Comic Genesis Forums

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... 7891.story

Looks like gay marriage still has a long ways to go.

Aeridus wrote:http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... 7891.story

Looks like gay marriage still has a long ways to go.

What would you expect from a religious fundamentalist country? With the direction the US has been taking lately, Iran will legalize gay marriage before half of the US does so.

The last paragraph is bullshit, though. How can sexual orientation "continue to receive the strongest constitutional protection possible when California courts consider cases of alleged discrimination, when the court has just ruled that a law discriminating gays is legal? Is that a case of discrimination being ok only when it's done by the government?

It's a little more complicated than that. Keep in mind this is the same court that that overturned the last gay marriage ban in the first place. I really don't blame the judges, basically their hands were tied, because unlike the last one, Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment. Yes it's really stupid that our constitution is that easy to change, but there you have it.

The last paragraph does look out of place, but should also keep in mind that California has had a "domestic partnership" law for about ten years now, so basically what they're saying is that Prop 8 successfully restricted the legal term marriage to opposite sex couples, but same sex couples are still entitled to all the same rights.

I know thats not satisfactory to many people, but thats where it stands for now.

I'm aware that civil unions have the same rights as marriages in California, and that the California Supreme Court was basically deciding whether gay marriage was an issue that could be decided by popular vote. It's still kind of disturbing to find out that stuff like that can be changed by popular vote, but then there have been other things which seem bizarre to let the majority decide such as adoption rights for gay or single parents.

ManaUser wrote:The last paragraph does look out of place, but should also keep in mind that California has had a "domestic partnership" law for about ten years now, so basically what they're saying is that Prop 8 successfully restricted the legal term marriage to opposite sex couples, but same sex couples are still entitled to all the same rights.

"Black people are still entitled to riding the bus, the just have to go sit in the back".

Try to claim that gives black people strong protection against discrimination, and see how it goes. I'll even go as far as claiming that there are less difference between sitting in the front or the back of the bus.

Aeridus wrote:I'm aware that civil unions have the same rights as marriages in California, and that the California Supreme Court was basically deciding whether gay marriage was an issue that could be decided by popular vote. It's still kind of disturbing to find out that stuff like that can be changed by popular vote, but then there have been other things which seem bizarre to let the majority decide such as adoption rights for gay or single parents.

Yes, it's definitely disturbing. I would very much like to see that fixed.

And here we see one major failing of democracy - if you can pass any law by a simple majority, the minority in any situation basically has no political power. Plus, all you really have to do to influence people's votes is run a few commercials consisting of someone screaming "Think of the children!" and BAM! anyone who opposes you is a terrible person. Nobody seems to understand that any parents who need the rest of the country to think of their children are clearly terrible parents.

Anyway, I'm hungry, so I'll have to cut this rant short and find food.

On a more hopeful note:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/27/ ... index.html

On the positive side:
Same-sex marriages are officially recognized in Sweden since May 1 of this year. I know this doesn't do much for the Californian gays, but at least it makes the Swedish gays happy.

Congrats, Sahrimnir.