Court: California's Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional
A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled that California's ban on same-sex marriages is unconstitutional, clearing the way for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the controversial issue.
In 2008 California voters approved Proposition 8, which limited marriage to between a man and a woman. In a 2-1 decision, the appeals panel said the ballot initiative itself was unconstitutional.
“Proposition 8 served no purpose, and had no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California,” the court said.
This should not affect gay marriage battles elsewhere in the country. The Los Angeles Times reports that "the ruling was narrow and likely to be limited to California."
A group called ProtectMarriage, which backed Prop 8, can now take the case to a larger appeals panel or directly to the Supreme Court.
Gay marriage was legal in California for six months in 2008, between the time the state's high court struck down a ban and when Prop 8 was passed.
In 2010 a lower court ruled Prop 8 was unconstitutional -- that is the ruling that was upheld on Tuesday. Same-sex marriages could still not be performed as the appeals process moved forward, and that will likely still be the case following this latest ruling.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Sign-Up Now for the Opposing Views Daily Newsletter
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Honestly People of the "FREE COUNTRY" stop trying to control everything and everyone. They are not hurting you so leave them alone!! For heaven sakes.
You have a significant minority who believe homosexuality is a choice and that gays can be "cured." No matter how much data or logic you lay before these folks, they won't back down. To them, they feel gay marriage only enables the gay lifestyle, and similar choices.
I think these people are ignorant nut jobs, but they will never back down, which is why we need this case to move forward to the bitter end.
What about those who don't assume that homosexuality is a choice, but believe that gay sex is immoral nonetheless, and therefore unsuitable as the basis for a marriage?
Well... that's even less defensible than asserting it's a choice.
What about those who don't assume that eating is a choice, but believe that taking life is immoral nonetheless, and therefore unsuitable as the basis for human life? And yes, fruit, vegetables, and plants are counted, as they have life while they're growing.
Do not underestimate the Power of Autism
I guess we'll just have to vote on it.
"If the lawmakers who wrote the Equal Protection Clause were too bigoted and narrow-minded to include equal rights for gay marriage, then the Equal Protection Clause didn't include support for gay marriage, and the judge lied."
I hate, I mean love, to point this out, but under your reasoning, straight marriage isn't supported either since the Fourteenth Amendment makes no mention of it.
Do not underestimate the Power of Autism
haha yes!! my man yes!!
That's right, same-sex marriage by straights is also not supported by the 14th amendment.
"That's right, same-sex marriage by straights is also not supported by the 14th amendment."
You really do like missing the point don't you? If you read the Fourteenth Amendment carefully, you can see that it doesn't mention marriage AT ALL. Now I'm done arguing with you, so I'll talk with a friend who has an intellectual disability and is less of an imbecile than a certain person on here.
You don't have to be stupid to be ignorant, but it helps. ~ Peter Griffin.
Do not underestimate the Power of Autism