, there is no chance of getting a federal statute passed with the liberal democRats in charge of the House and Senate.

38 posted on 06/04/2008 11:36:33 AM PDT by Bubba_Leroy ("Once again, the white man keeps us down. What's up with Whitey?" - Michelle "My Belle" Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 2harddrive
Next will be constitutionally protected bigamy, followed by incestuous marriages. (If a brother and sister want to get married, what business does the government have in discriminating against them?)

Constitutionally protected marriages between humans and consenting animals will be next. (How dare the government discriminate between humans and other animals?)

"Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the Lord out of the heavens" Genesis 19:24. "Turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly" II Peter 2:6.

39 posted on 06/04/2008 11:42:34 AM PDT by Bubba_Leroy ("Once again, the white man keeps us down. What's up with Whitey?" - Michelle "My Belle" Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 1035rep
Having this on the ballot will turn out the California Republicans and Independent voters

I heard one of the talking heads on FOX opine that it might put California in play for McCain.

40 posted on 06/04/2008 11:47:53 AM PDT by Churchillspirit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Churchillspirit; kellynla
I heard one of the talking heads on FOX opine that it might put California in play for McCain.

That's what we're hearing. I know that many people voted for Obama in the primary, but honestly, I know severals Democrats and not one of them is voting for Obama. It would not surprise me if McCain wins this state.

41 posted on 06/04/2008 12:15:57 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: HoosierHawk
Of course it will cause confusion. Just as it did in MA. That is why the courts won't stay the decision. Then they can claim you cannot take away a right since some phony marriages have already taken place. And they will whine and carry on “Don't take away our rights! Don't make us second class citizens” and on and on and on. Don't be surprised if CA voters never get to vote.

On a more positive note, the SCOTUS accepted David Parkers parents rights lawsuit!

42 posted on 06/04/2008 12:26:37 PM PDT by gidget7 (Duncan Hunter-Valley Forge Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: messierhunter
That’s what bothers me most about this. That and what happens when they start suing religious institutions who refuse to recognize them?

It's time for Churches and religious organizations to proclaim they will perform "Holy Matrimony" ceremonies ONLY! Homosexuals do not qualify no matter what Judges rule from their high and mighty benches of tyranny.

43 posted on 06/04/2008 12:37:10 PM PDT by gidget7 (Duncan Hunter-Valley Forge Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: manc

Why also do we not see this being covered on the likes of hannity, on fox etc?


They’re far too busy over there campaigning non-stop for the Clintons.


44 posted on 06/04/2008 12:40:38 PM PDT by The Ghost of Rudy McRomney (Using Hillary to nip Obama's heels is like beating a dead horse with an armed nuclear bomb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #45 Removed by Moderator

To: lobsterjesus

President Bush won that election fairly. Apples and oranges lefty.


46 posted on 06/04/2008 12:53:29 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: lobsterjesus

Why do the homo’s need to call this abomination a marriage?


47 posted on 06/04/2008 12:55:29 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: lobsterjesus
Well, activist judges worked in our favor in swearing in President Bush at the 2000 election

Welcome to FR. I see we have our work cut out for us. But if you stick around a while, you can learn a lot...and you have a lot to learn...if not about what it means to be conservative, at least get a talking-points memo from the DNC from the past 6 months...

48 posted on 06/04/2008 12:57:12 PM PDT by LearnsFromMistakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LearnsFromMistakes

KOS kid got nuked. That was a stinky one.


49 posted on 06/04/2008 12:58:40 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: 1035rep
The liberals occupy our coast, one good Tsunami and California goes red.

Or, a major earthquake along the San Andreas fault from LA to above the SF gay (bay) area.

50 posted on 06/04/2008 1:06:29 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Dad of a 2nd BCT 10th Mountain Soldier home after 15 months in the Triangle of death)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson