queerbychoice | Proposition H8

California: a state embroiled in a seemingly neverending budget crisis because a two-thirds majority is required to approve a budget, but where a simple 50% + 1 is sufficient to vote away the rights of minority couples to marry - even when discrimination against that group is supposed to be subject to "strict scrutiny," and even when the people never voted to remove the contradictory part of the state constitution that claims the state guarantees equal rights to everyone.

Also, the crazy Catholic self-hating lesbian on the California Supreme Court voted against her own right to marry, again. It was not a surprise, considering that she also voted against her own right to marry last May, when the majority on the court ruled that we did have the right to marry. This woman must have the most terrible commitment issues ever.

Really, the only thing that surprised me was that Justice Moreno was the only dissenter in today's decision. When I watched the oral arguments in March, I really thought that Justice Werdegar was going to dissent also.

(At least I suppose I can take some comfort in the fact that 18,000 same-sex couples who married here do get to remain married, despite the attempt by 52% of California voters to forcibly divorce them from each other. Congratulations again to

misterkrista and

jess_s, to Chuck B. and Guy, and to James and John.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

What's up with that fucking ridiculous woman? Does she address this directly? My guess is NOOOOOO!

No, she's way too closeted for that. Also, she can't possibly come out since coming out would reveal some unethical behavior on her part.

This is such a great, big disappointment. I really wish y'all could get married.

Have you seen the news about WA at all? Our state recently expanded the domestic partnership benefits to basically include "everything but marriage," and now a group filed a referendum to stop it. So it is not just that they don't want us to get married. Even if we don't get to be married, they don't want us to have any rights. And the real icing on the cake is that the guy heading the group has been married THREE times and has a history of domestic violence. Charming.

Wow - I'd heard about WA establishing domestic partnerships, and I think I'd heard something vaguely about people protesting against it. But I definitely had no idea that the protests were being led by someone so blatantly horrible at truly "protecting marriage."

Well, you know, the tiny advantage to not having the right to marry is that you never have to worry about popping the question.

(In theory.)

But I already did that part!

If you don't take advantage of your tiny advantages when they're available, I can't help you :)

Based on the arguments the Supremes were putting forward during the hearings I can't say I was surprised at the final decision. I get to stay married but all the thousands of others who'd like to can't get hitched. Sucks. Things are changing in culture and we WILL overcome this bigotry. But we want our rights NOW!

James (Lostinthelandscape)
http://soenyun.com/Blog

Yes, I watched the hearings too. Susan and I haven't been able to get married because we're still waiting for the courts to dissolve her registered domestic partnership with her ex whom she left in 2006. But I'm glad that you and John had the chance to get married and that the court wasn't sufficiently shameless to take that away too.

I like 36,000 people as an even bigger number than 18,000 couples. I wasn't expecting it to get overturned, so I was really happy that the marriages will stay valid. They'll add to all the evidence that there's no valid argument against banning same-sex marriage. Folks in Berkeley were already collecting signatures the next day.
ryan

Proposition H8

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

h8ing 8

Re: h8ing 8

36,000