According to the LA Times, the California Supreme Court “strongly indicated Thursday it would rule that Proposition 8 validly abolished the right for gays to marry but would allow same-sex couples who wed before the November election to remain legally married.”
What this means is that the court will deliver its decision that Proposition 8 is valid and that same-sex marriage is illegal–and 36,000 people will be walking and talking and breathing same-sex married life for all to see.
On a fundamental level, Proposition 8 will be a farce; it will be seen to have failed. Yes, no more lesbians and gay men can marry their loves, for now, but meanwhile those 36,000 people will be there as living examples that women marrying women and men marrying men does not call down apocalypse. When all this goes back to the ballot, which it will, we will win because same sex marriage will be old news.
I feel for those Californians who had planned to marry this year. I also feel vast contempt for the justices who, afraid of recall, are splitting hairs to reach absurd conclusions. The validation of Proposition 8 means any voter initiative in California can take away any right of any group of citizens. Want to say that all blue-eyed people can’t drive? Done! This is clearly ridiculous. They’re going to do it anyway because they want to keep their jobs.
The court has 90 days to deliver its opinion. In 90 days they’ll be the laughing stock of the judicial world. And lesbians and gay men will be angry. Very angry. Buckle up. This is going to get interesting.
7 thoughts on “absurdity”
I am not a legal scholar– watching the lawyer for this case on Rachel Maddow is about as much info as I've got on the legalese– so I don't know about amending/provisioning the state constitution. What I do know is that there is a REASON the USA is not a direct democracy, & this is populism at its worst.>>I also sort of get annoyed at friends of mine who say that right-to-marry isn't what they consider an important gay rights issue. Sorry, but this is a watershed issue; you may not care about getting married, you might consider marriage a tool of the patriarchy, whatever– but this is a visible issue. Just like school access wasn't necessarily the most important injustice in the black civil rights movement. It is a turning point.>>The whole thing frustrates me! People are really arguing to restrict people's civil rights? Like, you can't think THAT might come back to haunt you? You being a huge bigot?>>UGH.>>YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE I HATE? I hate how making trans jokes is “okay.” Like, The Daily Show is supposed to be pretty open minded, but they use “tranny” as a punchline almost every episode. Really John Stewart? Really?
I can not even articulate a comment, it is so damn frustrating. Really, when is this stupidity going to cease?
I agree that it will be entirely absurd for those 36,000 marriages to be legal while no other same-sex couples can be married in California. But I have to say I think it is the fault of the California constitution — it is too easily amended. Even Ken Starr admitted that yes, we could vote in discrimination against blue-eyed people (or whatever — as long as it doesn’t violate the federal constitution). I think it’s a remnant of the Wild West at work — it’s awful and needs to be changed. But changing it is going to be a pain in the ass, to say the least.
I think the court will not make such a ruling because it would then open it up for appeal (again) or push it back to legislature. Allowing 36000 same sex marriages while denying the others is unsupportable and the whole issue will be brought back again until it is resolved.
I agree with Malinda about the constitution. I think the justices had no choice given the CA constitution. Sometimes that crap is a silly back and forth about semantics.>>Now if they could say this violates civil rights in the US constitution, then the CA constitution could be changed. And yes, Prop 8 (as are several other CA props.) is a farce.>>I’m thinking it’s more likely back to the polls, and as you said Nicola, the attitudes will have/already have changed. We’ll see if it’ll be enough in 2010 as new props are already in the works.>>Until it is a federal amendment, we will be constantly jerked around by the whims of bigots and small minded people every time the wind blows conservative.
The 14th amendment to the US constitution provides for equal protection under the law, except in California. Damn!
Yes, we can put another vote to the people to invalidate Prop 8, then they will bring it back to a vote, then we will…>>The court needs to stop nit-picking the issues and choose the obvious humane thing to do.>>This has to end.>Maine will be doing the same thing soon.
Comments are closed.