Prop 8 Decision Coming Wed.

[metta]

reality check

I'm here in CA and most of my gay friends and contacts are prematurely celebrating. They think this means prop 8 is gone and gay marriage is legalized and we won so lets go drink and be merry and yay. But no. First it will be appealed to the court of appeals, which may or may not agree with the district judge (and who knows, what if they dont agree? Do we get depressed just like prop 8 again). THE ONLY DECISION THAT MATTERS IS THE SUPREME COURT. As of now there will likely be 4 votes for the gays and 4 against... with Anthony Kennedy being the swing. Kennedy is a moderate conservative but has shown friendliness toward gays in the past, HOWEVER, we are not sure his stance on marriage. Cork the champagne, it's not over yet.

I think that we realize where we stand right now. But hey....let us celebrate this....there is nothing wrong with that. A victory is a victory. Is it over...of course not...but this is a HUGE step in the right direction that should be celebrated. Don't deny people that. We have been waiting a long time for this particular big step. I remember trying to fight against prop 22 in california (the one prior to 8 ) and wishing that we could just go straight to the federal courts. Wait they say...wait....well...looks like we are finally moving to the federal courts very soon now. We will never have equal rights until we have them on the federal level. People saying that it is only about state rights is %&#@$@.

 

[Adrock-JD]

 

[Críostóir]

Re: U.S. Court Overturns Calif. Same-Sex Marriage Ban

Roberts and Thomas have taken strong positions based on the Equal Protection Clause, so there's still an outside chance of getting one of them. With a conservative lawyer on our side, he may be able to make an argument that could sway them.

But neither of them has a scrap of conscience or integrity. They use the Equal Protection clause to further their political aims, which are arch-conservative.

YOU may think it's bizarre for them to rule that corporations have rights, but that gays do not, but trust me neither of those two assholes would even notice an inconsistency or be bothered by one if they did.

 

[metta]

Did you guys see the clip?


A must see.....please.... and it is a good time to share with friends and family as well.

Perry v. Schwarzenegger plaintiffs Paul & Jeff discuss how they met, fell in love, and why marriage matters to them.

http://digg.com/d31YtZR

http://vimeo.com/13876731

 

[jizzeater]

Re: U.S. Court Overturns Calif. Same-Sex Marriage Ban

I dont think so...seeing as how she's replacing Stevens. You replace a liberal with a ??? that doesnt really get you a 5-4 in a favor.

Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, Breyer, and one more...most likely Kennedy. I'm sure Kagan is a lesbian, so which way is she likely to vote?

But neither of them has a scrap of conscience or integrity. They use the Equal Protection clause to further their political aims, which are arch-conservative.

YOU may think it's bizarre for them to rule that corporations have rights, but that gays do not, but trust me neither of those two assholes would even notice an inconsistency or be bothered by one if they did.

It's unlikely, but anything is possible. I'm staying positive.

 

[metta]

Fox news is running an online poll to get viewers reactions. Currently 54% of the vote is saying the Judge made a mistake and marriage equality belongs only to hetrosexual couples. I thought some of you might like to balance the odds a bit. We all know Fox's regular viewers are people with a more conservative slant of view.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/08/04/decide-gay-marriage-judge-ruling-proposition-decision/

Please create a new thread for this in hot topics....so more people will do it.

 

[jizzeater]

No -- Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. I don't care what the judge thinks about the Constitution.

That's why I hate establishment Republicans. They will wipe their ass with the Constitution if it goes against their religious beliefs.

 

[metta]

Ted Olson Comments on Prop 8 Being Ruled Unconstitutional

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjv_AMI8H0M&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[blueto21]

Yay! Hopefully with full marriage equality set in motion that will deter gay open relationship proponents to support monogamous gay relationships. Maybe marriage equality will change the gay communities perspective on monogamy. *crossing fingers*

 

[SilverWolf]

Yay! Hopefully with full marriage equality set in motion that will deter gay open relationship proponents to support monogamous gay relationships. Maybe marriage equality will change the gay communities perspective on monogamy. *crossing fingers*

While I support the rights of same sex couples to marry and to have their relationship recognized and granted the same rights and benefits that straight married couples have....

I fail to see why that should change some people's view on monogamy. If a couple gay or straight wants to marry, they should be able to do it. They should also be free to have as many sex partners as they want, as they are free to practice monogamy with marriage equality. Hell, having multiple sex partners probably would reduce the 50% divorce rate straight couples have.

So, um, you can take your views on how a relationship should be and shove it.

 

[scream4ever]

I heard that a Fox news analyst said that (assuming Kagen is confirmed), the Supreme Court will rule 5-4 in favor of the plaintiffs (yes, a FOX NEWS analysist).

Kennedy will rule in our favor:

-Not only did he rule in our favor in Romer v Evans and Lawrence v Texas (two of our most important court victories), but he wrote the majority opinions for both.

-He recently ruled in our favor in Christian Legal Society v Martinez, and while he did not write the majority opinion, it did say that homosexuality was an "immutable trait".

-He is a big supporter of the 14 amendment and the Equal Protection clause, which is a very large basis for this case.

-Him and Ted Olsen are very close friends, so Olsen is tailoring this case to fit his views.

 

[Yves]

NYTimes Editorial:

Marriage Is a Constitutional Right
Published: August 4, 2010

(...)

"The decision, though an instant landmark in American legal history, is more than that. It also is a stirring and eloquently reasoned denunciation of all forms of irrational discrimination, the latest link in a chain of pathbreaking decisions that permitted interracial marriages and decriminalized gay sex between consenting adults."

(...)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/opinion/05thu1.html?hp

 

[metta]

NOM's Response:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsMHBmvkpxE&playnext=1&videos=Bp0iYWlPGc4&feature=sub[/ame]

Press Release:

"So while they congratulate themselves over their victory before their home-town judge today, let’s not lose sight of the fact that this case is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court, where the right of states to define marriage as being between one man and one woman will be affirmed—and if the Supreme Court fails, Congress has the final say. The rights of millions of voters in states from Wisconsin to Florida, from Maine to California, are at stake in this ruling; NOM is confident that the Supreme Court will affirm the basic civil rights of millions of American voters to define marriage as one man and one woman,” noted Gallagher."


http://www.nationformarriage.org/si...px?c=omL2KeN0LzH&b=5075187&ct=8569893&notoc=1


I know this may sound impossible, but must also use this time to help build support within the Republican party. We can't depend on the Democrats having enough power to protect us on their own.

 

[doetim]

reality check

I'm here in CA and most of my gay friends and contacts are prematurely celebrating. They think this means prop 8 is gone and gay marriage is legalized and we won so lets go drink and be merry and yay. But no. First it will be appealed to the court of appeals, which may or may not agree with the district judge (and who knows, what if they dont agree? Do we get depressed just like prop 8 again). THE ONLY DECISION THAT MATTERS IS THE SUPREME COURT. As of now there will likely be 4 votes for the gays and 4 against... with Anthony Kennedy being the swing. Kennedy is a moderate conservative but has shown friendliness toward gays in the past, HOWEVER, we are not sure his stance on marriage. Cork the champagne, it's not over yet.

I understand that the supreme court thing needs to happen to settle this once and for all but in order for this matter to reach the supreme court we would have to have won this case first right? Well that just happened today! Isn't that cause for celebration in itself?

 

[metta]

Ted Olson Speech AFER Rally Pt 1


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBQrE1S2PJI[/ame]

 

[metta]

Ready for a little breakdown of the details:

http://zackfordblogs.com/2010/08/th...t-everything-we-should-learn-from-this-trial/

 

[braex27]

Not being familiar with the American judicial system, how many more rounds of appeals can there be before the matter can be taken to the US Supreme Court?

And is an appeal to the US Supreme Court a matter of right? Or, does it, like in Australia, require that Court to allow leave for the appeal to be heard?

 

[braex27]

Re: U.S. Court Overturns Calif. Same-Sex Marriage Ban

The case has the right to be heard on the merits in the 9th Circuit Court.

However, the Supreme Court is not obligated to hear the case, in which it would grant a writ of certiorari to hear it if it wants to. Four justices have to decide to hear the case for it to be heard.

Four judge approval for a writ of certiorari is a high threshold for the right to appeal to SCOTUS.

In Australia, you can appeal to the Court of Appeal (or the Full Federal Court) constituted of three or five judges, depending on the case and the question to be answered almost always as a matter of right.

Appealing to the High Court (our equivalent of SCOTUS) requires Special Leave which is determined by a hearing constituted of (usually) two (of seven) of the High Court justices. I always thought two judge approval was difficult! Four out of nine just seems prohibitive.

 

[masgrandeburrito]

Source: Huffington Post

Proposition 8 was overturned yesterday when a federal judge declared the ban on gay marriages "unconstitutional." We couldn't be more happy about this landmark ruling and what it says about equality in this country, but there are some folks who are not so pleased about it. To celebrate the death of Prop. 8, we found some photos of anti-gay protesters being counter-protested with hilarious signs. While the protesters used a lot of fiery language and big, bright signs, the counter-protesters used irony, wit, and some strategic standing to show how silly the anti-gay protesters were. Looks like it worked!

 

[masgrandeburrito]