Judge overturns California's ban on s...

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

There are 201844 comments on the www.cnn.com story from Aug 4, 2010, titled Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage. In it, www.cnn.com reports that:

A federal judge in California has knocked down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, ruling Wednesday that the state's controversial Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.cnn.com.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#182006 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 is also a ban on poly marriage. Why does that disturb you so? Are you against marriage equality?
You cannot spin away the fact that it is a ban on same sex and poly marriage EQUALLY. No matter how hard you try.
On February 7, 2012, in a 2–1 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#182007 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
Proposition 8 was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment passed in the November 2008 state elections. The measure added a new provision, Section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights, to the California Constitution, which provides that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."[2][3][4]
By restricting the recognition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, the proposition overturned the California Supreme Court's ruling of In re Marriage Cases that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The wording of Proposition 8 was precisely the same as that which had been found in Proposition 22, which had passed in 2000 and, as an ordinary statute, had been invalidated by the State Supreme Court in 2008. California's State Constitution put Proposition 8 into immediate effect the day after the election.[5] The proposition did not affect domestic partnerships in California,[6] nor same-sex marriages performed before November 5, 2008.[7][8][9]
After the elections, demonstrations and protests occurred across the state and nation. Same-sex couples and government entities filed numerous lawsuits with the California Supreme Court challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered same-sex marriages. In Strauss v. Horton, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, but allowed existing same-sex marriages to stand (under the grandfather clause principle).
United States District Court Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8 on August 4, 2010 in the case Perry v. Schwarzenegger, ruling that it violated both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the United States Constitution.[10] Walker issued an injunction against enforcing Proposition 8 and a stay to determine suspension of his ruling pending appeal.[11][12] The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals continued the stay, keeping Walker's ruling on hold pending appeal.[13]
Does prop 8 ban polygamy? Yes in that pesky "A" in a man and a woman. Sure there are other laws against it, but it's one less when prop 8 goes away. How can you argue otherwise? And why try?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#182008 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>On February 7, 2012, in a 2–1 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.
That ruling said nothing of or about polygamy, now did it?
You are depressing his sister, and perhaps his goat.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#182009 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>On February 7, 2012, in a 2–1 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.
Prop 8 is also a ban on poly marriage.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#182010 Mar 1, 2013
Jazybird58 wrote:
<quoted text>Is polygamy already illegal? Why yes it is.
Why would a law then be crafted, to outlaw something that's already illegal?
Because the law was made to only allow marriage between a man and a woman.

Sure it was directed at same sex marriage mainly but it was worded to ban polygamy also. Kill two birds with one stone so to speak.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#182011 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
There is no limit on equal rights,
Yes there is.... the guarantee is equal protection, not equal rights. The State can limit marriage to whatever group they so choose IF..... IF there is a legitimate State interest in doing so.

Why can't you grasp this? What is wrong with you? We've told you at least 50 times and it still hasn't sunk in. Are you retarded?

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#182012 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you trying to convince me prop 8 doesn't ban polygamy too? Why?
Existing laws, prohibit polygamy.

On February 7, 2012, in a 2–1 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#182013 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 is also a ban on poly marriage.
Polygamy was already illegal. Prop 8 did not ban polygamy.

“Reality bites”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#182014 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 is also a ban on poly marriage.
On February 7, 2012, in a 2–1 decision, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed Walker's decision declaring the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#182015 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
You are depressing his sister, and perhaps his goat.
What happened to my goat? Is he depressed too?

You ridicule that dumb non-argument when used against SSM, then you use it yourself against other forms of marriage.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#182016 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
One man one woman. Bans more than one of each. Sorry for you, I know your bigoted ignorant opinions of polygamy well.
Double illegal.... how fascinating is the legal system on your planet?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#182017 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what they said about SSM, as little as a few short years ago.
SSM was LEGAL in California a few short years ago. Polygamy was never legal.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#182018 Mar 1, 2013
When Prop 8 gets overturned, let's have a party celebrating lawnchair marriage. After all, that man, woman thing will be moot.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#182019 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Double illegal.... how fascinating is the legal system on your planet?
They throw the switch on the electric chair twice ;)
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#182020 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Prop 8 is also a ban on poly marriage. Why does that disturb you so? Are you against marriage equality?
You cannot spin away the fact that it is a ban on same sex and poly marriage EQUALLY. No matter how hard you try.
No need to try, it's simple. Polygamy was illegal BEFORE Prop 8. Therefore, Prop 8 did not ban polygamy. It was already banned. How much simpler can we make this for you?
Big D

Modesto, CA

#182021 Mar 1, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
What happened to my goat? Is he depressed too?
You ridicule that dumb non-argument when used against SSM, then you use it yourself against other forms of marriage.
Lighten up, gezzzzz you hold impossible positions and expect not to be teased a little about it?

Everyone ( except you ) knows that prop 8 didn’t change polygamy laws at all, and the overturn of prop 8 will put things back where they were, Same Sex Marriage being legal, and Poly still illegal.

Prop 8 will get overturned, that is now an inevitability, either the supreme court will do it ( expected ) or another proposition will be put forward in California and it will strike prop 8 down easily.

It is just a matter of time

But it won’t change the laws on polygamy, that will have to be a separate issue, with separate measures and separate legal action.

I will even support it when it does come,( more jobs for more lawyers )

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#182022 Mar 1, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes there is.... the guarantee is equal protection, not equal rights. The State can limit marriage to whatever group they so choose IF..... IF there is a legitimate State interest in doing so.
Why can't you grasp this? What is wrong with you? We've told you at least 50 times and it still hasn't sunk in. Are you retarded?
Who or what determines if there is "legitimate state interest"? One court say no state interest in restricting it to OSCs, another says yes there is. So who's right? I suppose that depends on which side of issue you're on.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#182023 Mar 1, 2013
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthought...

If there was any doubt that Judge Vaughn Walker would allow his personal views of homosexuality trump legal reasoning, he removed that with his ruling today overturning California’s ban on same-sex marriage. Fortunately, the reasoning is so jaw-droppingly stupid that it will be overturned on appeal when it reaches the Supreme Court. Since Walker is (presumably) not a stupid man, he has to know that his ruling is weak and has no basis in actual reason. The only explanation is that he decided that sending a message of support to his friends in the gay community was more important that applying coherent legal reasoning to interpret the law.

Admittedly, this is a serious accusation. Yet I think it can proven with a simple test: Ask Judge Walker if his reasoning applies to polygamous marriage. In the decision he handed down, Walker find no rational basis for denying this fundamental right to same-sex couples. But every one of his reasons applies equally to polygamy.

I am not claiming that his reasoning leads to an argument ad absurdum. That would be a lateral move from one absurdity to another. What I’m claiming is that, if he is consistent, Walker would have to conclude that his rational basis criteria effectively overturns not only the ban on same-sex marriage, but the ban on polygamy.

Here are key excerpts from his opinion.(I assure you that this summary (which was compiled by the Wall Street Journal) comes from the actual opinion and not from The Onion.)

Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians, including: gays and lesbians do not have intimate relationships similar to heterosexual couples; gays and lesbians are not as good as heterosexuals; and gay and lesbian relationships do not deserve the full recognition of society.(Page 85)

This one is straightforward: replace “polygamous partners” for “gays and lesbians and it would be equally as applicable.

Proposition 8 has had a negative fiscal impact on California and local governments.(Page 90)

Even for an opinion riddled with idiotic reasoning, this justification is exceptionally ridiculous. Almost every law passed has a negative fiscal impact on California. That does not make them unconstitutional. Nevertheless, if preventing homosexuals from marrying has a negative fiscal impact, the same must hold true for denying polygamists the right to marry.

Proposition 8 increases costs and decreases wealth for same sex couples because of increased tax burdens, decreased availability of health insurance and higher transactions costs to secure rights and obligations typically associated with marriage. Domestic partnership reduces but does not eliminate these costs.(Page 91)

The same holds true for polygamists.

Proposition 8 singles out gays and lesbians and legitimates their unequal treatment. Proposition 8 perpetuates the stereotype that gays and lesbians are incapable of forming long-term loving relationships and that gays and lesbians are not good parents.(Page 93)

The same holds true for polygamists. Both research and common sense support the idea that children function better when they have both a mother and a father. In a polygamous marriage, the child would generally not only have a mother and father but a spare parent as well. Imagine the benefit of having both parents at work and yet still having a parent who can stay home with the children.
Big D

Modesto, CA

#182024 Mar 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Who or what determines if there is "legitimate state interest"?.
Politicians, lobbyists, and campaign contributors.

OK maybe that is a little cynical, but It is also fairly true.
Frankie Rizzo

Union City, CA

#182025 Mar 1, 2013
Big D wrote:
<quoted text>
Lighten up, gezzzzz you hold impossible positions and expect not to be teased a little about it?
Everyone ( except you ) knows that prop 8 didn’t change polygamy laws at all, and the overturn of prop 8 will put things back where they were, Same Sex Marriage being legal, and Poly still illegal.
Prop 8 will get overturned, that is now an inevitability, either the supreme court will do it ( expected ) or another proposition will be put forward in California and it will strike prop 8 down easily.
It is just a matter of time
But it won’t change the laws on polygamy, that will have to be a separate issue, with separate measures and separate legal action.
I will even support it when it does come,( more jobs for more lawyers )
Oh you are just teasing? Silly me!

Prop 8 banned polygamy EQUALLY to banning SSM.

The end.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brea Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Honk: Are those 'Children at Play' signs legal? (Feb '11) Jul 17 Thankful I live i... 90
News Felon Arraigned on Assault, Robbery, Attempted ... Jun '15 Larry Miller 1
do you notice more black people in brea? Jun '15 No black people here 3
... just 'cause I can ... Jun '15 just cause 3
News Unions representing federal scientists protest ... May '15 innocent youth ca... 1
News Massage Therapist Accused of Sexually Assaultin... (Nov '13) May '15 mehboob 2
News Why the Getty is giving Cal State Long Beach's ... Apr '15 Spanky 4
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brea Mortgages