Gay Marriage Ban is Overturned in CA

[Ooberman]

U.S. Court Overturns Calif. Same-Sex Marriage Ban
By JESSE McKINLEY and JOHN SCHWARTZ
Published: August 4, 2010

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in San Francisco struck down California’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage on Wednesday, handing a temporary victory to gay rights advocates in a legal battle that seems all but certain to be settled by the Supreme Court.

Wednesday’s decision is just the latest chapter of what is expected to be a long legal battle over the ban — Proposition 8, which was passed in 2008 with 52 percent of the vote -- and proponents were already promising to appeal, confidently predicting that higher courts would be less accommodating to the other side than Judge Walker.

“Being gay is about forming an adult family relationship with a person of a same sex, so denying us equality within the family system is to deny respect for the essence of who we are as gay people,� said Jennifer Pizer, the marriage project director for Lambda Legal in Los Angeles, who filed two briefs in favor of the plaintiffs. “And we believe that equality in marriage would help reduce discrimination in other settings because the government invites disrespect of us when it denies us equality.�

The trial, which began in January, was closely watched in the gay community, drawing large crowds to courtrooms, and inspiring re-creations by actors which were posted online. The plaintiffs offered two weeks of evidence from experts on marriage, sociology and political science, and emotional testimony from the two couples who had brought the case.

Proponents for Proposition 8, which was heavily backed by the Mormon church and other religious and conservative groups, had offered a much more straightforward defense of the measure, saying that same-sex marriage damages traditional marriage as an institution. They also argued that marriage was essentially created to foster procreation, which same-sex unions could not, and was thus fundamental to the existence and survival of the human race.

Gay marriage will be a reality in America soon. I see no reason for the proponents of banning gay marriage to make a credible case - especially when we know it is rally driven by religious reasons, which makes them disingenuous AND wrong.

[micatala]

Gay marriage will be a reality in America soon. I see no reason for the proponents of banning gay marriage to make a credible case - especially when we know it is rally driven by religious reasons, which makes them disingenuous AND wrong.

Hello;

Can you please provide me with proof that the 52% of Californians who voted for Prop 8 did so on religious grounds.

Thanks

It is not necessary for everyone voting for the measure to be doing so on religious grounds for the campaign for the measure to be driven by religious reasons.

It is well-documented that the Mormon Church spent large amounts of money supporting Prop 8. It is very clear from the documentation provided in the case that many of those involved at the highest levels of the campaign from Prop 8 were religiously motivated.

It is clearly reasonable, based on the evidence, to suggest Prop 8 would not have been on the ballot except for the work of religious organizations and religiously motivated people and that, once on the ballot, it would not have passed without the same.

[Goat]

Gay marriage will be a reality in America soon. I see no reason for the proponents of banning gay marriage to make a credible case - especially when we know it is rally driven by religious reasons, which makes them disingenuous AND wrong.

Hello;

Can you please provide me with proof that the 52% of Californians who voted for Prop 8 did so on religious grounds.

Thanks

While it is hard to see why any specific person opposed it, look at where the money came from to campaign against it. The money came from the Roman Catholic Church, the Mormon's, the eastern orthodox church, the council of orthodox Jewish rabbi's, focus on the family (religious oriented poltical group), Defense of marriage council (headed by a pastor)

[Veronicdiall]

It is clearly reasonable, based on the evidence, to suggest Prop 8 would not have been on the ballot except for the work of religious organizations and religiously motivated people and that, once on the ballot, it would not have passed without the same.

Sorry, I don't buy that arguement.

Just because many of the groups who supported Prop 8 are themselves religious, does not mean that the decisions by the majority of the people are based on religion. I saw many of the ads for proposition 8 and they were not faith based. I have also read many articles acessing why proposition 8 passed in the first place and many reasons cited the sloppiness and poorly delivered messages by the people who were against it. In fact I saw some of the 'No' adds on Youtube and I was schocked by the level of condescension enemating in the messages. They basically equated people who vote for prop 8 as evil or stupid. That wouldn't win me over.

Further even if many the yes votes were done by religious people or based on religion. I don't see what is wrong with that. The last time I heard religious people were allowed to express their democratic rights.

Unless that is being taken away.

[Veronicdiall]

It is not necessary for everyone voting for the measure to be doing so on religious grounds for the campaign for the measure to be driven by religious reasons.

It is well-documented that the Mormon Church spent large amounts of money supporting Prop 8. It is very clear from the documentation provided in the case that many of those involved at the highest levels of the campaign from Prop 8 were religiously motivated.

It is clearly reasonable, based on the evidence, to suggest Prop 8 would not have been on the ballot except for the work of religious organizations and religiously motivated people and that, once on the ballot, it would not have passed without the same.

Sorry, I don't buy that arguement.

Just because many of the groups who supported Prop 8 are themselves religious, does not mean that the decisions by the majority of the people are based on religion. I saw many of the ads for proposition 8 and they were not faith based. I have also read many articles acessing why proposition 8 passed in the first place and many reasons cited the sloppiness and poorly delivered messages by the people who were against it. In fact I saw some of the 'No' adds on Youtube and I was schocked by the level of condescension enemating in the messages. They basically equated people who vote for prop 8 as evil or stupid. That wouldn't win me over.

Further even if many the yes votes were done by religious people or based on religion. I don't see what is wrong with that. The last time I heard religious people were allowed to express their democratic rights.

Unless that is being taken away.

[TheLibertarian]

They basically equated people who vote for prop 8 as evil or stupid. That wouldn't win me over.

The people who voted for it are, indeed, both evil and stupid. They are the enemies of human liberty.

[Angel]

They basically equated people who vote for prop 8 as evil or stupid. That wouldn't win me over.

The people who voted for it are, indeed, both evil and stupid. They are the enemies of human liberty.

I wouldn't call anyone who disagrees with gay marriage as being evil and stupid nor enemies of human liberty. We each have our own morals and until we can prove who's morals are right or if there are any objectively or truly righteous morals to begin with, your judgement is as subjective as an anti-gay marriage person's.

[Veronicdiall]

They basically equated people who vote for prop 8 as evil or stupid. That wouldn't win me over.

The people who voted for it are, indeed, both evil and stupid. They are the enemies of human liberty.

On the contrary. They are citizens excercising their democratic rights.

[Veronicdiall]

I wouldn't call anyone who disagrees with gay marriage as being evil and stupid nor enemies of human liberty. We each have our own morals and until we can prove who's morals are right or if there are any objectively or truly righteous morals to begin with, your judgement is as subjective as an anti-gay marriage person's.

The fact of the matter whatever reason a person chose to make decision on should not be invalidated or negated.

[TheLibertarian]

They basically equated people who vote for prop 8 as evil or stupid. That wouldn't win me over.

The people who voted for it are, indeed, both evil and stupid. They are the enemies of human liberty.

I wouldn't call anyone who disagrees with gay marriage as being evil and stupid nor enemies of human liberty. We each have our own morals and until we can prove who's morals are right or if there are any objectively or truly righteous morals to begin with, your judgement is as subjective as an anti-gay marriage person's.

Morality is objective; if you were remotely a Christian, you'd recognize this (though Christianity has a bad habit of subjectivizing morality for the sake of its unviersalist, everyone-can-be-saved faith). And the greatest objective moral good is human freedom. Wherever legislation overrides freedom, it is an objective evil. I am not prepared to pussyfoot around with you on this issue: where Christianity denies liberty to men, there it ought to be halted.

[Angel]

They basically equated people who vote for prop 8 as evil or stupid. That wouldn't win me over.

The people who voted for it are, indeed, both evil and stupid. They are the enemies of human liberty.

I wouldn't call anyone who disagrees with gay marriage as being evil and stupid nor enemies of human liberty. We each have our own morals and until we can prove who's morals are right or if there are any objectively or truly righteous morals to begin with, your judgement is as subjective as an anti-gay marriage person's.

Morality is objective;

Saying that 'morality' is objective is a very general statement and in effect says nothing. There are so many different moral standards that vary from culture to culture to person to person, so who's or which moral standards are objective? HOw do I know that there are even suppose to be 'objective' morals, as in morals that are really what mankind are suppose to follow? I don't dispute that morals exist, but please note that we're not just speaking about any morals, but rather are referring to morals that mankind are truly suppose to follow.

if you were remotely a Christian, you'd recognize this (though Christianity has a bad habit of subjectivizing morality for the sake of its unviersalist, everyone-can-be-saved faith).

I am a Christian but I'm also an agnostic. My faith only leads me to believe that objective morals exists and I do live as if they do but when speaking on a DEBATE site, to apply logic you have to admit that there is no proof to justify any assertion about any Christian morals being objective. I'd also think that lots of Christians would also say if YOU were 'remotely' a Christian you would not be supporting same-sex 'MARRIAGE'.

And the greatest objective moral good is human freedom.

That's not my belief. The greatest moral instruction or good is to follow the Creator. There is no such thing as real human freedom or democracy. All laws are a restriction on freedom and in some cases for good reason, otherwise you are denying the 'freedom' of those who support PROP 8.

Wherever legislation overrides freedom, it is an objective evil. I am not prepared to pussyfoot around with you on this issue: where Christianity denies liberty to men, there it ought to be halted.

I don't agree with anything you've told me about any objective evil unless you can prove to me that human freedom is the GREATEST objective good as you've asserted earlier. PROVE to me if there are any 'objective' morals to begin with or why should I listen to you and not anyone else.

I don't claim that objective morals don't or do exists, I only claim that it can't be proven either way.