The judge is a homo, what did you expect?
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.
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.
>>”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.
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
There have been cases of people who were unaware of the definition of marriage looking for a license.
Or all people telling me that no homosexual has ever gotten married in the state of California?
It is comletely unacceptable that the UNELECTED judiciary should have the power to overturn a DEMOCRACTIC decision. Our country is a democracy, not a black-robed oligarchy. Perhaps we need a second civil war to reinforce this, before faggotry inflames our nation like it has so many others.
It doesn't. The law doesn't have any way of knowing when the license is issued what your private proclivities are.
The law only prohibits issueing a license to two men, or two women whatever their proclivities.
In any case, there is no such thing as gay marriage. It doesn't exist. Pass all the laws you want, it is something that in 15000 years has never existed because it doesn't exist. Californians are within their right to refuse to license something that doesn't exist and never has.
And what is the end result? Federal court fiat overturning state constitutional matters to restore the state supreme court fiat of unilateral redefinition of marriage.
So, in effect, the courts have declared that they are the final word, that balance of power no longer exists. Bye, bye, 10th amendment.
So if gays can marry, why can’t relatives marry each other?
Whether you like it or not.
Spoken like a true tyrant.
I do not recognize such a ruling: it destroys the true meaning of marriage.
I don't know when these people (government workers) began to think of themselves as royalty, but we need to correct their misconception immediately.
I am neither supporting nor condoning gay marriage, but given that this court has “ruled” then by definition, “same sex partners” should no longer be able to share benefits such as health insurance, access to hospitals, etc unless said benefit sharing are equally accessible to different sex partners. They will have to get married to participate in the benefits of their partner.
Thus the fact that Disney offers medical coverage and other benefits to same sex partners, but NOT heterosexual partners is unequal under the law.
Plus if gays get married then how are the courts going to “stick it to” one of the partners similar to how they stick it to the male partner now? What if two men are in divorce court - how will the court screw them both?
So this freak homo-judge from San Francisco gets to re-define the word ‘marriage’ to suit his own faggotry, while overturning not just the voters, but thousands of years of tradition? Like, hell!
Is anybody keeping score on how many voters’ initiatives have been overturned in CA?