Gay Marriage on Hold in California

Reader Comments
Back to article

I am not gay. Neither am I black. I would no sooner deny a social right to a black person than I would a homosexual. Those in opposition of gay marriage are bigots to the extent of any prejudice group. Separation of church and state is hard to find being that most of our country is christian, but soon a new generation of people indifferent to sexual orientation, race, religion, and way of life will take over the country, and a feeling of understanding and unquestioning love will find a place in the hearts of all people, sea to sea. That is what it should take to be an American, and I can't stand to see people in such blatant disregard for the feelings and lifestyle of others. Make a gay friend. Then maybe you too can see that we're all human.

Chris of TX 4:53PM August 21, 2010

Seems as if the gays want to strap it on to the straight people and shove their lifestyle down their throats a poke it in the their rears.

Tyrone Shoelaces of DC 9:32AM August 19, 2010

"They are the are people who want total government control of private lives and they'll use any group they ca to try to get support in the guise of caring for them."
Exactly! Which is why you are advocating for prop8, which is government control of people's private lives, which... wait what?!?

oliver of CA 9:31PM August 17, 2010

and Jeebus that all the heterosexual marriages in California are saved, at least until December when they will all have to get divorced if gay marriage passes.

Sam of TX 6:24PM August 17, 2010

Most of us want to couple and live happily ever after. Why not let two people of the same sex do the same? There's is no logical reason for denying same-sex couples the exact same rights that heterosexual couples enjoy. Other than the paranoia and longing for the way things were (circa 1950) when women stayed home and tended to home and children, while men worked to support the household, there is no rational reason for denying one person the right to marry another based on their sex organs. It's just ludicrous to exclude homosexuals from these rights. Equality, liberty and justice is something that all Americans strive for, therefore denying a minority those rights is just un-American.

tom of CA 4:41PM August 17, 2010

Art, I do need to help clarify a couple of things you are saying.
"The will of the people" is not absolute, and the Constitution was designed to prevent what some have called "The Tyranny of the Majority". The voters in California are entitled to amend their constitution as they see fit, so long as it does not offend Article 1 of the Constitution or the provisions of the Bill of Rights incorporated to the states under the 14th amendment.
The question at hand isn't about liberals ruling the land, or socialists and communists taking over. (This isn't a question of macro-economics or the right of individuals to own property.) The question, which is a valid question and one which has never been addressed at this level, is whether the right to marry the person of one's choosing can be restricted to exclude same-gender couples. The plaintiffs in the case argue that by doing so the State of California offends the due process and equal protection guarantees of the 14th amendment. The proponents of Prop 8 argue that the State of California has a compelling interest in preserving the definition of marriage.
There's no brainwashing or corruption here, this is a valid question that deserves to be addressed. I have no objection to the District Court's ruling being stayed pending appeal . . . it is to be expected.
A frustrating aspect of this type of controversy is that all sorts of arguments and issues are raised by members of the general public who don't understand how the constitution works and how law is decided an applied. At the end of the day this decision will probably come down to the swing Associate Justice who has shown himself to be pretty free of ideological preconceptions.
Like I said . . . this is a very interesting case.

Celeborn of CT 2:18PM August 17, 2010

DeeToo - I don't know if I would call this a waste of time. It's actually a necessary step on the way to establishing solid law that is applicable across the country.
There is far more than Prop 8 and California at stake here. The ruling by the District Court, if affirmed by the 9th circuit, becomes law in Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and Washington. If appealed to the Supreme Court and upheld it becomes settled law nationwide, and all prohibitions against same gender marriage in the Unites States of America and all of its territories and posessions become invalid.
Pursuing this appeal is a risky gambit on the part of Prop 8 proponents. Should they be denied standing the District Court ruling stands, but it is only applicable to the specific case and does not establish precedent law. They are betting that even if the generally liberal 9th circuit affirms the District Court decision the Supreme Court will grant them standing, issue a writ of certiorari, and ultamately overturn the finding.
Not a sure thing . . . and not a waste of time at all.
C.

Celeborn of CT 2:01PM August 17, 2010

I hope gay marriage is permanently banned not only in California, but worldwide... and this has absolutely nothing to do with my views on homosexuality. I have nothing against gay people as long as they don't try to push their lifestyles on me. The reason I'm glad about the ban is that it's another sign that the liberals can't just go and take away the will of the people and allow a small minority to rule the land. The main people pushing for gay marriage and gay rights are not homosexuals, but rather straight people who are using gays for their own political agenda. These are people who want total government control of private lives and they'll use any group they can to try to get support in the guise of caring for them. The Socialist/Communist movement in America is being exposed for what it is and is continuing to lose support and momentum. May the corruption and brainwashing end and then let the same sex weddings happen, provided that it is the will of the people.

art of CA 1:50PM August 17, 2010

One of the most interesting fact is that in spite of the lack of standing backers of prop 8 were heard in the circut court as representatives of the interest of the state of California.

Russell of CA 1:34PM August 17, 2010

What is the point of denying people their rights? Has this suddenly become fashionable?
Denying muslims the right to have their mosque....
Denying gays the right to marry.....
Denying legal citizens the right to not be harassed if they look Mexican......
The judge did the right thing. If all the paranoid, reactionary, over-politicized, frightened, uncomfortable with the new demographics types keep trying to block the rghts of people here, we might as well throw away the constitution.
Funny too - these are the folks who claim they love the constitution - and claim the Left does not. But religion and fear can really get in the way of rational thought.
California courts - DO WHAT IS RIGHT - allow gay marriage. If churches wish to ban it, they have that right. But in this country, the government does not have the right to block basic rights for equal treatment in a civil environment.

DeeToo of SC 1:30PM August 17, 2010