Skip to comments.
California Supreme Court Backs Gay Marriage
California Supreme Court Webpage ^
| May 15, 2008
| California Supreme Court
Posted on 05/15/2008 10:02:52 AM PDT by NinoFan
Opinion just released.
TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: caglbt; california; friberals; gaymarriage; heterosexualagenda; homosexualagenda; judges; lawsuit; ruling; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 601-613 next last
To: Niteranger68
If you support marriage between two men, you support it between a man and his daughter.
As long as she's not still a minor, quite frankly I don't see how it's any of my business, no matter how screwy I think it is. The government has no business engaging in social engineering by defining marriage in any way - it's a religious institution.
To: DryFly
It would be nice to be able to blame this on an extremely liberal court, but in truth the CA Supreme Court is actually very conservative nowadays.
Conservative being such a relative term, these days.
62
posted on
05/15/2008 11:06:28 AM PDT
by
papasmurf
(Unless I post a link to a resource, what I post is opinion, regardless of how I spin it.)
To: Antoninus
They tried it twice already, didn’t go anywhere. It’s main back the second time, David Vitter, obviously takes the “sanctity of marriage” very seriously, cheating on his wife with a hooker. It may have been a useful issue in 2004, but it didn’t work in 2006, and sure as hell won’t work this year. The GOP seems to have learned absoultely nothing from 2006 and the special elections, trying the same old tricks that don’t work. I think it will be very funny if there’s a ballot initiative and it fails, like in Arizona.
To: Eva
Gay couples here in California have been trying to argue that the tough State divorce rules are not in effect for gay couples since the so called "Marriage" they entered into was not recognized as being lawful.
Well, that is about to change.
California is a "Community Property" state which will be divided equally (50-50) by the court if the parties are not able to come to an agreement.
64
posted on
05/15/2008 11:10:19 AM PDT
by
R_Kangel
(`.`)
To: BigFinn
It was a mistake to use a merely legislative approach on Prop. 22. I knew from the start that the only way to get the homogamy ban to stick was to use a constitutional amendment, which is available to the voters in California.
We passed a constitutional amendment in Oregon. They have kind of circumvented that by legalizing civil unions, but that’s as far as they can go.
65
posted on
05/15/2008 11:10:32 AM PDT
by
B Knotts
(Calvin Coolidge Republican)
To: OB1kNOb
If God doesnt soon bring judgment upon America, Hell have to go back and apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah! - Ruth Graham AMEN to this... Oh God Revive us again!!!!
66
posted on
05/15/2008 11:16:14 AM PDT
by
pollywog
(I will lift mine eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help. My help comes from the Lord...Ps 121)
To: svcw
can you help me out here
since the court in Mssachusetts and now california say it’s legal, ARF
then why isn’t this going to the supreme court and how on earth can a court over turn the law.
plus if an appeal goes ahead of which I hope it does then does this ruling by the court get put on hold until it does get to the supreme court which can take years can’t it?
sorry for the questions but wanted to clear this up
67
posted on
05/15/2008 11:18:44 AM PDT
by
manc
(Most Republicans go on facts, law, constitution, many others go on the pitch fork mob mentality,)
To: Regulator
remember their argum,ent is they love each other
well you can love a sheep
they are not hurting anyone
well neither are you with the sheep
it is their buisiness what they do in their bedroom
well it is yours to with your sheep
every argument they use can used for having more thna one wife or marrying an animal
maybe the polymists should get the law changed in Utah using the very same arguments and see how the homo’s will go mad and not say about civil rights after all where is their civil rights
another sham marriage comes to a state
68
posted on
05/15/2008 11:23:03 AM PDT
by
manc
(Most Republicans go on facts, law, constitution, many others go on the pitch fork mob mentality,)
To: Old Professer
hey the polygamists should get their way of life legal
after all homo’s say it’s about civil rights
then their are muslims who say they should have 4 wives so let them have 4 wives, civil rights and religious rights you know
would the homo’s back them then
69
posted on
05/15/2008 11:26:12 AM PDT
by
manc
(Most Republicans go on facts, law, constitution, many others go on the pitch fork mob mentality,)
To: Argus
This must be in the "penumbra" becaue it's nowhere in the California constitution as written. Just makin' it up as they go.
To: MinnesotaLibertarian
It may have been a useful issue in 2004, but it didnt work in 2006, and sure as hell wont work this year. The GOP seems to have learned absoultely nothing from 2006 and the special elections, trying the same old tricks that dont work. I think it will be very funny if theres a ballot initiative and it fails, like in Arizona.
Yeah, it'll be hysterical. I always laugh when my country goes collectively insane enough to confuse two sodomites with a husband and wife.
Of course, you're wrong. Arizona is the only example of someplace where a ballot initiative on this issue didn't pass. And if you research why, it's because all sorts of riders were tagged onto the initiative which were only peripherally concerned with homosexual faux-marriage.
Plus, it looks like the traditional marriage initiative will be back on the ballot in Arizona in November without the riders.
Butt-sex marriage is not popular with the voters and should absolutely be an issue so that we do not remain at the mercy of these black-robed dictators.
71
posted on
05/15/2008 11:26:45 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(Siblings are the greatest gift parents give their children.)
To: R_Kangel
well look at the homo’s who got a sham marriage in massachusetts
half of them nearly are divorced
what about the civil rights of a kid, I grew up in foster homes and I always wanted a father and a mother, so what about kids today does a girl have to settle for two daddies
bizarre
to think outrage about a man having more than one wife at that ranch yet no outrage from libs about two men poking each other and thinking they should get married
very bizarre indeed
72
posted on
05/15/2008 11:29:52 AM PDT
by
manc
(Most Republicans go on facts, law, constitution, many others go on the pitch fork mob mentality,)
To: NormsRevenge
We had a real colorful sunset last night - We live on the beach in SF and it truly was spectacular
To: MinnesotaLibertarian
maybe I should turn muslim and have 4 wives then
we have a law defining marriage already but the libs and homo’s want to over turn the law to suit their perverted mental sickness
74
posted on
05/15/2008 11:32:00 AM PDT
by
manc
(Most Republicans go on facts, law, constitution, many others go on the pitch fork mob mentality,)
To: Kickass Conservative
"Does this mean that I can practice Polygamy now?"If you haven't noticed Polygamy has been practiced for a long time, without anyone coming after them. It isn't until the charges of child abuse that action is being taken.
75
posted on
05/15/2008 11:32:13 AM PDT
by
Spunky
(You are free to make choices, but not free from the consequences)
To: Antoninus
By funny I meant ironic-funny, not “ha ha”-funny, but that's not really relevant. We'll see what happens with ballot initiatives this year, but even if they pass, it's not going to be nearly as powerful an issue as in 2004. In Wisconsin, a gay marriage ban passed in 2006, but that didn't stop the voters from overwhelming re-electing a Democrats to virtually every statewide office. This election pony trick isn't going to work anymore.
To: NinoFan
I think it’s time us Texans just close all borders surrounding Texas: the Mexico southern border and the U.S. north, east, and west borders.
It was a nice ride U.S.A. but it’s just getting too blue out yonder.
77
posted on
05/15/2008 11:35:00 AM PDT
by
avacado
To: NinoFan
MSNBC staff and news service reports updated 22 minutes ago SAN FRANCISCO - In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation's biggest state to tie the knot.
Biggest state????
You mean Alaska????
Biggest Socialist state, maybe.
Damn, those hippies sure think a lot of themselves.
78
posted on
05/15/2008 11:37:11 AM PDT
by
KSoldier
(IRAQ WAR VETERAN)
To: manc
maybe I should turn muslim and have 4 wives then
Knock yourself out. It's none of my business.
we have a law defining marriage already but the libs and homos want to over turn the law to suit their perverted mental sickness
I'm against the whole idea of marriage as a government institution. The government has no business engaging in social engineering by getting involved in family, personal, and religious issues.
To: MinnesotaLibertarian
so by that logic marriage could be anything
people marrying animals, as what as happened elsewhere in the world namely India
we can have more than one wife or husband
Kids as young 5 could get married
you need laws
if we don’t have a law defining then anything goes and anarchy happens
80
posted on
05/15/2008 11:43:11 AM PDT
by
manc
(Most Republicans go on facts, law, constitution, many others go on the pitch fork mob mentality,)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 601-613 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