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

Skip to comments.

California Proposition 8 ruling: PROP 8 UPHELD (faux marriages to remain)
local media

Posted on 05/26/2009 10:03:42 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture

The California Supreme Court rules to UPHOLD Proposition 8 (which put into the California state constitution that marriage is defined as being between a man and woman)

The court also ruled on the validation of the pseudo-marriages performed before passage of Prop 8.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: caglbt; gaystapo; homobama; homosexualagenda; homosexualmarriage; marriage; moralabsolutes; panicinpervtown; prop8; proposition8; ruling; samesexmarriage; traditionalmarriage; willofthepeople
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-213 next last

1 posted on 05/26/2009 10:03:42 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
Oxymoronic decision
2 posted on 05/26/2009 10:05:02 AM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (zer0 is doing to capitalism what Kennedy did to health care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Of course they uphold it. Anyone who thought otherwise is crazy. They would never overturn the vote of the people


3 posted on 05/26/2009 10:05:33 AM PDT by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

I think that’s probably what most people were expecting.

The libs know that we’ll just go through this fight again next year. It never ends until they win by attrition.


4 posted on 05/26/2009 10:05:39 AM PDT by rom (Obama '12 slogan: Let's keep on hopin'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Here we go....


5 posted on 05/26/2009 10:05:39 AM PDT by joejm65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Better than I was expecting, anyway


6 posted on 05/26/2009 10:05:46 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Two rulings: Prop 8 upheld... gay marriages not to be recognized, but existing “married” couples to remian.


7 posted on 05/26/2009 10:05:52 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (RECALL Abel Maldonado; DEPORT Arnold Schwarzenegger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Homosexuals’ “marriages” are bogus.


8 posted on 05/26/2009 10:06:00 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: CounterCounterCulture

Carrie 1
Perez 0

But what a stupid outcome. It’s like telling your kids that it’s wrong to steal, but letting them keep the stuff they swiped from the store yesterday.


9 posted on 05/26/2009 10:06:19 AM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98E21HG1&show_article=1


10 posted on 05/26/2009 10:06:45 AM PDT by campaignPete R-CT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

The Gaystapo has been unleashed to the streets in anger of the decision.


11 posted on 05/26/2009 10:06:45 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (RECALL Abel Maldonado; DEPORT Arnold Schwarzenegger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Agree with the decision of course, but they should have invalidated the prior gay marriages.


12 posted on 05/26/2009 10:06:46 AM PDT by Enterprise (The Porkulus brought us economic swine flu.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

18,000 “marriages” to remain legal.

We’ll be voting in 2010 .. again.


13 posted on 05/26/2009 10:06:54 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

“Better than I was expecting, anyway”

Yep.


14 posted on 05/26/2009 10:07:11 AM PDT by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925; Foreigners 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

there is precident.

states which abolished common law marriage. allowed prior common law marriages to stand.


15 posted on 05/26/2009 10:07:18 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Yes, it’s like calling a dog a cat. You can do it, but it doesn’t make it so.


16 posted on 05/26/2009 10:07:24 AM PDT by brytlea (Jesus loves me, this I know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda
Of course they uphold it. Anyone who thought otherwise is crazy. They would never overturn the vote of the people

At least not a third time anyways....

17 posted on 05/26/2009 10:08:23 AM PDT by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

Breaking news... multiple threads heads up.


18 posted on 05/26/2009 10:08:26 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (RECALL Abel Maldonado; DEPORT Arnold Schwarzenegger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

KFI (640am) Los Angeles

Handle (Handle on the Law fame) is trying to cast this as a non victory for those opposing homosexual marriage, stating that the actual issues before the court didn’t relate to homosexual marriage per se.

He states it was an issue of whether the initiative changed the state constitution or not.

Preempting Rush to bloviate on the topic.


19 posted on 05/26/2009 10:08:27 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Obama is mentally a child of ten. Just remember that when he makes statements and issues policy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

Is this an intentional loophole to leave this legally open to challenge??


20 posted on 05/26/2009 10:08:58 AM PDT by Kieri (The Conservatrarian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

The DUmmies heads must be exploding about now.


21 posted on 05/26/2009 10:09:47 AM PDT by mojitojoe ( Idiots elected a Marxist ideologue with narcissistic personality disorder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Having determined that none of the constitutional challenges to the adoption of Proposition 8 have merit, we observe that if there is to be a change to the state constitutional rule embodied in that measure, it must “find its expression at the ballot box.” (In re Marriage Cases, supra, 43 Cal.4th 757, 884 (conc. & dis. opn. of Corrigan, J.); see also id. at pp. 861, 878 (conc. & dis. opn. of Baxter, J.).)

5-2 ruling


22 posted on 05/26/2009 10:10:05 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (RECALL Abel Maldonado; DEPORT Arnold Schwarzenegger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

chalk one up for the peoples vote


23 posted on 05/26/2009 10:10:14 AM PDT by angelcindy (c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

“Homosexuals’ “marriages” are bogus.”

Or same sex marriage is bogus, opposite sex marriage rules.


24 posted on 05/26/2009 10:10:21 AM PDT by mickey finn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
But what a stupid outcome. It’s like telling your kids that it’s wrong to steal, but letting them keep the stuff they swiped from the store yesterday.

Yea and no...if you stole something before it was illegal to steal, then legally you should get to keep it. Of course it was only legal because the courts in the first place.

25 posted on 05/26/2009 10:10:35 AM PDT by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rom

You’re exactly right, unfortunately our “leadership” in the Republican party never seems to learn. They keep taking the “dialogue” bait the left holds out, every time. Like Hussein at Notre Dame. They want to “talk”, and compromise, until they get the whole enchilada. Then they show their true arrogant uncompromising selves. Hussein just said “I won”, and still dumazzes supposedly on the right think they can “dialogue” with him.


26 posted on 05/26/2009 10:10:43 AM PDT by mrsmel (Put the Gitmo terrorists near Capitol Hill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Any details on break down or gay reaction on the ground?


27 posted on 05/26/2009 10:10:49 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
Some gays who married before the ballot proposition became law now have registered 'pre-ban' marriages.

... this sounds strangely familiar. Hope liberals enjoy the shoe being on the other foot.

28 posted on 05/26/2009 10:11:06 AM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

I cannot wait for the articulate response from Perez Hilton/s


29 posted on 05/26/2009 10:11:14 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (http://ccwsaveslives.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
states which abolished common law marriage

But these weren't common law marriages, they were, ahem, legal

30 posted on 05/26/2009 10:11:49 AM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (zer0 is doing to capitalism what Kennedy did to health care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Victory!! The beginning of our taking back the country.


31 posted on 05/26/2009 10:12:11 AM PDT by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

I really think they deliberately upheld the existing “marriages” to give the queers something on which to base “precedence” when they contest this further.


32 posted on 05/26/2009 10:12:23 AM PDT by mrsmel (Put the Gitmo terrorists near Capitol Hill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

They’re marching on the streets of San Francisco (surprise, surprise)


33 posted on 05/26/2009 10:12:30 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (RECALL Abel Maldonado; DEPORT Arnold Schwarzenegger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Not bad...overall.I guess members of the CA Supreme Court didn’t want to be recalled.Now if only the voters of Massachusetts would be allowed to decide the issue.The pervert lobby here...both inside and outside the state legislature...knows that every statewide poll shows that pervert “marriage” would lose...convincingly...so they’ve successfully fought against it even appearing on the ballot.


34 posted on 05/26/2009 10:13:05 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Christian+Veteran=Terrorist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

“I cannot wait for the articulate response from Perez Hilton/s”

Maybe it will become a suicide bomber.


35 posted on 05/26/2009 10:14:14 AM PDT by mickey finn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
...marching prancing... there, fixed it.
36 posted on 05/26/2009 10:14:24 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Obama is mentally a child of ten. Just remember that when he makes statements and issues policy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

keeping in mind the court legislated the 18,000 marriages by overturning the will of the people the first time.

While what they did is analogous to outlawing common law marraige with existing marriages, it is not correct to apply that since they are two totally different issues.

The court was telegraphing that this has to be at the ballot box again. IOW those 18,000 marriages will have to be eliminated by popular vote. (or if stats hold true, within 24 months 75% of those relationships will be over)


37 posted on 05/26/2009 10:15:22 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

I’m in LA, and the gays who are on another blog that I read say that they are “devasted”...


38 posted on 05/26/2009 10:15:27 AM PDT by Beaten Valve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel
I really think they deliberately upheld the existing “marriages” to give the queers something on which to base “precedence” when they contest this further.

Plus seeing a bunch of homo's rioting in the streets is just toooo damn fugly

39 posted on 05/26/2009 10:15:47 AM PDT by Las Vegas Ron (zer0 is doing to capitalism what Kennedy did to health care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

Wow. Marriage in CA should be between a man and a woman.

What is this world coming to.


40 posted on 05/26/2009 10:16:03 AM PDT by saneright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

They think it sucks


41 posted on 05/26/2009 10:16:15 AM PDT by east1234 (It's the borders stupid! My new enviromentalist inspired tagline: cut, kill, dig and drill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

I think their approach was that the homosexual marriages prior to Prop 8 were still valid because otherwise Prop 8 acts as an ex post facto law.

Which is unconstitutional.

Just a hunch.


42 posted on 05/26/2009 10:16:19 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007 (To view the FR@Alabama ping list, click on my profile!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture

SAN FRANCISCO - California’s highest court on Tuesday upheld the state’s gay-marriage ban but allowed existing same-sex marriages to stand.

The California Supreme Court handed down its decision in a series of lawsuits seeking to overturn November’s Proposition 8. Gay-rights advocates maintain the ballot measure so dramatically revised the state constitution’s equal protection clause that it needed the Legislature’s approval before it could be put to voters.

The seven-member court upheld the initiative as a constitutional expression of the electorate’s will, but also decided to sustain the marriages of an estimated 18,000 gay couples who wed before the measure passed with 52 percent of the vote.

—AP


43 posted on 05/26/2009 10:16:33 AM PDT by Smogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saneright

San Francesco must be throwing a hissy fit.


44 posted on 05/26/2009 10:17:06 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: real_patriotic_american
I'm afraid I disagree with you. The left never concedes until they accomplish the goal they set out to win. Mrs Thatcher called it the "ratchet effect"--the right never corrects moves to the left as far they've gone, they only temporarily turn them back just a bit. When the left has the power again, they just pick up where they left off. In all the decades sense the left has held real power in this country-I'd say around the time of FDR-this country has lurched ever more to the left. Even President Reagan couldn't completely correct the course. Who thinks we are more to the right since FDR? Government only grows, even under Republican administration, rather than ever shrinking. The rats keep moving more to the left (openly), and the Republican party moves more to the left as a reaction, in order to merely appear "centrist".
45 posted on 05/26/2009 10:17:12 AM PDT by mrsmel (Put the Gitmo terrorists near Capitol Hill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel
I really think they deliberately upheld the existing “marriages” to give the queers something on which to base “precedence” when they contest this further.

Where do the pervs go? Is there a state court in CA that's higher than their Supreme Court? My hunch is that the decision they announced was as far as they could go and still avoid recall.I'll wager that they wanted to strike down the whole thing but settled for "half a loaf" so that both sides could claim *some* degree of victory.

46 posted on 05/26/2009 10:17:25 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Christian+Veteran=Terrorist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

I see your point, but if you proceed from the view that marriage is between one man and one woman in the first place, then morally at least, it’s always been wrong do do otherwise. But as you say, since a court previously said it was OK, I can see how they view this as a dilemma, and see fit to allow the existing gay marriages to stand.


47 posted on 05/26/2009 10:18:02 AM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
They fought the law and the law won. WooHoo!
48 posted on 05/26/2009 10:19:46 AM PDT by 444Flyer ("...But Mordecai would not kneel down or pay him honor."-Esther 3:2b)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Faggot activists blocking streets in San Francisco (Van Ness)


49 posted on 05/26/2009 10:19:47 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (RECALL Abel Maldonado; DEPORT Arnold Schwarzenegger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mickey finn
Well, it looks like the Supremes “ducked” on this issue by saying that the 18K homosexual marriages on the books are valid...
50 posted on 05/26/2009 10:20:07 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-213 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