CA judge overturns "No Gay Marriage" law

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • sgreger1
    Member
    • Mar 2009
    • 9451

    #1

    CA judge overturns "No Gay Marriage" law

    In CA a few years back, the citizens voted in favor of Prop 8, which consisted of an ammendment to the California constitution which states that gay marriage is not legal or recognized by CA.



    Breaking: Right now, the Judge has overturned it as unconstitutional, because it "puts the rule of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians".

    Now an appeal is off to the supreme court.





    Personally I think it's lame that gays would hijack our word and force it by law to mean something it's not (marriage is a religious pact between a man and a woman in the face of God, who according to various religious texts strictly forbids being gay). But I am glad this was overturned because a) it's not primitive times anymore and marriage now means something different than it used to. It's primarily a legal thing, as well as an "official" devotion to another human being "for life", and I don't think any two people in love should be excluded from this.



    I think it's weird personally but that's because it's a foriegn concept in my world, but as a libertarian I salute this ruling because the government should not have any say in what two consenting adults decide they want to do with their lives. Whether you are for or against gay unions being referred to as a marriage, the point here is that this is a strike against government's power to dictate our lives and therefore is a step in the right direction.




    I know some republicans will claim that this will surely lead to man/turtle unions etc etc, but it doesn't matter, the gov should not have the power to say who you can or cannot love for life, or what you and another human being decide to call yourselves. I don't think marriage should be in any way regulated by the government.


    On the flip side, this is also a bad thing, because the majority of people voted to forever ban gay marriage from CA, yet a judge overruled that, thereby not doing the will of the people. But seeing how populist everyone acts nowadays, I can't say that's a bad thing, even though at the end of the day this country should be whatever the electorate wants it to be. I don't like judged overturning voters. Either way, congratulations to any snusers on here from CA who were hoping to finally make it official with their loved one!

    What do you think?
  • lxskllr
    Member
    • Sep 2007
    • 13435

    #2
    One small correction... It goes to appeals court before the Supreme Court(assuming they agree to hear the case). Instead of granting queers the right to marriage, I'd revoke it for the straights. That'll take care of the issue, and it can then become an issue of contract law. Anyone competent to sign a contract and ally with another person, will have the right to do so. There would be no tax benefit, or any other governmental benefit by incorporating in that method. There's no reason a "corporation" should have greater rights than an individual citizen.

    Comment

    • snusjus
      Member
      • Jun 2008
      • 2674

      #3
      While I'm not happy with the way the state handled it by ignoring voters, I'm glad same-sex couples will be able to marry... again.

      Comment

      • MGX
        Member
        • Jun 2010
        • 127

        #4
        Marriage is a state's right. However it remains a mystery how a population can vote on whether a minority can have the same rights as the others.

        Following up, legislation is never forever, but bureaucracy never dies.

        Comment

        • RobsanX
          Member
          • Aug 2008
          • 2030

          #5
          Why should straight people be the only ones who have to suffer this torture?!

          Comment

          • PipenSnus
            Member
            • Apr 2010
            • 1038

            #6
            As a gay man, and as a libertarian, I think all cohabiting couples should have equal rights, gay, straight, or what have you. But I also agree with lxskllr that the whole concept of marriage, no matter who is involved, should be replaced with civil union contracts, which need not be for life. Let the religious fanatics have the word "marriage", if they want it so badly. Civil unions have worked out pretty well in the UK, from what I hear.

            I find it very strange that my gay brothers and sisters want to adopt a social institution that obviously doesn't work for the majority of those who have access to it now. I don't think it's the right way to pursue equal rights for gay couples.

            Comment

            • lxskllr
              Member
              • Sep 2007
              • 13435

              #7
              Originally posted by PipenSnus View Post
              As a gay man, and as a libertarian, I think all cohabiting couples should have equal rights, gay, straight, or what have you. But I also agree with lxskllr that the whole concept of marriage, no matter who is involved, should be replaced with civil union contracts, which need not be for life. Let the religious fanatics have the word "marriage", if they want it so badly. Civil unions have worked out pretty well in the UK, from what I hear.

              I find it very strange that my gay brothers and sisters want to adopt a social institution that obviously doesn't work for the majority of those who have access to it now. I don't think it's the right way to pursue equal rights for gay couples.
              Exactly. Any 2 people should be able to contract to look out for each other. It doesn't even have to be sexually based. Two friends, two brothers, parent and adult child... whatever. That's absolutely fair, their intent is well documented, and nobody gets discriminated against. If someone wants to get married, they can do it in a church that allows it. That isn't a government issue since we have separation of church and state. At least I think we do... We're supposed to anyway :^/

              Comment

              • Randall
                Member
                • May 2010
                • 753

                #8
                I don't care what gays do. Or anyone else.

                Comment

                • Roo
                  Member
                  • Jun 2008
                  • 3446

                  #9
                  Who really gives a **** about or feels threatened by two homosexuals who wish to get married? The fact that anyone is opposed to this blows my mind. I don't care who anyone wants to get married to, and I don't care what anyone wants to do with their private parts, as long as it's consentual. Long live gay rights. Marriage is such an outdated institution anyway... It started as an economic bond between familes of neighboring villages/clans and a means to strengthen those ties economically. As a way to lean on each other. Hence arranged marriages, when the head of household chose the potential bride of a family whose economic ties would bring stability to one or both parties involved. Alas, I digress. Let 'em marry, adopt, and do whatever the hell else they want. As long as straight or "normal" people are afforded those same privaleges, so should everyone else. Let a dude marry a turtle for all I care. Marriage means nothing to me except that which is expected of me. And I have yet to do it.

                  Comment

                  • Bigblue1
                    Banned Users
                    • Dec 2008
                    • 3923

                    #10
                    My only point to this whole discussion, comes from being a single person, who gets no tax breaks, WTF about me???????? None for marriage, none for kids, nothing. why the f uck is that? Explain please.....


                    Edit: I didn't read roos post cuz I was writing my own, but I would marry a turtle for a tax break,,,, that's for sure....... Might even adopt some more turtles for tax ecemptions,,,, why the hell not?

                    Comment

                    • Simplysnus
                      Member
                      • May 2010
                      • 481

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Bigblue1 View Post
                      My only point to this whole discussion, comes from being a single person, who gets no tax breaks, WTF about me???????? None for marriage, none for kids, nothing. why the f uck is that? Explain please.....
                      Being married and having kids is punishment enough...

                      Comment

                      • Bigblue1
                        Banned Users
                        • Dec 2008
                        • 3923

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Simplysnus View Post
                        Being married and having kids is punishment enough...
                        Still doesn't explain why my invite to the tax exemption party got lost in the friggin mail......

                        Comment

                        • Simplysnus
                          Member
                          • May 2010
                          • 481

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Bigblue1 View Post
                          Still doesn't explain why my invite to the tax exemption party got lost in the friggin mail......
                          Kids reduce the distance gross income can go, but I hear ya

                          Comment

                          • Bigblue1
                            Banned Users
                            • Dec 2008
                            • 3923

                            #14
                            but think about it, it's welfare anyway you think about it. All these blow hards who hate welfare and unemployment for hard working men on tough times, have no problem taking their exemptions for having kids. And by their own logic, they are stealing from those of us who have no children exemptions.

                            Comment

                            • Bigblue1
                              Banned Users
                              • Dec 2008
                              • 3923

                              #15
                              And to go a step further any body who has used these house buying, car buying, appliance buying gifts from the government, can from this point on consider themselves part of the welfare system AFAIC

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X