RECENT  POSTS:  » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

11/19/2008

It's happening...

by Jeremy Hooper
SAN FRANCISCO -- California's highest court has agreed to hear legal challenges to the state's new same-sex marriage ban, but is refusing to allow gay couples to resume marrying until it rules on the measure's validity.

The California Supreme Court on Wednesday accepted three lawsuits seeking to overturn Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment which passed with 52 percent of the vote. As is its custom when it takes up cases, the court did not elaborate on its decision.

All three cases claim Proposition 8 abridges the civil rights of a vulnerable minority group and therefore voters alone did not have the authority to enact such a significant constitutional change.
Court agrees to hear Prop 8 challenges [AP via KABC]

Keep on keepin' on, everyone. And keep thinking positively. After all, we have a friend in reason, and we have reason in the CA Supreme Court.

**A pdf of today's 6-1 decision:

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Keep protesting everyone. Make yourselves loud enough that they won't bow to the religious reich.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Nov 19, 2008 6:31:43 PM

The SFGate article gives the Schedule: Written arguments by January 15, 2009, then a hearing could be held by March with a ruling due within 90 days after.
So I am willing to start a pool? May 15? anyone...or wait a minute, sorry JH...make that April 15.

Posted by: LOrion | Nov 19, 2008 7:34:11 PM

Rainbow...we have to keep emphasizing...religion has nothing to do with CIVIL RIGHTS.

Posted by: LOrion | Nov 19, 2008 7:35:30 PM

No doubt LOrion, as Jefferson wrote: "...our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions..."

Posted by: jaysays | Nov 20, 2008 5:57:34 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails