Federal Judge Rules California's Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

[Chris_]

A federal judge on Wednesday overturned a California ban on same-sex marriage, ruling that the Proposition 8 ballot initiative was unconstitutional.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Vaugh Walker, one of three openly gay federal judges in the country, gave opponents of the controversial Proposition 8 ballot a major victory.

Despite the favorable ruling for same-sex couples, gay marriage will not be allowed to resume. That's because the judge said he wants to decide whether his order should be suspended while the proponents pursue their appeal in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The judge ordered both sides to submit written arguments by Aug. 6 on the issue.

"Because Proposition 8 disadvantages gays and lesbians without any rational justification, Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment," the judge ruled.

Fox News

[thundley4]

The DUmmies are hailing this as a victory, but it's just another step on the way to the USSC.

[vesta111]

The DUmmies are hailing this as a victory, but it's just another step on the way to the USSC.

They have worn me down folks.  I give up, none of this is my business.

It is just too darn hot to worry about anyones sex life except MY OWN ,and it is  too darn hot to even want one----who has the energy.

[miskie]

Personally, I could care less either way --


However -- this will have negative ramifications for Obama. There are two groups who overwhelmingly support Prop 8

A ) Blacks.
B ) Hispanics.

and one religion..

A ) Muslim.

This also further highlights Obama's inability to recognize the most important thing today.. According to Biden, its a three-letter word --J-O-B-S--    Instead Team Obama is far too interested in gay marriage and immigration.

[Carl]

Any law disadvantages someone so that sure seems like a lame argument.
It by judicial decree ascribes a higher level of citizenry on them making them a protected group in the words of the finding "without any rational justification".

[Godot showed up]

Conservatives have to care about this. This is just one more hammer at the foundations of our Judaeo-Christian traditions. I can't look at this coldly and see it only through a political prism.

Yes, it's not over; yes, this goes up the rungs. The 9th Circuit is a crapshoot, and for that matter, so is the USSC, and that's where this will end. And then what? This all depends on Anthony Kennedy again? One man decides whether or not centuries of Western tradition and law are shattered? Madness.

[thundley4]

Teh Gheys won't be happy until a minister/preacher/priest can be forced into marrying them in a church.

[Ptarmigan]

Personally, I could care less either way --


However -- this will have negative ramifications for Obama. There are two groups who overwhelmingly support Prop 8

A ) Blacks.
B ) Hispanics.

and one religion..

A ) Muslim.

This also further highlights Obama's inability to recognize the most important thing today.. According to Biden, its a three-letter word --J-O-B-S--    Instead Team Obama is far too interested in gay marriage and immigration.

You raise a good point right there. As for gay marriage, if states want to ban or legalize them fine with me. Personally, I rather have civil unions for gays.

[lastparker]

The only pleasure I ever got out of Prop 8 was when DU looked around, the day after the election of The One, all hungover on the hopey changey cocktails, and screamed: "OMG!  Those black people voted against the gays!"

I LOVE it when they let their racism out of the basement.

[PatriotGame]

Wow!

Gay San Francisco judge rules in FAVOR gays in gay marriage case.

Never saw that coming...

[ColonialMarine0431]

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, whenever an activist judge overrules the will of the people, then something is seriously wrong.

[thundley4]

Wow!

Gay San Francisco judge rules in FAVOR gays in gay marriage case.

Never saw that coming...

I seem to remember that there were some calling for the judge to recuse himself when this first went before him.

[Tucker]

When the corn holer supporters start crowing, and they will, ask if they can claim "Married filling jointly" on the Federal 1040's. When they say No, tell em to STFU.

BTW. They'll be a lot of TSing on the island tonight.

[JLO]

Teh Gheys won't be happy until a minister/preacher/priest can be forced into marrying them in a church.

Pardon me for quoting you saying "Teh Gheys " is really queer.

Use proper  English language, please.  Just so we can all follow along in what you want to say.  And thanks  in advance.

[PatriotGame]

Pardon me for quoting you saying "Teh Gheys " is really queer.

Use proper  English language, please.  Just so we can all follow along in what you want to say.  And thanks  in advance.

You see, it is a manner of calling out the gays for the dysfunctional manner of their chosen existence: Dysfunctional WRONG spelling equates to Dysfunctional WRONG lifestyle.

[Hawkwarrior2]

I find it absurd and completely undemocratic that a judge can overturn a popular vote. That being said, I think we have much more important things to worry about than gays getting married. I mean, if you just let them have "civil unions" or something, they would shut up and we wouldn't have to hear about this crap anymore. Just saying, we have some issues closer to critical mass than this one.

[Celtic Rose]

I find it absurd and completely undemocratic that a judge can overturn a popular vote. That being said, I think we have much more important things to worry about than gays getting married. I mean, if you just let them have "civil unions" or something, they would shut up and we wouldn't have to hear about this crap anymore. Just saying, we have some issues closer to critical mass than this one.

Um, no, they had Civil Unions, until a judge ruled that not allowing them to be married violated their civil rights, so the judge allowed Gay Marriage in California.  The people voted that they did not want Gay Marriage, and now another judge is saying that the people's will doesn't matter.  

The fact that they keep pushing for "real marriage" tells me that it is only a matter of time until a church is sued for not allowing a gay couple to marry, or until a photographer is sued for deciding not to work a gay wedding, or until a judge rules that they cannot be discriminated against when it comes to adoption.  There are so many factors beyond just "they want to get married".  

Here's a timeline for the whole history since San Francisco started allowing Gays to marry without state authorization:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/The-long-battle-over-same-sex-marriage-99977109.html

[dutch508]

Yee-Haw! Ghey Marrage is back on the election cycle!

 

[thundley4]

Um, no, they had Civil Unions, until a judge ruled that not allowing them to be married violated their civil rights, so the judge allowed Gay Marriage in California.  The people voted that they did not want Gay Marriage, and now another judge is saying that the people's will doesn't matter.  

The fact that they keep pushing for "real marriage" tells me that it is only a matter of time until a church is sued for not allowing a gay couple to marry, or until a photographer is sued for deciding not to work a gay wedding, or until a judge rules that they cannot be discriminated against when it comes to adoption.  There are so many factors beyond just "they want to get married".  

Here's a timeline for the whole history since San Francisco started allowing Gays to marry without state authorization:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/The-long-battle-over-same-sex-marriage-99977109.html

I mentioned the church thing , too, but on second thought , forcing a church to perform a wedding would be violating the first amendment right to freely practice their religion.  However, I do think that a photographer has already been sued for this.  Photographer sued.

[Celtic Rose]

I mentioned the church thing , too, but on second thought , forcing a church to perform a wedding would be violating the first amendment right to freely practice their religion.  However, I do think that a photographer has already been sued for this.  Photographer sued.

The court would probably rule in favor of the court, but considering judges in California, it might happen on appeal.  However, most churches are not wealthy, and a court case could easily bankrupt a church, regardless of the outcome.

[NHSparky]

And if that wasn't a 1A violation, what is?

Frankly, marriage is/was a RELIGIOUS institution long before it was a legal/governmental one.  If teh gheys want civil unions, more power to them.  If they can find a church that will marry them (like the Unitarians or Episcopalians), go for it.  Otherwise, cram it--no pun intended.

This is what, 32 states which have voted on gay marriage?  And EVERY SINGLE TIME, it's been voted down.  The only states in which gay marriage is legal, it was done by judicial or legislative fiat, not based on the will of the people.

And don't think there aren't a heck of a lot of people up here who remember Governor Lynch talking out both sides of his ass on this issue.

[Hawkwarrior2]

Um, no, they had Civil Unions, until a judge ruled that not allowing them to be married violated their civil rights, so the judge allowed Gay Marriage in California.  The people voted that they did not want Gay Marriage, and now another judge is saying that the people's will doesn't matter.  

The fact that they keep pushing for "real marriage" tells me that it is only a matter of time until a church is sued for not allowing a gay couple to marry, or until a photographer is sued for deciding not to work a gay wedding, or until a judge rules that they cannot be discriminated against when it comes to adoption.  There are so many factors beyond just "they want to get married".  

Here's a timeline for the whole history since San Francisco started allowing Gays to marry without state authorization:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/The-long-battle-over-same-sex-marriage-99977109.html

Thanks forthe info

[Celtic Rose]

Thanks forthe info

No problem.    Welcome to the site.

[Freeper]

Yet the unconstitutional health care bill is still standing. And the constitutional AZ bill has been shut down. 
Funny how the 2 items with majority support are the ones the courts will stop. The one a majority does not want will stand. 

[thundley4]

I've seriously considered linking to the zombietime blog and their pictures of the parades in SF, but I'm afraid it would really offend a few of the more religious people I know, and maybe a couple of possible gay ones, (females).