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

Skip to comments.

SOURCE: CA Prop 8 held to be unconstitutional under due process and equal protection.
Drudge Report ^ | 8/04/2010 | Drudge

Posted on 08/04/2010 1:45:48 PM PDT by tsmith130

Court enjoins enforcement of Prop 8... Will be released at 2 pm pt...

Judge strikes down 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California'..


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: barackhusseinobama; bostonglobe; caglbt; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; judgesgonewild; margaretmarshall; newyorktimes; novote4you; novotes4people; nytimesmanipulation; obama; prop8; rinos4mitt; rinos4romney; romney; romneyfascism; romneyvsmasscitizens; samesexmarriage; stenchfromthebench; unconstitutionalmitt; whoisjohngalt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-364 next last
Siren up
1 posted on 08/04/2010 1:45:49 PM PDT by tsmith130
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Cobb salad for all.


2 posted on 08/04/2010 1:46:50 PM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

JUDGE: Having considered the trial evidence and the arguments of counsel, the court pursuant to FRCP 52(a) finds that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional and that its enforcement must be enjoined.


3 posted on 08/04/2010 1:46:54 PM PDT by tsmith130
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

If this stands then all states must permit gay marriage, as a Constitutional right?


4 posted on 08/04/2010 1:46:56 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

And why I avoid California and have now for 5 years, even though I have a way to get there at will.


5 posted on 08/04/2010 1:47:01 PM PDT by RobRoy (The US Today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Is anyone surprised? The ruling class cannot allow the little people input into the law.


6 posted on 08/04/2010 1:47:37 PM PDT by Ingtar (If he could have taxed it, Obama's hole would have been plugged by now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Facinating how our Founders, courts, Congresses, Presidents missed this for well over 200 years, that Gay marriage is a Constitutional right.


7 posted on 08/04/2010 1:48:35 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Kagan will be so happy...


8 posted on 08/04/2010 1:48:35 PM PDT by Sacajaweau (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Interestingly, the law is completely and utterly fair. It is just that some are motivated to break it more than others. All homosexuals have the same rights the rest of us have - to marry a member of the opposite sex who is not a direct family member and neither of them is currently married.

Or are those limitations unconstitutional as well? ;)

Idiots.


9 posted on 08/04/2010 1:48:43 PM PDT by RobRoy (The US Today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Williams
No ~ this affects a single court district.

It probably guarantees a Republican sweep in the Fall election, and quite possibly even the weakening of the Democrat lock on California's Hispanics.

The risk for the gay blades who take advantage of the injunction is that if it is lifted, and his is appealed, their marriages just disappear. Of course that's not really a risk for them since they'll just go to the nearest gay bar for dates, as per usual.

10 posted on 08/04/2010 1:49:26 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Williams
If this stands then all states must permit gay marriage, as a Constitutional right?

Where in The Constitution is marriage mentioned?

11 posted on 08/04/2010 1:49:38 PM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
voting doesn't count for anything........

I suspect Missouri's vote to exempt itself from the federal "Manditory Health Insurance Mandate" will also be ignored by activist courts.....

The peoples voting voice is silenced.

12 posted on 08/04/2010 1:49:44 PM PDT by rface (Remember to roll your Traditional IRA into ROTH before the end of the year.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Did anyone expect anything different from this rabid court of lawmakers in black robes? Hasn’t this court ALWAYS legislated from the bench?

This court is irellevant in my opinion.


13 posted on 08/04/2010 1:50:45 PM PDT by Kevin in California
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
Was to be expected, when our decadent imperial rulers made sure a homosexual judge heard the case.


14 posted on 08/04/2010 1:52:59 PM PDT by drpix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I know it affects the single District, but if appealed and upheld as far as the Supreme Court, it will be the law of the land.

Even as a District Court ruling it becomes precedent for other courts.


15 posted on 08/04/2010 1:53:10 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
This makes me so mad. We voted....twice...and some idiot judge ignores what the people of CA say.

This is just not the country I used to know. I really do hate the libs and their, "take it to court until we get what we want" tactic.

16 posted on 08/04/2010 1:54:12 PM PDT by CAluvdubya ("Sarah Palin fights, we cannot spare her."--GonzoGOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

used to, the definition of words used to mean something and did not need to be placed in constitution - that is, that a marriage requires a husband and a wife (ergo, no need to define it specifically as one man and one woman). All it takes is judicial notice of that definition to have tossed this out.


17 posted on 08/04/2010 1:54:24 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
'Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians'...

(Drudge keeps adding one line at a time.)

18 posted on 08/04/2010 1:54:41 PM PDT by tsmith130
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

There is no constitutional right to marriage.


19 posted on 08/04/2010 1:55:54 PM PDT by ichabod1 (Hail Mary Full of Grace, The Lord Is With Thee...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

One of the important aspects to consider in the decision is the judge’s ruling that having previously granted gay marriage, California cannot then take away that right.

That decision, if upheld, will be far-reaching in so many other cases.


20 posted on 08/04/2010 1:56:23 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
No one is surprised, right? The votes of the people mean NOTHING to the leftwing judges.
21 posted on 08/04/2010 1:56:39 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Yet another issue for the Democrats and RINOs to deal with this November.


22 posted on 08/04/2010 1:56:42 PM PDT by freedomfiter2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CAluvdubya

Can I go out and smash some windows now?

I’ve been needing a new flat screen.


23 posted on 08/04/2010 1:57:19 PM PDT by GunsAndBibles (God save Calif. - 'cause it's gonna take a miracle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Williams

No, it means that as of 2:00 PM Pacific Time, gay marriage is legal again in California. The rulings in other states banning gay marriage are not affected by this decision until and unless it reaches the SCOTUS.


24 posted on 08/04/2010 1:58:36 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Posted it on my blog as well:

http://annem040359.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/breaking-ca-prop-8-held-to-be-unconstitutional/


25 posted on 08/04/2010 1:59:11 PM PDT by Biggirl (AZ Is DOING THE JOB The Feds Should Be Doing, ENFORCING The Southern Border! =^..^=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

This will make more people in this country turn against the liberal judges.


26 posted on 08/04/2010 2:00:18 PM PDT by Biggirl (AZ Is DOING THE JOB The Feds Should Be Doing, ENFORCING The Southern Border! =^..^=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Where is abortion mentioned? It doesn’t matter - the courts now makes the rules.


27 posted on 08/04/2010 2:00:39 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

The State should get out of the marriage business entirely. I’d rather have it eliminated than have it redefined like this. It’s meaningless now. You want to have kids with someone? Draw up a contract.


28 posted on 08/04/2010 2:00:59 PM PDT by Floratina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams
You don't seriously think the USSC would sustain this?

I suspect you will see the Gubernator NOT appealing this case to the 9th ~ and it'll just die.

What you will need to do is run another referendum, and keep on doing that until you have some trustworthy individuals in your state government's leadership positions, and several federal judges out there die ~ or retire (although it is preferable they simply pass on to the other side ~ where Satan awaits them ~ else they continue to serve as judges on a part time basis and can continue to create mischief).

29 posted on 08/04/2010 2:01:11 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GunsAndBibles
Can I go out and smash some windows now?

No. Only minorities have the right to riot and destroy property. If you do it, you're ...

Wait for it ...

RACIST!

30 posted on 08/04/2010 2:01:56 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GunsAndBibles
That's just how I feel! Smashing windows would be theraputic!

I.....hate......this!!

31 posted on 08/04/2010 2:02:03 PM PDT by CAluvdubya ("Sarah Palin fights, we cannot spare her."--GonzoGOP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
What really underscores the "stigmas" is AIDS.

As long as homosexual males continue to spread AIDS and kill people they'll really have a difficult time eliciting any sympathy from serious minded people.

32 posted on 08/04/2010 2:04:01 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
More from Drudge:

'Stereotypes and misinformation have resulted in social and legal disadvantages for gays and lesbians'...

JUDGE: THE RIGHT TO MARRY PROTECTS AN INDIVIDUAL’S CHOICE OF MARITAL PARTNER REGARDLESS OF GENDER...

DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS DO NOT SATISFY CALIFORNIA’S OBLIGATION TO ALLOW PLAINTIFFS TO MARRY...

33 posted on 08/04/2010 2:04:27 PM PDT by tsmith130
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

So polygamy is a go as well?

Why not a Man and 6 year old while we are at it!?


34 posted on 08/04/2010 2:05:47 PM PDT by VanDeKoik (Iran doesnt have a 2nd admendment. Ya see how that turned out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
You don't seriously think the USSC would sustain this?

Judge Napolitano said on Cavuto just now that he thinks there'll be a 5-4 SCOTUS decision upholding this ruling with Kennedy voting with the liberals. He bases that opinion on a previous ruling in Colorado in which Kennedy voted to invalidate a law interfering with gay rights.

35 posted on 08/04/2010 2:06:51 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Then the law that required only men register for the draft is a violation of equal protection.


36 posted on 08/04/2010 2:07:12 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
Why not a Man and 6 year old while we are at it!?

I guess as long as it is a six year old boy and not a girl for these perverts.

37 posted on 08/04/2010 2:07:51 PM PDT by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

The ruling ended with “Who wants fudge?”


38 posted on 08/04/2010 2:08:35 PM PDT by Hillarys Gate Cult
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Another nail in America’s coffin.


39 posted on 08/04/2010 2:08:42 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Ideological and idiotic “decision” using 138 pages to strike down one sensible sentence...

They took a stand for their side; other than that, it means nothing - either way it was going to be decided in SCOTUS, so it was a political freebie for 9th Circus.


40 posted on 08/04/2010 2:09:24 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

How many times can the government subvert the will of the people in a so-called democratic society before the people stand up and do something about it?

Judges and the current administration are destroying this country. November can’t come quickly enough, but I fear even that will be too little, too late.


41 posted on 08/04/2010 2:10:01 PM PDT by whitey righty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult

ROTFLMAO!


42 posted on 08/04/2010 2:11:00 PM PDT by tsmith130
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

Will there be throngs of Prop 8 supports flooding the streets and throwing a tantrum tonight?


43 posted on 08/04/2010 2:11:15 PM PDT by Floratina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130
The sirene is up oh my

Actually it makes no noise so it is a light LOL

44 posted on 08/04/2010 2:11:33 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130; All
Someone please tell me again why I should take the time to vote? A single judge can overturn the will of the people.
45 posted on 08/04/2010 2:12:20 PM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Anti-Gunners suffer from Factose Intolerance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Prop 8 passed (52%) despite Obama getting 61% and the dems winning 34 (USHOR) seats compared to 19 by Repubs.

Many voters do not equate homosexual marriage to dems. This is due to the fact many dems openly deny supporting homosexual marriages (Of course, they wink, wink, which many voters do not pick up).

Also add to the fact that the Judge who overturned Prop 8 was appointed by a Repub President (Correct me if I am wrong).

How will you equate the democrat Party with this decision? (Dems will cover and say “We must respect the process etc...”)

46 posted on 08/04/2010 2:12:33 PM PDT by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

The case for civil marriage between a man and a woman in a nutshell:

http://stumpedagain.wordpress.com/marriage-not-so-gay/


47 posted on 08/04/2010 2:13:00 PM PDT by cookcounty ("Today's White House reporters seem one ball short of a ping pong scrimmage.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
So polygamy is a go as well?

Probably. Consenting adults and all ...

Why not a Man and 6 year old while we are at it!?

Minors can't consent for themselves. You know, except in the cases of whether or not they want their parents to know they're having sex and killing babies.

48 posted on 08/04/2010 2:13:05 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
It probably guarantees a Republican sweep in the Fall election, and quite possibly even the weakening of the Democrat lock on California's Hispanics.

You're right. Liberals may be cheering this travesty, but between what that hack judge did with the Arizona law and this -- both voter approved measures -- there is going to be a lot of anger.

That anger will only be worthwhile if we use it to elect conservatives, not "Republicans" willing to vote for a leftist pig like Elena Kagan.
49 posted on 08/04/2010 2:13:48 PM PDT by LostInBayport (Fiscal order and a strong border...how about Christie/Cuccinelli 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
So polygamy is a go as well? Probably. Consenting adults and all ...

Then bestiality following close behind.

50 posted on 08/04/2010 2:13:59 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-364 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