California's top court to rule on gay marriage

Both sides in the gay marriage debate will be watching California 's highest court Thursday to see if the nation's biggest state goes the way of Massachusetts and legalizes same-sex marriage.

[Dan]

The related link on this page about other countries ("A Look at Gay Marriage in Some Countries") is way out of date (it's dated 2004). Since then, Spain, Canada, and South Africa have legalized marriage for same-sex marriage, and the United Kingdom's civil partnership law is in effect.

[Brian]

A republican appointed court ruled in favor of gay marriage. This is definitely a great day for those who support equality in the United States Constitution. My belief is that marriage is a human right, not a gender right.

The court ruled gay marriage was a natural right like thinking. As a result, voter referendums are useless because this same court would easily overrule any vote on the ballot not in favor of gay marriage.

The debate is over on this issue and let's move on.

[CT Luver]

Forget about the issue. I don't give a hoot either way.

But, how is it that the voters, residents, taxpayers etc are overruled as to how they want THEIR state to be goverened by a select group of "appointed" judges.

This is not good.

[Imagine no religion]

Finally, a state court that got it right. These marriage bans are separate but equal all over again, and it's about time that a court recognized that this is about a fundamental right being denied to a suspect class.

[Enough]

I hope that someday the CT Supreme court and/or our legislators and governor might see that Civil Union is seperate and not equal to marriage in title, rights or practice

[Sheepdog]

Enough wrote:

I hope that someday the CT Supreme court and/or our legislators and governor might see that Civil Union is seperate and not equal to marriage in title, rights or practice

It may be sooner than you think. The CT Supreme court has been sitting on their ruling and I surmise they will now join the club and impose judicial activism on the residents of this state versus allowing us a vote on this.

[Benny]

Green Beanie wrote:

Only in this country could the majority be superceded by the minority. Californians should be disgusted.

I know.. Like when Bush lost the popular vote, right?

[Another voice]

Green Beanie wrote:

Only in this country could the majority be superceded by the minority. Californians should be disgusted.

The majority should never have the last say in rights for a minority. That is the reason for the seperation of powers. It was not that long ago when these same arguments were being made for Civil Rights in the the 1960's. Should we have waited for the majority to agree then?

[Gworld]

"But, how is it that the voters, residents, taxpayers etc are overruled as to how they want THEIR state to be goverened by a select group of "appointed" judges."

I suppose you think people would have voted to end slavery or allow women to vote too, right? HA HA - this is GREAT. By a conservative court with SIX republican appointees.

[Marjorie]

This is wonderful news, and long overdue! Congrats to the California folks who worked so hard to get this done. Hopefully with some hard work and prayers, the other 48 states will fall in line soon!

[so move to cali then]

Enough wrote:

I hope that someday the CT Supreme court and/or our legislators and governor might see that Civil Union is seperate and not equal to marriage in title, rights or practice

Very well said, and I totally agree. The California ruling does nothing but further devalue the intent of marriage - a union between a MAN and a WOMEN.

[No Stimulus Here]

Lived there when this went to referendum. Also lived there when Prop 187 passed by a 3-1 margin. Prop 187 denied ILLEGAL immigrants access to schools and hospitals. Well, Guess what? The ACLU got involved, and the will of the people was overturned. Here we go again. Doesn't matter what you think about gay marriage. It is the idea that the courts can hijack the will of the people.
Many days I feel like relocating from Callifornia to Connecticut was like jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
This makes me remember why it sounded like a good idea at the time!
What I don't understand is that when TAXPAYERS vote NO on something, in Connecticut, they just keep coming back again and again until they get your money.
In California a 2/3 plus 1 majority was needed to pass any kind of property tax increase. Not so here in Connecticut.

[ricbee]

Green Beanie wrote:

Only in this country could the majority be superceded by the minority. Californians should be disgusted.

Everybody should be disgusted.

[Givemebreak]

I am disgusted!

ricbee wrote:

<quoted text>
Everybody should be disgusted.

[Givemebreak]

Sorry but your prayers won't work. God doesn't listen to these kind of prayers.

Marjorie wrote:

This is wonderful news, and long overdue! Congrats to the California folks who worked so hard to get this done. Hopefully with some hard work and prayers, the other 48 states will fall in line soon!

[Patrick in Texas]

Nimrod wrote:

What a SAD day.
Fortunately, though--
"The challenge for gay rights advocates, however, is not over.
"A coalition of religious and social conservative groups is attempting to put a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine laws banning gay marriage in the state constitution.&#8232;&# 8232;The Secretary of State is expected to rule by the end of June whether the sponsors gathered enough signatures to qualify the marriage amendment, similar to ones enacted in 26 other states.&#8232;&#8232;I f voters pass the measure in November, it would trump the court's decision."
...."In a dissenting opinion, Justice Marvin Baxter agreed with many arguments of the majority but said the court overstepped its authority. Changes to marriage laws should be decided by the voters, Baxter wrote. Justices Ming Chin and Carol Corrigan also dissented."
NOTE that NOM California collected over 1.1 MILLION signatures for this marriage amendment, so it no doubt will appear on the Nov. ballot--unless there is some skulduggery like there was in MA.

Good luck with that one. All polls show a majority of Californians are against an amendment to ban gay marriage. Even Gov. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, says he is against a constitutional amendment.

[Rude Boy]

Givemebreak wrote:

Prayers won't work. Sorry. God does not approve of this sick lifestyle. God created Adam and Eve. Don't you get it?
<quoted text>

Maybe there was a typo on the original copy and it was supposed to be Adam and Steve

[Yep]

mad as hell wrote:

this completely sick,perversion at the bottom of the toilet.just look what is shown on network tv.

Yeah, it is pretty damned sickening whenever they show Bush on network tv.

[Yep]

Nimrod wrote:

I should have clarified--"SAD" for America's future, and especially for the rights of children.
1%(or less) of the people may be rejoicing at the ruling from California today. But they are not considering the future unintended consequences.
Of course, it's not only judges who often have no concern for the "future unintended consequences." Too often, our state legislators, as well as those in Congress, are concerned mainly with satisfying their lobbyists and funding sources for their campaigns, and getting their names in the media--instead of doing what is best for America and its FUTURE.

If all the good, God-fearing Christian folks didn't instill such fear and hatred into their children for people who are different from them, there would be no "future unintended consequences".

[Yep]

Givemebreak wrote:

Sorry but your prayers won't work. God doesn't listen to these kind of prayers.
<quoted text>

If God finds anything offensive, surely it's the arrogance of ignorant little people who pretend to know what he does or does not listen to.