BREAKING: California Supreme Court Uphold Same-Sex Marriage Ban

LifeSiteNews.com -- Your Life, Family and Culture Outpost ^ | Tuesday, May 26, 2009 | By Peter J. Smith

[topher]

Tuesday May 26, 2009

---

BREAKING: California Supreme Court Uphold Same-Sex Marriage Ban

18,000 same-sex "marriages" obtained under Supreme Court ruling allowed to stand

By Peter J. Smith



SAN FRANCISCO, California (LifeSiteNews.com) - The California Supreme Court has struck down a constitutional challenge to Proposition 8, the voter-approved constitutional amendment to the state constitution that upholds marriage as the union between a man and a woman. However the ruling does not apply to the 18,000 homosexuals who received marriage licenses from the state of California before November 5, 2008.



The justices voted 6-1 to uphold the amendment, which effectively bans same-sex "marriage," reversing a course that began last year in May, when the justices had voted to invalidate a California voter referendum passed in 2000 by a wide 61% to 38% majority, defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

In their decision, the justices argued that the issue at hand in Proposition 8 was "the scope of the right of the people, under the provisions of the California Constitution, to change or alter the state Constitution itself through the initiative process."

The high court rejected the challenges to Proposition 8 which argued that it did not constitute an "amendment," but a "revision" to the state constitution, which would require the involvement of the state legislature.



The justices also rejected Attorney General Jerry Brown's theory that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional on the basis that it violated inalienable rights such as "fundamental liberty" or a "right to privacy" without compelling interest.

However, Justice Werdegar, in her concurring opinion, said that although Proposition 8 did not bring about "such a broad change in the principle of equal protection," she insisted that all branches of the state government "continue to have the duty … to eliminate the remaining important differences between marriage and domestic partnership, both in substance and perception."



In the meantime, the decision lets stand all marriage licenses given to same-sex couples between June 16 and November 4, 2008 under the authority of the May 2008 Supreme Court decision. That part of the decision has been criticized by defenders of Proposition 8, who point out that applying constitutional amendments only prospectively and not retroactively is not the norm nor supported by well-established legal principles, as the high court insists.



"This part of the ruling makes little sense, because a constitutional amendment like this one means that going forward, that which happened in the past is no longer recognized," said Mat Staver, the founder of Liberty Counsel, which helped represent the Campaign for California Families in defending Proposition 8. "When the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, slavery was abolished. Slave holders could not claim grandfather rights to own another person."

"If the licenses that were issued in this limited time frame remain valid, then what about licenses outside the state that were issued in this same period? If a person with such a license moves to California, can their license also be recognized? Of course, the answer to both questions should be 'No!'"

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09052605.html

---

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.

[Wil H]

So now we might see some REAL “teabaggers” demonstrating in the streets...LOL!

[Churchillspirit]

It will be even less likely if the perverts riot upon hearing the news.

Quite.....I must seek an alternate road home tonight, as Redondo and Broadway in Long Beach, CA is a hub for the perverts' protests.

[Maelstorm]

This is excellent. I got the message on my phone. The Homos are going to be out in force. California keep your cameras ready to record their ugly demonstrations. Provoke them and record them. :-) Now on to Maine and New Hampshire and Iowa.
We can win this battle Meghan McCain be damned.

[real_patriotic_american]

A significant victory over the Democrats, the liberals, Hollywood and the mainstream news media (such as Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Diane Sawyer, George S., and Charlie Gibson).

[goldstategop]

The California Supremes tossed a politically correct consolation prize to the Gaystapo. Its pointless to try to overturn that since the state Supreme Court IS is the final court of appeal in California.

"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

[goldstategop]

I think the existing marriages stand but no more marriages - those after Nov. 5th, 2008, will be valid or recognized in California. I think they should have been annulled but the Court had to appease the militant gays somewhere. And this I think will take the steam out of the move to change the California Constitution just for them.

"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

[goldstategop]

Agreed. The Court ignored the standing law at the time - Proposition 22, now reinstated - that prohibited such marriages. But allowing the 18,000 same sex marriages to stand wasn't about the law, it was about politics.

"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

[goldstategop]

Its like grandfathering in slavery where its prohibited and that contradicts both the intent of the law as well as common sense. But political correctness is about remaking both to suit the liberal fads of the day.

"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

[longtermmemmory]

http://www.dayofdecision.com/

the homosexual advocates are preparing protests (riots?) in the streets.

Also from their website, it looks like the next attack is 100% square on full faith and credit by demanding Obama repeal the 1996 DOMA.

(the president can order repeal?)

2010 is going to be an iiiiiinteresting election year.

[TheFourthMagi]

The Left has been bashing straight men for decades. Why?

So they can elevate the image of gay men in contrast.

The Right needs to start standing up for straight men: when is the last time that a conservative politician weighed in against feminist stereotyping of straight men?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

As Gomer Pyle would say... Wasn't there something funny/strange about Jim Nabor smeared all over the scandal sheet tabloids a few years ago???

[topher]

The homonazies have long been at odds with Christians...

Look for descrations of churches and other things as retaliation...

[Nachoman]

This court ruling is something else the homos can shove up their a$$es.

[Alatar]

A significant victory over the Democrats, the liberals, Hollywood and the mainstream news media (such as Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Diane Sawyer, George S., and Charlie Gibson).

Is this victory? Friend, take a step back and look again. Two hundred years ago, the legal penalty for sex between consenting adults of the same gender was death. Seventy-five years ago, declared homosexuals could not serve in government or as teachers. Fifty years ago, gays could not adopt. Today, the battleground is marriage, and each confrontation requires huge amounts of time and money for an outcome which is far from certain.

Victory? The man hanging over the edge of a precipice, clinging to bare stone with his bare hands, does not talk of victory when he finds a tiny new foothold, six inches above the last one.

[real_patriotic_american]

You make a great point below. I like it! It was a victory in that particular case, but I admire your viewpoint.

Re: “Is this victory? Friend, take a step back and look again. Two hundred years ago, the legal penalty for sex between consenting adults of the same gender was death. Seventy-five years ago, declared homosexuals could not serve in government or as teachers. Fifty years ago, gays could not adopt. Today, the battleground is marriage, and each confrontation requires huge amounts of time and money for an outcome which is far from certain.

Victory? The man hanging over the edge of a precipice, clinging to bare stone with his bare hands, does not talk of victory when he finds a tiny new foothold, six inches above the last one.”