Posted on 10/21/2008 12:08:06 PM PDT by SmithL
An estimated 11,000 couples have wed since the California Supreme Court ruled in May that same-sex marriages are legal.
Two weeks before the election, it's not clear what happens to them if state voters approve Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage. Would the marriages carried out before Proposition 8 still be legal?
"I wake up in the morning thinking about it, and it's still on my mind when I go to bed at night," said Dru Richie, 53, who is among the newly married. At times, she said, she feels sick to her stomach with the stress.
Richie and her spouse, Robin, exchanged vows at the Placer County Courthouse on June 17, the first day same-sex couples were able to wed legally in California.
In the months since, they've settled into what they call a traditional untraditional life in Rocklin, with two children, three dogs and two birds.
"The people who support the ban can go on with their lives the next day," said Robin Richie, 50. "Ours could be turned upside down."
Polls have shown the ban losing, but experts believe the contest will be close. If the measure succeeds, same-sex unions would become illegal the day after the election.
What becomes of the marriages conducted before Nov. 5 if Proposition 8 passes is a matter of legal debate. Many scholars believe they would remain valid.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
“”I wake up in the morning thinking about it, and it’s still on my mind when I go to bed at night,” said Dru Richie, 53, who is among the newly married. At times, she said, she feels sick to her stomach with the stress.”
Hm, well your situation has me sick to my stomach too, but for a whole other reason entirely.
How many of those couples have already broken up for someone else?
11,000 - wow, what a homosexual state. Always knew SFO was the capital.
Ex-post facto laws being illegal the marriages will remain legal. Prop 8 will only ban future gay marriages.
I'd suspect that they would still be legal. Wouldn't this fall under the expost facto (sp) or bill of attainer clause?
OMG, what’s gonna happen to Mr. Sulu?
Not all Ex Post Facto laws are illegal. Regulatory or administrative laws (among others) can be applied backward. This is not the application of the criminalization of these marriages (which would be illegal), but rather an administrative nullification. This may well be very legal to nullify that which is subsequently unconstitutional.
He will be beamed up.
Legally, the language of the proposition is very clear. There is nothing uncertain about its effect. If it passes, those marriages will be null and void.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I don’t much care how the state decides to handle this after the election. That is a matter for politicians and bureaucrats and I am sure they will exercise their moral judgment as clearly and decisively as they do at all other times. But it must be stated that participating in some mumbo-jumbo with the connivance of a county clerk or judge, pagan priestess or apostate officiant is in no way a marriage.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Make-believe marriages aren’t covered by ex post facto law prohibitions.
No Robin, you can continue living your perverted existence but it will be turned right side up for the vast majority of normal people.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
In related news ... “Fate of 11,000 unicorns uncertain if research confirms that unicorns don’t exist.” IOW, I am quite certain that no marriages are endangered by this proposition.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Gosh, they could be “living in sin!”
Oh, really? Just how will that happen?
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.