Revisit Queerty’s endless Prop 8 coverage as we prepare ourselves for the California Supreme Court’s decision, expected Tuesday at 10am PST. Remember what the Court is — and is not — deciding.
Latest on Queerty
Gay rugby player Devin Ibañez & his boyfriend went to their first wedding together & looked absolutely adorbs
The guy who wrote the book on heterosexual marriage & family had some VERY homosexual tendencies
Mike Ruiz’s big guns, Evan Lamicella’s tan lines, & Chris Salvatore’s beach bum
a gay old time
I’m going to make a prediction. I predict that the court has decided on one of two following outcomes:
1. Proposition 8 is an invalid amendment, or..
2. That California’s constitution no longer recognizes the word Marriage, but Civil Unions for both same-sex and opposite-sex spouses.
To do otherwise would be completely untenable. For a constitutional democracy to have any validity, it must be able to protect the rights of minorities when they have been established to be a subject class. If our constitution is meaningful at all, then these two options are the only ones that maintain the spirit of the document.
Of course, that’s just my opinion. And my opinion, plus six dollars, will get you a triple grande soy latte and a blueberry scone at Starbucks. So, I could be wrong.
…when they have been established to be a suspect class.
Is what I meant to say… the Mai Tais are flowing pretty freely here…
In a way, I want Prop 8 to remain intact. Not because I like it but because it will expose the phony liberalism that exists in California. It isn’t a true acceptance. It’s a phony acceptance based on segregation. We gays are accepted but only so long as we are segregated.
It will also expose the phoniness of the “blacks are wonderful people” argument. For many years, we’ve thought that the black community is this wonderful beacon of tolerance and acceptance. After all, they had to fight some awful prejudice, right? Well, I’m sure you all know that the black community – that wonderful so-called “accepting” community – voted en masse for Prop 8.
Sometimes it’s good for things to go against us gays. It wakes us up to the phoniness of liberals and blacks.
Well, I’m sure you all know that the black community – that wonderful so-called “accepting” community – voted en masse for Prop 8.
Except for the 40-plus percent that didn’t. Also, I don’t know where you get the idea that black people are any more or less accepting and tolerant than any other race.
you again? i’m consistently amazed at your ability to be simultaneously offensive and tangential. it’s like archie bunker with ADD.
@wowjustwow: don’t bother trying to reason with it. futile.
… returning to a reasonable discussion ON the topic…
i think the most likely outcome will uphold the ban but reject the dissolution of the pre-ban marriages. as much as the court may want to overturn prop H8, legally they have to try to reconcile the constitution with itself before rejecting an amendment.
@dgz: If they uphold prop H8, how likely would you say it is that they will go the extra step of replacing Marriage with Civil Unions?
honestly, i personally don’t think that’s very likely (imHo). it’s not really necessary to decide either way, and i don’t think it’s an integral part of the question before the court — they’re not deciding the constitutionality of marriage as an institution. furthermore, stripping marriage from the populace at large would violate Due Process, which is precisely what those arguing *against* the dissolution of pre-ban, same-sex marriages are asserting.
i *do* expect a dash of optimism will be thrown into the majority opinion, citing the steady demographic change in popular opinion, however.
@jason: Shut up. Just… Just shut up & stick your racism where the sun don’t shine!
@Dick Mills: Well, I hope you’re right. I think the “civil unions for all” option is possible, but I doubt it’s all that probable. After all, that would just throw the whole CA population into the crosshairs of DOMA. But then again, if they really want to be rabblerousers… 😉
Well, I just hope they keep it simple and invalidate H8. They can make a HUGE statement tomorrow and continue setting the trend for civil rights by just doing the right thing. I have hope they’ll go for it.
@dgz: I dunno. As we discussed in the earlier Prop H8 thread, I don’t think this is as likely as the corporate media “legal experts” think. This “split decision” would cause an unprecedented legal quagmire for our community, and especially for the 18k CA married couples and thousands more MA married couples who ever think about coming to CA.
I suspect they’ll toss out the 18k marriages if they vote to keep H8 intact (which I hope they don’t), while probably giving them a “consolation prize” of recognizing them as the equivalent of “common-law marriages” or just commuting them to DP status.
@atdleft: Sorry but the truth is “racist.” Homophobia runs rampant among blacks, and a majority of them (not as big as originally reported, but still a majority) helped pass Prop H8.
@Attmay: Gimme a break. The truth isn’t “racist”. The truth is that the African-American vote for H8 was probably only 7% more than the white vote for H8, 4% more than the Latino vote for H8, and 8% more than the Asian-American vote for H8. So when will you start talking about how “homophobia runs rampant among whites”?
@atdleft: interesting theory. i think it’s very possible they’ll invalidate the marriages, but i think the court may find the complexities of a “mixed” decision tenable, as they’ll likely suppose that the constitution will be re-amended soon, and invalidating the marriages will give rise to thousands of due process challenges and a horrifying mess in probate courts/intestacy.
as for common-law, i don’t think it’s recognized in CA, so i doubt they’ll carve out a new institution when it’s not required. DP is completely different and confers different rights. a mass-conversion to a separate legal status would be legal suicide, as that would require express legislative action. CA supremes might be fairly activist judges, but i don’t think there will ever be a Court extreme enough to attempt something either of those options.
The truth is the truth (and it helps to start with it instead of assumptions and heresay).
How some people interpret events is what is racist.
@Attmay: and anyway, that’s off-topic. we’re talking about the legal challenge, here. every other comment thread on this site devolves into a racial debate, so can we keep this one focused? pretty please?
@Attmay: Many of those in the radical religious reich want nothing more than to pit one hated minority group (oh let’s say the gays) against another one of their hated minority groups (conveniently there is African Americans), and hope that the two fight it out. Nothing would make them happier.
The fact of the matter is that the only demographic in California that voted in sufficient quantity against us were those over 65. And, fortunately for us, most of them will not see many more election cycles. Among all ethnic groups, under 35 voters are overwhelmingly on our side. That doesn’t sound like rampant homophobia to me.
@dgz: No, CA doesn’t have a “common-law marriage” provision… But they have another legal status that’s pretty much the same thing. That’s what I’m talking about.
This would allow the court to “recognize” the 18k marriages somewhat without actually getting into the mess of determining which past marriages are valid and which ones aren’t. But as the CA Family Law Blog explains, it’s quite possible they’ll avoid this altogether by just overturning H8. In fact, this whole quagmire over trying to “split the baby” may have been why they’ve been taking so long to deliberate. And hopefully, it’s led them to the conclusion that they don’t need to do this by just doing the right thing.
Yeah, it would be sweet if they just decided to do the right thing like last time.
I am resisting getting my hopes up that they might actually do that, but it would be a great vindication.
This is the precept by which I have lived: Prepare for the worst; expect the best; and take what comes.
@atdleft: that’s a great article; thanks for the link.
i just really hope no one riots, either way.
Regarding racism and homophobia. It is not the color of one’s skin that determines the level of homophobia it is purely the level of religiousity that determines the level of homophobia. As groups, African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans are more religious than Caucasian-Americans or Asain-Americans.
Attacking someone for their skin color is discriminatory and is what we are trying to fight. Don’t play into the hype that blacks or hispanics are homophobic. Our enemy in this battle is religion – plain and simple.
I don’t judge a man by the colour of his skin; I judge him by how well you can see him in the dark when he smiles.
@strumpetwindsock: And I judge him by the size of his nostrils. But that’s beside the point.
I just can’t see how there can be same-sex marriages in a state where the constitution reads “Only marriage between a man and a woman…” My guess is the justices would have to instruct the legislature to add a statute providing for these “grandfathered” marriages? Is that even possible?
Top 5 reasons why Prop 8 will (or should) be stricken
I’m not sure if you got my point or not.
give me something to celebrate tomorrow please!!!!!
I sure hope they throw Prop 8 in the trash or I will have lots of divorced friends. If the court upholds Prop 8 Obama will have a very angry mob waiting to greet him at the Beverly Hilton on Wednesday!
@atdleft: Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. The homophobic black majority is brainwashed by KKKristianity, the hate cult forced on them by the white man. BaCrackhead Obreeder sat in that hate church for 20 years; don’t you think some of that hate rubbed off on him? And I’m not even going to start on the Nation of Islime.
Notice a trend? It was more than any other group, with Hispanics (largely brainwashed by that cult that sanctions child molestation) a close second. MORE. THAN. ANY. OTHER. GROUP.
Comments are closed.