real_magick1970 wrote on 05/21/08 at 2:23pm:


of course I think we agree here that states have a lot of control over their own affairs, but are not as sovereign as they were pre 1865.

real_magick1970 wrote on 05/21/08 at 2:20pm:


There are ways around it though, those include constitutional amendments and if the legislative and executive branch get together they can pack the court.  Checks and balances are built right in that was the genius of the founders.

Drake wrote on 05/21/08 at 2:42pm:

Traditionally, there is no officiant who conducts the wedding ceremony, and ultimately it could be described as a self-uniting ceremony, but the family participates in the entire ceremony with the parents of both the bride and groom making sacrifices to the God of Marriage. No priest or any other official is needed to solemnize the ritual.

Drake wrote on 05/21/08 at 2:42pm:

Of course, but the prayers should be more focused on the "new home" rather than the couple. There ceremony included a procession, prayers, the singing of hymns, and sacrifices.

Kadynastar wrote on 05/22/08 at 12:42am:

To be honest, I think you are not paying attention. What we are discussing is the reality of law, the legal system, and the legislative process. These things exist separate from any personal opinion I may have about same-sex marriage, and are a reality that one has to face when dealing with the issue. Just because you really, really, really want same-sex marriage to be considered the same as a legal marriage does not make it so. Pounding your fist on the table yelling "that's not fair" does nothing.... and what you see here, is while everyone is slapping each other on the backs, saying how wonderful this court win is, all that really happened was that it motivated people to attempt and force a constitutional amendment in November... Cali is one of the most progressive and liberal states in the Union. If that passes, you can virtually kiss away any hope of same-sex marriage in the rest of the country.

Well, if I may, from my understanding the reason it was titled a civil rights issue in the first place was because by allowing civil unions but disallowing the name and rights of marriage that the law was stating without stating that the relationships of homosexuals were secondary and not equal to their heterosexual counterparts in a sort of seperate but equal way.

Timothy wrote on 11/05/08 at 7:38am:

I'm really surprised that there has been no reaction to California voters having passed a constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage. It should also be noted that yesterday Arizona and Florida voters also approved amendments banning gay marriage, and in Arkansas, voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents, which supporters made clear gays and lesbians were their main target.

I'm disappointed. Not only in California, but Arkansas Florida and Arizona also passed legislation on Tuesday that denies rights to same sex couples.

A friend of mine and his partner went out to CA over the summer to get married at Disney. I hope he hasn't heard yet. It's a down right shame.

I'm disgusted by the whole thing. It's no different than saying blacks can't marry, or Indians can't marry, or Italians can't marry. it's discriminatory, it's exclusive, and for the love of Benji it's just plain wrong. It goes against the very principles of the US Constitution.

I can't believe the wave of hatred that has rolled across the country in relation to this issue. Gay and lesbians couples want to be married - SO WHAT?!? They have the same feelings, and needs, and desires as every one else. It's not going to destroy the fabric of humanity (or whatever BS these people have been spouted) if it happens.

*ugh*

Sorry...annoyed..taking a deep breath now...having a beer...a ciggie or two....

Nope. Still don't feel any better about it.

It's not right, darnit. It's just not right.

*edit* and you know what the worst part is? The money and support for this travesty has come from all over the world. groups in other states and other countries have poured money and effort into banning same sex marriage. Sure in the end the voters were from california. But what business was it of anyone else's outside the state to put their resources into it?

*grumpgrumpgrump*

i'm done...for now

I am shocked that SSM could be overturned despite its ruling by the California Supreme Court, I always thought the Supreme Courts were the highest point an issue could be raised to.  

If a simple vote is used to decide these things, and apparently overpowers the ruling of a Supreme Court, it makes me wonder why the voting process isn't used to decide other issues State and Nation wide.  It would seem that ultimately the Supreme Court system is rather pointless.