- Joined
- Aug 26, 2007
- Messages
- 50,241
- Reaction score
- 19,243
- Location
- San Antonio Texas
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal - Yahoo! NewsBy LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer – 5 mins ago
SAN FRANCISCO – A federal appeals court put same-sex weddings in California on hold indefinitely Monday while it considers the constitutionality of the state's gay marriage ban.
The decision, issued by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, trumps a lower court judge's order that would have allowed county clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples on Wednesday.
Lawyers for the two gay couples that challenged the ban said Monday they would not appeal the panel's decision on the stay to the Supreme Court.
In its two-page order granting the stay, the 9th Circuit agreed to expedite its consideration of the Proposition 8 case. The court plans to hear the case during the week of Dec. 6 after moving up deadlines for both sides to file their written arguments by Nov. 1.
Absolutely!
Its nice to see the courts stand up for the rights of 7 million voters
Where is the freedom to force the people to change society for no good reason?As opposed to the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution?
The funny thing is....you guys didn't even read the article. This is actually a good sign for those who oppose prop 8. The Court expedited the process which is a good indication that they believe that a significant right is being infringed upon and are seeking the remedy the situation.
As opposed to the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution?
The funny thing is....you guys didn't even read the article. This is actually a good sign for those who oppose prop 8. The Court expedited the process which is a good indication that they believe that a significant right is being infringed upon and are seeking the remedy the situation.
Where is the freedom to force the people to change society for no good reason?
there is nothing in the Constitution about gay marriage Disney. No matter how much you scream, the only way to claim its in there is to bastardize the law already written to include it when it never was..
Where is the freedom to force the people to change society for no good reason?
How does it affect you again? I keep forgetting.
No but the 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of association.
Great news, no more marriages will be preformed. That way when the ruling is struck down they won't have to void the "weddings"If not, it will still be a terrible atrocity committed against voters.
Are you calling the welfare of millions of children of same sex couples who are denied the benefits inherent in marriage, no good reason? Or do you call denying an entire group of people their Constitutional equal protection under the law, no good reason?
I just want to make sure.
Oh, and how exactly does same sex marriage change society?
Actually, I'm super psyched about this. You see, when the voters of California overturn Prop 8 in 2012, you are going to be eating your own words. A majority of voters in California now support same sex marriage and you can bet that a slew of LDS and Catholic funded ad smears on same sex couples is not going to work a second time.
Are you calling the welfare of millions of children of same sex couples who are denied the benefits inherent in marriage, no good reason? Or do you call denying an entire group of people their Constitutional equal protection under the law, no good reason?
I just want to make sure.
Oh, and how exactly does same sex marriage change society?
It makes Christians become gay, seriously.:?
so you support all sexual orientations obtaining marriage rights as long as it doesn't change soceity. Excellent.
I deleted that post.
And I have said in other threads that if the majority vote in favor of gay marriage then I have no problem with it. If a majority supports it then let them vote on it. However, they will have to vote to repeal prop 8 and then place a new proposition that defines marriage for that state. I fully support the state's rights to define marriage by popular vote.
Yes. Because not enacting some proposition that legally defines marriage to include or exclude homosexuality pretty much leaves the window open up to anything. Prop 8 never mentions homosexuality, it just set up a definition for marriage that sets it as a union between one man and one woman. Repealing this repeals the definition, it doesn't set a new one in place. If the overturn Prop 8 that means they disagree with it. And if they truly endorse gay marriage they can legally define marriage to include homosexual relationships. They have to go the "extra mile" because repealing Prop 8 does nothing but remove a definition, it doesn't set up a new one.Let me get this straight. The only way that you are going to accept that California wants same sex marriage is that they not only overturn Prop 8 with a majority vote, but then they have to introduce a proposition to amend their Constitution to include a definition of same sex marriage? Why? If they overturn Prop 8, then by all means they have endorsed same sex marriage. Why would they have to go that extra mile? It sounds to me like you are just trying to leave yourself an excuse to fight it until the day you die.
I deleted that post.
And I have said in other threads that if the majority vote in favor of gay marriage then I have no problem with it. If a majority supports it then let them vote on it. However, they will have to vote to repeal prop 8 and then place a new proposition that defines marriage for that state. I fully support the state's rights to define marriage by popular vote.
Yes. Because not enacting some proposition that legally defines marriage to include or exclude homosexuality pretty much leaves the window open up to anything. Prop 8 never mentions homosexuality, it just set up a definition for marriage that sets it as a union between one man and one woman. Repealing this repeals the definition, it doesn't set a new one in place. If the overturn Prop 8 that means they disagree with it. And if they truly endorse gay marriage they can legally define marriage to include homosexual relationships. They have to go the "extra mile" because repealing Prop 8 does nothing but remove a definition, it doesn't set up a new one.
I will always disagree and hold gay marriages to not be marriages by my belief system. But if a state votes and decides that marriage in that state includes homosexuality then I have no objections. I don't object to Canada having gay marriage, nor do I object to other countries that have it when that's what the people want. Stop making false and offensive judgments.
What does that have to do with marriage?
The thing though is, is that homosexual relationships aren't marriage. The two people who want to get married can't change the existing contract against the will of others to force the government to recognize their union for something that it isn't.Do you believe that the voters should have veto power over YOUR (current or future) marriage? It's no one's goddamn business except the two people who want to get married.
So if a majority wants something in this country, then you will support their right to have it no matter what it is and even if you personally disagree with it?
I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it. I think you support a Federal Constitutional amendment and would love the opportunity to deny same sex marriage to states that would vote for it. The only reason you care about the voting issue is because that is the only way you can win; by appealing to the prejudices of the populace.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?