Calif. court passes on suit over gay-marriage vote
The California Supreme Court has refused to hear a case seeking to keep an initiative that would ban gay marriage off the November ballot.
The justices' decision not to take up the case means Proposition 8 will stay on the ballot barring further legal action. It also clears the way for the secretary of state to print voter information pamphlets on the issue.
The initiative seeks to amend California's constitution to ban same-sex nuptials in the state. It would overrule a May decision by the state Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage.
Equality California filed a petition last month arguing among other things that the signature petitions used to put the proposal on the ballot were misleading.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
BOSTON (AP) — Gay couples from across the country are one step closer to a Massachusetts wedding.
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: jnakhoul @ 07/16/2008 11:34:04 AM
Comment: unless they are provided all the rights of a married couple then civil unions are not equal and therefor discrimination. why should the name matter anyway? because a couple can say their married just like anyone else and they would not have to say their entered into a civil union. marriage is a right afforded to everyone regardless of whom they choose to love. There was a time when people could not marry someone of a different race in this country until the US reversed this ruling on the basis that it is discriminatory. i dont really understand how this is still a debate
Posted By: wstephenjackson @ 06/18/2008 7:16:57 PM
Comment: Only one thing disturbs me regarding gay marriage .. and that is the intrusion of religion into the argument in an attempt to enact legislation based on a specific set of religious teachings. One would think that their interpretation requires them to constantly tell others what they must not do. This is fine and free speech until they move to enact these ideas into legislation. Then it becomes theocracy, and this is precisely the kind of abuse envisioned by the authors of the United States Constitution when they mentioned that no state religion would be established. It is precisely the kind of narrow minded ecclesiastical arrogance that, bearing force of law, caused so many to come to these United States of America in the first place.
Marriage is an ancient tradition, but one which has changed radically over the centuries and would have been essentially unrecognizable in biblical times. The pageantry now associated with a marriage is, in fact, based on ancient pagan traditions, but traditions which were also recognized in ancient times as symbolic of creation. The modern ???fundamentalist??? Christian rarely understands the fundamentals. They treat recent writings in the margin of Scofield with the strength of Biblical prophecy, not careful enough to recognize the difference, hence the ???rapture???.
I gladly accept anyone???s belief???s and accept their right to call god by whatever name they choose, and to practice their particular religion as they see fit, provided they do not, in doing so, tread upon the rights of others. To even make the attempt to enact law based on their religion is nothing less than tyranny at its most fundamental level and it has no place in this nation.
Posted By: wstephenjackson @ 06/18/2008 7:04:31 PM
Comment: Only one thing disturbs me regarding gay marriage .. and that is the intrusion of religion into the argument in an attempt to enact legislation based on a specific set of religious teachings.