Quantcast

Judge Says Calif. Can't Ban Gay Marriage

dh girlie

MISS MISSY (geek)
HA! SWEET!

SAN FRANCISCO - A judge ruled Monday that California's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, saying the state could no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

In the eagerly awaited opinion likely to be appealed to the state's highest court, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.

"It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Kramer wrote.

The judge wrote that the state's historical definition of marriage, by itself, cannot justify the denial of equal protection for gays and lesbians.

"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional," Kramer wrote.

Kramer ruled in lawsuits brought by the city of San Francisco and a dozen same-sex couples last March. The suits were brought after the California Supreme Court halted a four-week marriage spree that Mayor Gavin Newsom had initiated in February 2004 when he directed city officials to issue marriage licenses to gays and lesbians in defiance of state law.

The plaintiffs said withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians trespasses on the civil rights all citizens are guaranteed under the California Constitution.

Two legal groups representing religious conservatives joined with California Attorney General Bill Lockyer in defending the existing laws and had vowed to appeal if Kramer did not rule in their favor.

Lockyer's office has said it expects the matter eventually will have to be settled by the California Supreme Court.

A pair of bills pending before the California Legislature would put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. If California voters approve such an amendment, as those in 13 other states did last year, that would put the issue out of the control of lawmakers and the courts.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
dh girlie said:
Oh shut up...I'm 'strictly dickly'. However, it kinda bugs me that people are so damn concerned with what others are doing...who cares if gay people want to get married? Let's use the resources used to fight it on something constructive, yo!
Lots of sanctimonious heterosexual bible believers who think that by railing against gay marriage, God might just overlook the fact that they are ****ing around on their own spouses...Adultery isn't cool in the bible either, but you never hear much abou that, do you?
 
Jul 19, 2004
283
0
Jax
Does the bible realy say in it that gay marriages are banned or does it just infer it. Sry for the dumb question dont read a bible. But anywho it is a waste of money to ban gay marriage the hole point of the goverment is freedom of speach and seperation of church and state. Banning gay marriage goes againts our own constitution.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
The bible advocates killing homosexuals, so I would tend to interpret that as a no on gay marriage.

Now, that was the old testament, true. Here's a verse from the New Testament that traditonally is trotted out to show homosexuality is evil:

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

1 Cor 6:9-10 (NIV)

Notice that by that verse, neither President Bush, his brother Neil, or his niece Noel is going to heaven. (Drunkard, swindler, drug addict. Jenna and Barbara probably aren't headed to the pearly gates either, I'd guess.)

Here is another one:

"We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers–and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine."

1 Timothy 1: 9-10 (NIV)

The President gets nailed twice, since even though he appears to not drink himself silly anymore, he doesn't go to church on a regular basis, and a strong case can be made that he's a bit of a liar.

edit: formatting, made sure the verses were from the same translation.
 

COmtbiker12

Turbo Monkey
Dec 17, 2003
2,577
0
Colorado Springs
dh girlie said:
However, it kinda bugs me that people are so damn concerned with what others are doing...who cares if gay people want to get married? Let's use the resources used to fight it on something constructive, yo!

No kidding. They're not bothering me in anyway. Maybe its just too politically incorrect for gay people to get married in America or something. If it makes them happy and doesn't physically hurt others, why should the bible folks be allowed to mess with all that?
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
Barbaton said:
nope, if you look at their main site (i only linked to the kids section), you'll see that they are indeed on a quest to have Landover Baptist (which actually is a spoof) shut down...
It's subtle, but a spoof. Look at the member bios page, and then tell me where Fellowship University is :D

Also notice Fred Hoskins nickname (Skeet) and the thong in the gift store...
 

Barbaton

Turbo Monkey
May 11, 2002
1,477
0
suburban hell
Silver said:
It's subtle, but a spoof. Look at the member bios page, and then tell me where Fellowship University is :D

Also notice Fred Hoskins nickname (Skeet) and the thong in the gift store...
meh, you might be right, though I've had it presented to me by a good half dozen people that it's real. a spoof that's so subtle as to be believable isn't that good a spoof...
 

reflux

Turbo Monkey
Mar 18, 2002
4,617
2
G14 Classified
I'm all for equal rights and crap...




too bad The Bush Administration doesn't feel the same way.




My prediction if this stands (and I hope it does--my gay friends would be stoked): The Bush Administration will devise a way to create an all-out, metal cage match featuring CA against the rest of the Republican states because our open-minded attitudes towards homosexuality infringe on the rights and freedoms of the homophobic population.



Werd.
 

manimal

Ociffer Tackleberry
Feb 27, 2002
7,213
22
Blindly running into cactus
what about my pedophile friend? he should be able to marry his boy lover too....after all, he was born with a genetic disorder that prevents him from having a normal relationship with an adult so it's not his fault that he has sexual relationships with 10 yr old boys. i think he should have special civil rights too :rolleyes: oh yeah, and i'm tired of the gov't infringing on my civil rights, telling me that i can only have one spouse! i need a mein kampf oriented lobbyist group to pull for my polygamist rights too! ....and if you don't agree w/ me then you're an ignorantly intolerant biggot!
 

blue

boob hater
Jan 24, 2004
10,160
2
california
manimal said:
what about my pedophile friend? he should be able to marry his boy lover too....after all, he was born with a genetic disorder that prevents him from having a normal relationship with an adult so it's not his fault that he has sexual relationships with 10 yr old boys. i think he should have special civil rights too :rolleyes: oh yeah, and i'm tired of the gov't infringing on my civil rights, telling me that i can only have one spouse! i need a mein kampf oriented lobbyist group to pull for my polygamist rights too! ....and if you don't agree w/ me then you're an ignorantly intolerant biggot!
Wow...Just...Wow.

Speaking subjectively, your typical Man/Boy love relationship is not consensual, and even if it is, the boy is said relationship typically does not have the mental capacity to foster such a relationship.

And if you want 182750237502376 wives, come to Utah, where it's illegal to be polyggy but they let them do it anyways...
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,373
0
SF
manimal said:
what about my pedophile friend? he should be able to marry his boy lover too....after all, he was born with a genetic disorder that prevents him from having a normal relationship with an adult so it's not his fault that he has sexual relationships with 10 yr old boys. i think he should have special civil rights too :rolleyes: oh yeah, and i'm tired of the gov't infringing on my civil rights, telling me that i can only have one spouse! i need a mein kampf oriented lobbyist group to pull for my polygamist rights too! ....and if you don't agree w/ me then you're an ignorantly intolerant biggot!
That is an excellent debating technique, mentioning points which seem related and are indefensible but actually have nothing to do with the topic in hand.

Marriage is a consensual act, where pedophilia is not (children cannot make a mature decision about sex, despite what pedophiles try to convince others).

Actually I never fully understood the problem with polygamy if it involves mature, rational people. The reality is polygamy usually involves older men and much younger girls who are unable to make their own decision who they should marry.

But is Manimal trying to advocate he should be able to marry as many young boys as he wishes? That is the point you are trying to make, right? Or did I get it wrong?
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
This should be in the PD forum. A lot of people in the lounge don't wanna read this stuff. That's why there is a PD forum in the first place.
 

binary visions

The voice of reason
Jun 13, 2002
22,202
1,390
NC
valve bouncer said:
This should be in the PD forum. A lot of people in the lounge don't wanna read this stuff. That's why there is a PD forum in the first place.
:stupid:

It was absolutely inevitable that this thread turn that way, though. Anything with "Gay" or "Pot" or "George W. Bush" in the topic immediately turns into a nasty political or religious argument.

Manimal, should I dig that exact same post out of the political forum? You're getting predictable...
 

valve bouncer

Master Dildoist
Feb 11, 2002
7,843
114
Japan
binary visions said:
:stupid:

It was absolutely inevitable that this thread turn that way, though. Anything with "Gay" or "Pot" or "George W. Bush" in the topic immediately turns into a nasty political or religious argument.

Manimal, should I dig that exact same post out of the political forum? You're getting predictable...
Right, I mean I love a good arguement as much as the next blowhard but I can appreciate that reading political stuff is not what some people enjoy doing on a mountainbike web-site. :)
 

ummbikes

Don't mess with the Santas
Apr 16, 2002
1,794
0
Napavine, Warshington
manimal said:
what about my pedophile friend? he should be able to marry his boy lover too....after all, he was born with a genetic disorder that prevents him from having a normal relationship with an adult so it's not his fault that he has sexual relationships with 10 yr old boys. i think he should have special civil rights too :rolleyes: oh yeah, and i'm tired of the gov't infringing on my civil rights, telling me that i can only have one spouse! i need a mein kampf oriented lobbyist group to pull for my polygamist rights too! ....and if you don't agree w/ me then you're an ignorantly intolerant biggot!
A 10 year old can not consent, too young. But nice try.


As far as polygamy goes, heck you cold have an entire fleet of little hucker/jumper/shreders if you cold plant multiple seeds in many fields.
:thumb:
 

Andyman_1970

Turbo Monkey
Apr 4, 2003
3,105
5
The Natural State
Silver said:
The bible advocates killing homosexuals, so I would tend to interpret that as a no on gay marriage.

Now, that was the old testament, true. Here's a verse from the New Testament that traditonally is trotted out to show homosexuality is evil:

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

1 Cor 6:9-10 (NIV)

Notice that by that verse, neither President Bush, his brother Neil, or his niece Noel is going to heaven. (Drunkard, swindler, drug addict. Jenna and Barbara probably aren't headed to the pearly gates either, I'd guess.)

Here is another one:

"We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers–and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine."

1 Timothy 1: 9-10 (NIV)

The President gets nailed twice, since even though he appears to not drink himself silly anymore, he doesn't go to church on a regular basis, and a strong case can be made that he's a bit of a liar.

edit: formatting, made sure the verses were from the same translation.
Which makes me wonder why the Christian right salivate over him. Granted I agree with many of his views on issues such as abortion and gay marriage, I do not however think he is any sort of "model Christian" to be drooled over.
 

Skookum

bikey's is cool
Jul 26, 2002
10,184
0
in a bear cave
MMike said:
That would be quite the honeymoon.....
i have a honeymoon almost everyday anyways. :o: i got my moves down and everything. i say "damn Skookie your sooooo sexxay!" and then i say back "tee hee hee, tell me more about my eyes!". Then i start stroking my flowing mane........
 

MMike

A fowl peckerwood.
Sep 5, 2001
18,207
105
just sittin' here drinkin' scotch
But then suddenly, your OTHER self bursts in and catches you! "YOU BITCH!!! How could you do this to me?" ..."Oh no! YOu're home early!"...."Uh oh...I'd better get out of here!".... "Not so fast bitch!"...."GAAACK!!!"... "STOP! Don't hurt him!!" ..."TAKE THAT! AND THAT AND THAT!"...."GAAAAAAAACCKKKK...thud"....."Now it's YOUR turn"..."Nooooo!!!!"
 

Skookum

bikey's is cool
Jul 26, 2002
10,184
0
in a bear cave
MMike said:
But then suddenly, your OTHER self bursts in and catches you! "YOU BITCH!!! How could you do this to me?" ..."Oh no! YOu're home early!"...."Uh oh...I'd better get out of here!".... "Not so fast bitch!"...."GAAACK!!!"... "STOP! Don't hurt him!!" ..."TAKE THAT! AND THAT AND THAT!"...."GAAAAAAAACCKKKK...thud"....."Now it's YOUR turn"..."Nooooo!!!!"
Yah that part is sooooo exciting!!!! :love:
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
6
dh girlie said:
saying the state could no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

In the eagerly awaited opinion likely to be appealed to the state's highest court, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.
is this a setup for something yet said? why did he refer in his opinion to "man and woman" being too restrictive, yet allow for "gays & lesbians" - not gay & lesbian adults? perhaps this is a red herring; i haven't read the full text of his opinion
dh girlie said:
The suits were brought after the California Supreme Court halted a four-week marriage spree that Mayor Gavin Newsom had initiated in February 2004 when he directed city officials to issue marriage licenses to gays and lesbians in defiance of state law.
and he sure made the case that straights can't model marriage by falling on his sword early this year when he & Kimberly Guilfoyle Newsom announced their split
dh girlie said:
The plaintiffs said withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians trespasses on the civil rights all citizens are guaranteed under the California Constitution.
not having seen the text of the CA constitution, i would expect other groups to argue similarly to this group.
dh girlie said:
A pair of bills pending before the California Legislature would put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. If California voters approve such an amendment, as those in 13 other states did last year, that would put the issue out of the control of lawmakers and the courts.
it seems these two events are at loggerheads, and is rather confusing: how can the state mandate that which is before the state legislature?

another aside: this will most likely help out california's ailing economy by keeping/inviting major corporations to setup shop, as same-sex & domestic partners will probably no longer be covered under the partner's company policy.
for a corollary from the MA ruling, see:
boston: unmarried gay couples lose health benefits
 

Ciaran

Fear my banana
Apr 5, 2004
9,841
19
So Cal
MMike said:
But then suddenly, your OTHER self bursts in and catches you! "YOU BITCH!!! How could you do this to me?" ..."Oh no! YOu're home early!"...."Uh oh...I'd better get out of here!".... "Not so fast bitch!"...."GAAACK!!!"... "STOP! Don't hurt him!!" ..."TAKE THAT! AND THAT AND THAT!"...."GAAAAAAAACCKKKK...thud"....."Now it's YOUR turn"..."Nooooo!!!!"
Sooooo that's how his leg got broken.