Posted on 05/26/2009 11:05:33 AM PDT by DesertRenegade
The California Supreme Court today affirmed a voter-approved state constitutional amendment that limits marriage to one man and one woman.
But in a decision today that essentially was a 6-1 vote, the court upheld the estimated 17,000 to 18,000 same-sex relationships that were formalized last year between its approval of "gay marriage" in May and the November ballot initiative that overruled the decision
"We conclude Proposition 8 constitutes a constitutional amendment rather than a constitutional revision. As a quantitative matter, petitioners concede that Proposition 8 – which adds but a single, simple section to the Constitution – does not constitute a revision," said the majority opinion written by Chief Justice Ronald George.
"As a qualitative matter, the act of limiting access to the designation of marriage to opposite-sex couples does not have a substantial or, indeed, even a minimal effect on the governmental plan or framework of California that existed prior to the amendment. Contrary to petitioners' claim in this regard, the measure does not transform or undermine the judicial function; this court will continue to exercise its traditional responsibility to faithfully enforce all of the provisions of the California Constitution, which now include the new section added through the voters' approval of Proposition 8," he said.
"Furthermore, the judiciary's authority in applying the state Constitution always has been limited by the content of the provisions set forth in our Constitution, and that limitation remains unchanged," said George.
At issue was the Proposition 8 state constitutional amendment adopted by voters in November. At its adoption it became part of the state constitution, defining marriage as being between one man and one woman only.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
1 man and one woman is only half of the true definition. One man and one woman until death do them part: no divorce. That should be the next hurdle in the Defense of Marriage movement.
“So I guess Carrie Prejean really does represent California”
Now that made me laugh! Perez must be pulling his hair out ... first Carrie ... then Kris .. now THIS ?
i guess this is what bugs me. they want laws enacted to give them rights that other people do not have because of a law. laws do not GIVE rights, they PROTECT rights. why do these loonies think they should have a law that GIVES them something they do not have in the first place.
Where does your pastor get this?
Not from any Bible I have read.
Nope, none at all.
California like Haiti is a lost cause.
SOOO, two years ago I went through Arkansas with the wife on a drive coming home from Vegas.
From the N. West to the S. East we got off the freeway and took back roads and had a great two days of it. Plan to go back and this time haul my Harley up to ride around for a week.
Folks were friendly and helpful, Vistas everywhere and I avoided Little Rock as I do most cites. Why are you such a proponent of Little Rock?
Anything or place you would suggest if and when I come back?
The divorce rate is abhorrent, but the thought of the government being able to force two people to stay together is just as bad. There will always be circumstances where divorce is, in fact, necessary (like when the relationship turns legitimately abusive and dangerous for one or both partners).
I think resisting pushes to make marriage about short-term personal satisfaction and validation (e.g. same-sex “marriage”) is a big step in restoring the culture’s reverence toward marriage.
Thanks for the question.
As happy as I am about the decision, this sets up an equal protection case that ultimately could be heard by the Supremes. It seems to me you cannot allow these 18,000 or so to be married, but then deny this status to all others.
Just curious... are there quite a few Mormons on the court?
so.....when do the nude photos of the seven justices get leaked?
love continues and is perfected in heaven. Marriage is not.
You will not meet a girl and get married in heaven.
And if you were married, and then married again for whatever reason, you will not have 2 wives or 2 husbands in heaven.
Marriage is a earthly construct made for the purpose of creating societal units for the continuation of the species.
And the love you are told to have for your wife is not the “lust-type” love that we so often now associate with the reason for marriage, but the type of devotional love that Christ has for the church, and that you can have with people who are NOT your spouse as well.
Love will continue in Heaven. Marriage will not. I didn’t say that very well — it was one of the distinctions he made in the sermon.
10,000 of ‘em will probably be divorced within 5 years.
You don’t have to choose to be straight to be married. Gay people have married before. You simply have to follow the rules and marry a person of the opposite sex. You have the same rights as everybody else.
Note that NONE of us have the “right” to marry who we please. If we did, a lot of men would be married to Angelina Jolie right now. You can only marry someone who is also willing to marry you. Marriage is not a personal right.
“Gay people can not marry the person they are attracted to and want to marry. I do not see how that is fair.”
Marriage was established by most civilizations as a way to ensure the establishment of families so that a mother and father would raise the next generation of citizens and ensure the survival of the civilization. A mother AND a father raising a child is the optimum environment for children.
Your argument for homosexual marriage is poor. Is it fair to children for the State to establish homosexual marriage, thereby ENSURING that children will either be denied a mother or a father? Is it fair to base law on who a person is attracted to? What if it is your adult sister/brother/mother/father you are attracted to. Should the State endorse those marriages?
Marriage is endorsed by the State so as to provide a mother and father to raise future generations. Any other definition of marriage besides being between one man and one woman is unfair for children.
“the government being able to force two people to stay together is just as bad”
_____________
No one forces anyone to get married in the first place. There are far too many casual marriages. Illegalizing divorce would make people give marriage a great deal of thought (and prayer).
If you want to truly “defend marriage” make divorce nearly impossible to obtain and make adultery a felony. Divorce and adultery is far more common then gays who want to get hitched.
This decision, because of how it accepts the legality of the same-sex marriages for which licenses were already issued in California, may not be upheld on appeal, and one of the grounds on which that may happen might be on “equal protection” grounds in how the ruling establishes two classes of same-sex marriages - those arranged before it’s ruling and those denied the same standing after it’s ruling.
It would have been more legally consistent for the court to have taken the language of the “civil partnership” law in California, and that law’s expression of “equal protection” with marriage, under state law, for “civil partnerships” and, with that acknowledgment, declared that the same-sex marriages licensed in the interim period are de-facto “civil partnerships” and have legal standing as such.
29-Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.I didn't think this was controversial at all. Marriage is an earthly construct, and does not exist in heaven. Love does exist in heaven, but not marriage. And the reason is that in heaven we are like angels, and we do not procreate (note we are not "angels", we are simply "like" angels in that we will not procreate, and therefore will not need a single spouse to cleave to in a familial relationship, since we will all be in the family of God.30-For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
This is in contrast to Islam and their virgins that they expect to have sex with.
Well, marriage represents Christ (the groom) and the church (the bride).
I never said there was marriage in heaven, thats another group that thinks that.
Sex by the way is a gift from God.
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.