In a major victory for basic human rights, the California Supreme Court found it unconstitutional to ban gay marriages. The California Supreme Court's seven justices, five of whom were appointed by Republicans, votes 4-3 in favor of legalizing gay marriages.
This whole case started in 2004 when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom issued a directive to the San Francisco city-county clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Newsom is a true American hero and should be applauded for his awesome work on this issue.
I find the coverage of this news pretty sad, as most pundits immediately 1) say this will help Republicans in the November elections and 2) focus on how radical right-wing activists are working to overturn the ruling. Why does the media feel the need to make this a negative story when it should be an extremely positive one?
And on a very happy note, Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi announced their engagement today.
On a disappointing note, both Obama and Clinton put out statements saying they respect the courts ruling and will continue to fight for civil unions. Note that they didn't say gay marriages. On the other hand, McCain still hasn't said anything on the issue.........
Comments (3)
Civil Unions are clearly the answer to the debate. I don't claim it's entirely fair, but it's the only way liberals will ever get the zealous religious fundies to back down on the issue enough to get anywhere close to passing it.
I actually think Marriages should not be granted at ALL by the government -- if all gays get is civil unions, then the government should give those to everybody. "Marriage" can be administered by whichever church the couple chooses, and here of course certain churches have no problem marrying same-sex couples. "Marriage" should be a title only, while the legal recognition under the state's laws should be done thru Civil Unions.
Posted on May 17, 2008 5:06 PM
Civil unions are bullshit. Can you even picture anyone suggesting that blacks should be allowed civil unions but not marriages? So, how is this acceptable for gays? Anyone suggesting such a thing is a bigot.
Up until 1967 it was illegal in Virginia for blacks to marry whites (this law was invalidated by the Supreme Court in a case called Loving vs. Virginia). This was during Obama's lifeime. If his parents had lived in Virginia they would not have been able to marry. So, I find it abominable that he does not support gay marriage. He is two faced. This is why I cannot support him. This sort of "I'm on the boat, now lets pull up the anchor" type mentality towards civil rights is despicable. Can't say I could ever vote for McCain but at least he's not such a phony. This, Jason, is why I don't understand your Obamamania
Posted on May 17, 2008 9:49 PM
"Can you even picture anyone suggesting that blacks should be allowed civil unions but not marriages?"
Who said anything about blacks? I'm saying EVERYONE should be given civil unions. Marriage should NOT be a government institution. It cannot exist simultaneously as a "religious institution" but be regulated by the state -- a contradiction which currently exists without challenge by anybody. So if the religious nutjobs are worried about the "sanctity of marriage", then let it be 'sanct' -- take the state right out of the deal.
If you really think Obama doesn't support gay marriage the most of any of the 3 candidates then you're just silly. He can't jump right behind it right now because A) it doesn't really make any difference in the current state of the race, and B) if he did come out in full force support, he'd instantly lose any hope of carrying any religious fundy voters, which encompasses major portions of southern blacks. Do the math, son.
Posted on May 18, 2008 12:40 AM