Posted on 08/05/2010 8:05:44 AM PDT by SmithL
"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license," federal Judge Vaughn Walker wrote. So one judge overturned a measure approved by 52 percent of California voters in 2008 and upheld by the California Supreme Court in a 6-1 ruling.
. . .
Walker summed up support for Prop. 8 as emanating from "a fear or unarticulated dislike of same-sex couples."
Wrong. Voters have reason to be afraid lest legalizing same-sex marriage result in unintended consequences - such as the legalization of polygamy, as recommended by a Canadian panel commissioned to debunk the same-sex-marriage-legitimizes-polygamy argument.
. . .
Barring a backlash, you would expect state voters to approve same-sex marriage within the decade - which would avoid lasting rancor over a court-imposed decision. Instead Walker went with: Whether you like it or not.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
The judge is a homo, what did you expect?
WHETHER YOU LIKE OR NOT!
How do we get to a point where a gay judge is involved in a gay case overturning 8 million voters?
If this does not tell you how bad things are, you will never get it.
Here’s my question: Why does the government have anything whatever to do with marriage? why not just let it be a private or church-related contract?
So basically the judge is saying that the people have no say on issues of sexuality are dealt with in public. Next it could be polygamy. Next it could be the age of consent. Of course why not public nudity and public sex acts as well? How is that hurting anyone, it is natural, it is only that people think it is yucky, right?
This judicial decision is out and out tyrannical. It is basically a perverted judge abusing his power to impose his will on the people.
Why do we bother to have elections if some unelected judge is just going to overthrow the will of the people and some media schmuck is going to refer to election results that he disagrees with as mob rule.
Democratically held elections are NOT mob rule.
Because the people have a legitimate interest in promoting marriage (between a man and a woman) in order to create stable and prosperous family structure for our children and the next generation.
Why should the people be told that they have no right to have a say on such an issue?
Exactly. You give government the keys to something and this is exactly where you eventually end up.
The GOVERNMENT Has Spoken! All must now bow down. The will of the people means nothing. Government is Master! This is for the greater good of the collective.
That is precisely how leftist nanny-state social engineers talk. Marriage has been happening for thousands of years without tax dollars "promoting" it.
Even those drooling in cups are starting to pay attention....
And, this case reminds us again that we are in Orwell’s “1984” in some ways.
Consider this: The judge ruled that it violates federal law for California to define marriage as a man and a woman. Yet federal law itself defines marriage as a man and a woman. Isn’t this “1984” or “Alice in Wonderland” thinking? How could he issue such a ruling with a straight face?
The happy liberals who want to change the definition of marriage do not think about such legal matters, however. They just want their agenda enacted through the courts.
I have heard very few liberal or Democrat politicians ever talk about same-sex marriage. They prefer to let judges impose this policy decision without having to go through the messy legislative process. They want nationwide homosexual marriage but don’t have enough courage to pass a law to allow it.
Another Federal fudgepacker on the bench. I bet Obama is happy.
>>”Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license,” federal Judge Vaughn Walker wrote.<<
In all seriousness, either these judges are idiots or they think we are. This is very, VERY black and white, as all laws should be.
Homosexuals can get a marriage license just like everybody else. And just like everybody else, there are restrictions on this. It is something like this:
If you want to marry a member of the opposite sex and:
1. You both are adult human beings or, for each one that is not, they have a parent or guardian’s permission.
2. You both consent.
3. Neither of you are already married.
4. You are nod close relatives.
5. One of you is male and the other is a female.
If you meet those requirements, you may marry, whether you are homosexual or heterosexual. If you fail any of them, you may not. It’s pretty simple and applies to all american citizens equally.
There is NO discrimination here. Homosexuals, like everyone else, may marry if they meet those requirements. They may have no motivation to, or may want to marry differently, but so do a lot of people. Pedophiles are a good example.
So, feel free to participate in acts that are legal, but if you want to get MARRIED, just meet the criteria above. They are basically the same criteria that have applied for the entire history of mankind.
There are good reasons for that.
Like I said, either this judge is an idiot or he thinks we are.
Since when did a dangerous behavior become a protected civil right?
I suppose heroin users will now have their day in court.
No it is not. There is no law forcing anyone to marry. Poeple are free to not marry or do what they like in private. It is idiotic to compare marraige law to the heavy handed regualtions of the left-wing.
I’m not a lawyer, but this ruling does seem to leave the door wide open for all types of marriages.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35374462/Prop-8-Ruling-FINAL
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.