On The View yesterday, a fired-up David Hyde Pearce talked passionately about a host of gay issues — outing, his marriage to his husband in California last year, the passing of Prop 8, and the California Supreme Court’s upholding of Prop 8.
His exasperation points to the absurdity of putting one’s marriage to a popular vote. Like this. ...
Justice Carlos R. Moreno The New York Times story on the Proposition 8 ruling contains this fabulous analogy which gets to the heart of why the California Supreme Court's ruling in Strauss was so wrong:Karl M. Manheim, a professor at Loyola Law School Los Angeles who had filed a brief with the court opposing Proposition 8, called the decision a “safe” one from justices who can be recalled by voters. The change wrought by Proposition 8 was anything but narrow, Professor Manheim said, and claiming that the word “marriage” is essentially symbolic is like telling black people that ...
Well, the big news is no doubt yesterday’s decision by the California Supreme Court that Proposition 8, a referendum banning same-sex marriage in the state, is a legally valid constitutional amendment. While I’m disappointed, I’m not sure I can add to what many other commentators have put more eloquently than I could.
All I can say is to keep up the fight. Equality is not inevitable; it must be fought for, and I wish California all the best in overturning Prop 8 in the next referendum!
...
Update: The ruling is in. Basically, they split the baby. The good news is that there are 18,000 gay and lesbian Americans who are that much closer to full U.S. citizenship status.
I’ll have more later, after I’ve had some time to read the decision and think about it. So, as usual, I’m not going to be one of those bloggers with a new post up immediately after the news breaks. It’s going to take me a little longer.
Today’s the day.
The California Supreme Court will rule this morning on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the November ballot ...