Comments on: California Supreme Court Upholds Proposition 8

By: kim kardashian video

kim kardashian video — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 20:26:51 +0000

Connected Websites…

[...]several various other sources on the internet which are well worth looking at with this subject matter contain[...]…

By: Lupe fiasco the show goes on mediafire

Lupe fiasco the show goes on mediafire — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:58:36 +0000

My personal related sites…

[...]a few fresh websites on the web we like, even if they are not related to mine. Check them out[...]…

By: Resources

Resources — Fri, 13 May 2011 01:29:48 +0000

Interesting Posts…

[...]some other related resources on the web that are worth viewing on this subject include[...]…

By: Acts Of Faith Blog

Acts Of Faith Blog — Thu, 28 May 2009 03:11:39 +0000

Today's Conversation Prop 8 Fight Rages On: What About Trans Women and Men? http://snipurl.com/iv6sw

By: heartsandflowers

heartsandflowers — Wed, 27 May 2009 23:11:39 +0000

Today's Conversation Prop 8 Fight Rages On: What About Trans Women and Men? http://snipurl.com/iv6sw

By: whiterosebuddy

whiterosebuddy — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:50:11 +0000

The sensible course would be to let sleeping dogs lay.

By: whiterosebuddy

whiterosebuddy — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:49:22 +0000

A legally binding majority one.
Based on the majority of the votes.

By: whiterosebuddy

whiterosebuddy — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:48:16 +0000

No. It is a strawman, red herring argument.

By: TerranceDC

TerranceDC — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:23:33 +0000

Does this ruling make it easier to put the civil rights of minorities to a simple majority vote?

By: rikyrah

rikyrah — Tue, 26 May 2009 20:01:32 +0000

AFTERNOON OPEN THREAD IS UP!!

By: RobM

RobM — Tue, 26 May 2009 18:39:26 +0000

I wonder what Sotomayor thinks about this ruling. I can not not see it being brought up in the confirmation hearing.

By: Luxuriate

Luxuriate — Tue, 26 May 2009 18:20:25 +0000

What kind of decision is this?

By: spirit_55z

spirit_55z — Tue, 26 May 2009 18:20:08 +0000

California Supreme Court Upholds Same-Sex Marriage Ban

By Ashley Surdin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 26, 2009; 1:15 PM

LOS ANGELES, May 26 -- The California Supreme Court upheld a voter-approved constitutional amendment Tuesday that bans same-sex marriage in the state.
The court said, however, that those couples who wed in the state under an earlier opinion from the court, will be considered married.
The ruling comes after three months of deliberation and nearly a year after the court struck down state laws that similarly banned such marriages. Then, the court ruled that the laws were unconstitutional and that the unions were a "basic civil right." This time, factoring in a successful Nov. 4 ballot measure that defines marriage as a union "between a man and a woman" in the state's constitution, which trumps state laws, the court revealed its hesitancy to override the will of the people.

But Tuesday's ruling, which has been anticipated for months, hardly settles the matter. The recourse for gay rights activists now is to put the matter to voters again through their own initiative or take the matter to federal court.

On the eve of the ruling, Jennifer C. Pizer, a lawyer with the gay rights group Lambda Legal, which is representing one of the plaintiffs in the case, said advocates would look to another ballot measure. "All the legal and policy and political groups feel very strongly that the sensible course would be another ballot measure to undo Prop. 8," she said.

It's unclear how voters would respond to another ballot proposition. Some predicted that the recent legalization of same-sex marriage in Eastern states would sway California's highest court. Advocates hope those events would influence voters.

Read on

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...