Skip to comments.
California's Gay Marriages Annulled
SkyNews ^
| August 12, 2004
Posted on 08/12/2004 12:27:39 PM PDT by traumer
More than 4,000 gay marriages in San Francisco have been annulled by California's Supreme Court. The court ruled the city had acted improperly in granting the marriage licences earlier this year in defiance of state law.
The mayor of the San Francisco ignited a passionate nationwide debate in February by allowing 4,037 same-sex couples to wed over a four-week period. The California Supreme Court stopped the marriages while it reviewed the city's actions.
It has now ruled the city violated the law, since both legislation and a voter-approved measure defined marriage as a union between a man and woman. The justices decided with a 5-2 vote to nullify the nearly 4,000 marriages.
The court, however, did not resolve whether the California Constitution would permit a same-sex marriage. It ruled only on the narrow issue of whether local officials could bypass California's judicial and legislative branches.
Polls show most Californians continue to oppose gay marriage.
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cascotus; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
1
posted on
08/12/2004 12:27:39 PM PDT
by
traumer
To: traumer
Well, this is some progress. The fact that the California SC didn't completely ignore the law means something.
To: Zack Nguyen
So that means they're....living in sin?
3
posted on
08/12/2004 12:31:38 PM PDT
by
George Smiley
(Tagline removed pursuant to threatening letters from DNC and Kerry/Edwards attorneys.)
To: traumer
4
posted on
08/12/2004 12:33:06 PM PDT
by
HawkeyeLonewolf
(Christian First, American Second)
To: traumer
When will the mayor report for jail time?
To: <1/1,000,000th%
So I guess Rosie O'Donnell is back on the market?
To: traumer
This is a liberal state but most people here support traditional marriage. If the Democrats want to do something stupid like repeal the law next year, let them go ahead. In the event that happens, you can be sure voters will amend the state Constitution to put a stop to these childish games of theirs.
7
posted on
08/12/2004 12:38:07 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: Zack Nguyen
CA Supreme Court Justices have to stand for re-election. A few years back, we threw a bunch out who refused to enact the death penalty. Looks like the Court still remembers the lesson.
8
posted on
08/12/2004 12:40:12 PM PDT
by
asmith92008
(If we buy into the nonsense that we always have to vote for RINOs, we'll just end up taking the horn)
To: traumer
Annulled my eye. They were never valid to begin with. A great, big, fat charade, just like homosexuality itself.
9
posted on
08/12/2004 12:40:48 PM PDT
by
Mr Ramsbotham
("This house is sho' gone crazy!")
To: King Koffee
To: traumer
"DUH!!" of the Year Award
Dan
11
posted on
08/12/2004 12:41:02 PM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: traumer
The court, however, did not resolve whether the California Constitution would permit a same-sex marriage. It ruled only on the narrow issue of whether local officials could bypass California's judicial and legislative branches. Why didn't they 'resolve' on the issue? The people have spoken.... no more inerpretations by a bunch of black robes from the left.
To: George Smiley
Dang, ya beat me to the punch
13
posted on
08/12/2004 12:44:43 PM PDT
by
NRA1995
("Just call me a proud Republican goon!")
To: traumer
The court, however, did not resolve whether the California Constitution would permit a same-sex marriage. It ruled only on the narrow issue of whether local officials could bypass California's judicial and legislative branches.So two justices thought that was just fine and dandy? I have GOT to read the dissent.
14
posted on
08/12/2004 12:46:44 PM PDT
by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
To: traumer
Del is 83 years old and I am 79," Lyon said. "After being together for more than 50 years, it is a terrible blow to have the rights and protections of marriage taken away from us. At our age, we do not have the luxury of time." This is one of my favorite lines. NO ONE IS TAKING AWAY YOUR RIGHT TO MARRY. You just want what has been given.
15
posted on
08/12/2004 12:57:37 PM PDT
by
ZeonZaku
To: George Smiley
So that means they're....living in sin? LOL. Well, they were doing that to begin with, unfortunately.
To: traumer
so will the 4000 get their marriage license fees back from the city ? Not likely.
17
posted on
08/12/2004 1:13:52 PM PDT
by
Centurion2000
(Truth, Justice and the American Way)
To: KingsKindred
Because this is most likely only a temporary bout of sanity. If the Calif Sup Court doesn't 'resolve' the issue by creating a constitutional right for gays to marry, then you can be sure that the Federal 9th appellate circuit will, and then the Supreme Court will back them up and the courts will have exercised their biggest power grab since, perhaps, Roe v Wade.
18
posted on
08/12/2004 1:35:29 PM PDT
by
Aetius
To: goldstategop
I have a feeling that the majority of CA whites support gay marriage. It is probably the hispanics, asians, and blacks that put gay marriage opposition in the majority of CA opinion.
19
posted on
08/12/2004 7:35:33 PM PDT
by
Kuksool
(Get Your Souls To The Polls In November)
To: Aetius
Right you are.
The 9th circuit will short-circuit this intelligent decision as they have so many times in the past.
20
posted on
08/12/2004 7:44:56 PM PDT
by
ZULU
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson