California to rule on same-sex marriage ban

[Skylar1]

A federal judge in California is expected to issue his ruling Wednesday on whether the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. The closely watched case, to be decided by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, comes some two years after Californians voted to pass Proposition 8, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
Wednesday's ruling, expected in the early afternoon, will decide whether that ban violates the U.S. Constitution by creating separate classes of people with different laws for each.
Though stakes in the case are high, neither opponents nor supporters of same-sex marriage say Walker's ruling will likely be the last. Both sides say the decision will be appealed and eventually wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court.
"We have little doubt that this trial judge is going to knock down Prop. 8. I hope I'm proven wrong tomorrow," said Maggie Gallagher, chairman of the National Organization for Marriage. "This has been a judge that looks pretty eager to make a historic decision."
She added Walker's ruling will likely have national implications as he is a federal judge.
Rick Jacobs, founder of the Campaign Courage, which supports same-sex marriage, said he was hopeful about Wednesday's decision because of what happened during the trial.
...

Full article:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/04/cal....html?hpt=Sbin


Update: Looks like it's been ruled that Prop 8 is unconstitutional. It also appears that this case is going to make it's way to the Supreme Court.

[DOOM!]

HELL YEAH! Goooo Golden Bears! Take that Prop 8 and shove it.... in a homosexual's face!
Waddya think of THAT, Caprenicus?

[Rongue]

Honestly I do not see why same-sex marriage is not legal.
All the points that those against it can bring up are either petty, false, or have already been beaten down by logic. There still like 1 or 2 legit points I guess but that is not = to the reasons that it should be legal.
Again I honestly find alot of people that are against same-sex marriage to be just failure's of humankind, but thats my opinion more than a fact.

To deny marriage to anyone is not the American way.

Besides being against same-sex marriage is republican thing mostly, and thus I am against it. Ok I admit I am not against everything republican in the true sense of what a republican is, it is just that I hate to believe in the same stuff they do because the republicans of today for the most part have lost thier value's.

[Skylar1]

HELL YEAH! Goooo Golden Bears! Take that Prop 8 and shove it.... in a homosexual's face!
Waddya think of THAT, Caprenicus?

I think you said it best when you said, "politicians are just playing a game, and using our rights as the ball"

Settling things of this manner in the courts is the way to go.

Allowing the people to vote on something that was originally a court decision involving civil rights was pretty stupid decision imo.

[Desulishor]

I'm hoping for a positive decision on same-sex marriage. Yaoi and yuri need state approval. Srsly speaking, what 2 ppl do in private has no effect on our lives and so it should be fully allowed. It's only because of those ridiculous religious fanatics that laws that probihit same-sex marriage exist.

[Rongue]

I'm hoping for a positive decision on same-sex marriage. Yaoi and yuri need state approval. Srsly speaking, what 2 ppl do in private has no effect on our lives and so it should be fully allowed. It's only because of those ridiculous religious fanatics that laws that probihit same-sex marriage exist.

Yep I agree 100%.
There were 1 or 2 legit concerns about it, but then again you can find that about almost anything.

[Nanobyte]

Being bisexual myself... I have to say that I not disapprove of same gender marriage... o.o

[ninryu4]

why the f*ck can't people marry if they love each other? I don't get it.
I mean, it's not about being straight or gay, it's about LOVE.

[Infinita]

I find there is nothing wrong with same sex marriage. If they love each other, allow them to get married. I don't understand why some people are so against it. It may appear unusual but really, it's love, in the end, it's pure love for someone.

[Lord]

Hear me out people, this is what I think.

Gay-marriage should be allowed, but not in churches or other religous temples.
Why; It's not human to forbid people to marry each other, doesn't matter if it's about gay-marriage or the usual marriage. But allowing gay-marriage in religious temples should be forbidden because you have to respect others rules. For example, Christians usually don't allow gay-marriage in churches because it's something their bible forbids, due to that I think respect has to be shown towards the church and other temples.

The only christians I know that allow gay-marriage in church is the swedish protestants, never heard of a catholic church that allows gay-marriage. Anyway, I'm not against gay-marriage but due to respect I'm against gay-marriage in religious temples, that's only if the religious temples doesn't accept gay-marriage in their buildings.

[ninryu4]

Hear me out people, this is what I think.

Gay-marriage should be allowed, but not in churches or other religous temples.
Why; It's not human to forbid people to marry each other, doesn't matter if it's about gay-marriage or the usual marriage. But allowing gay-marriage in religious temples should be forbidden because you have to respect others rules. For example, Christians usually don't allow gay-marriage in churches because it's something their bible forbids, due to that I think respect has to be shown towards the church and other temples.

The only christians I know that allow gay-marriage in church is the swedish protestants, never heard of a catholic church that allows gay-marriage. Anyway, I'm not against gay-marriage but due to respect I'm against gay-marriage in religious temples.

I disagree. if a gay couple wish to marry in religious way then it's that's their right.

[Lord]

I disagree. if a gay couple wish to marry in religious way then it's that's their right.

I understand but what if the church (doesn't have to be the church/christianity, just using it as a example) doesn't want gay-couple to get married in the church? You can't just force your way in.

[ninryu4]

I understand but what if the church (doesn't have to be the church/christianity, just using it as a example) doesn't want gay-couple to get married in the church? You can't just force your way in.

but you also forbid religious gay couple marry in their way.
BTW, I love discussing seriously with someone.

[miniPhil]

I disagree. if a gay couple wish to marry in religious way then it's that's their right.

Not if the church doesn't want it. Forcing a priest to marry two people in a union he doesn't agree with isn't right. There are plenty of churches that allow gay marriage, demanding marriage in churches that don't agree with it is no better than not allowing gays to marry at all.

[Gjallarhorn]

I disagree. if a gay couple wish to marry in religious way then it's that's their right.

A religion can still choose whether or not they allow a gay couple to have a religious ceremony, but here in the US marriage is a civil right, not a religious right.

[Lord]

but you also forbid religious gay couple marry in their way.

Nope, I'm not forbidding anything.
For example, let's say that you don't want blonde-girls in your room and that's why you make it a rule. But if a blond-girl disagrees with your rule and just enters your room isn't that lack of respect and wouldn't that make you angry?

[ninryu4]

I was born blonde, but anyway - of course I would, but it's very insulting in the first place to the blonds that I made that rule.

[Lord]

That was just an example.

[wolfgirl90]

Nope, I'm not forbidding anything.
For example, let's say that you don't want blonde-girls in your room and that's why you make it a rule. But if a blond-girl disagrees with your rule and just enters your room isn't that lack of respect and wouldn't that make you angry?

It would make me angry, yes. However, that's only reasonable if it is truly my room and if the rule just applies to my room. With what's going on, not only do we have people forbidding blonds from entering rooms that don't really belong to them but also forbidding blonds from entering other people's rooms, where their presence is really no one else's business.

No one is forcing churches to allow gays to get married in their buildings. This is a civil issue, not a religious one, so whatever views a particular religion has about gay marriage really doesn't matter here. We understand where they are coming from, but no one is forcing them to do anything and ultimately, separation of church and state prevents such religious sentiment to be used as the basis of a law, especially when we are talking about two consenting adults (this was made clear in Lawrence v. Texas).

Also, just so that everybody knows, the Federal judge ruled that Prop 8 was unconstitutional.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...nclick_check=1

Here's a quote from the ruling (not the article):

"The availability of domestic partnership does not provide gays and lesbians with a status equivalent to marriage because the cultural meaning of marriage and its associated benefits are intentionally withheld from same-sex couples in domestic partnerships...Permitting same-sex couples to marry will not affect the number of opposite-sex couples who marry, divorce, cohabit, have children outside of marriage or otherwise affect the stability of opposite-sex marriages."

[SigmaSD]

It seems like only yesterday that I was replying to a similar thread like this on AF.

Glad its being taken care of.