California's Supreme Court upheld today Proposition 8, which bans same sex marriage. At the same time, the Court recognized those same sex marriages performed before the ban was approved. So, the unions of some 18,000 gay and lesbian couples from last summer are legal, but if you're gay or lesbian and want to take vows with your partner this summer, forget it. That would be illegal.
Talk about a mess. What was the Court thinking? It's bad enough that gay and lesbian couples are treated as a different class of citizenry. Now, there are effectively two classes within that class. To call it a compromise is a cop-out. A form of separate but equal is more like it.
And what does this situation say about our democracy? What have our courts come to if civil rights are determined by popular vote?
Ever prescient, Stanford Professor Larry Lessig argued months ago that turning to the judiciary to defeat Proposition 8 would be folly. I am sorry to say he was correct.
Watch the full program and a series about same sex marriage at FORA.tv.
The fundamental problem with marriage in the United States is that clergy are allowed to administer the civil contract of marriage. Yes, people have to obtain a marriage licence through the public sector, but practically any ordained "minister" can perform a legal marriage once that licence is obtained.
By giving the power of the state to the clergy to administer civil contracts, the United States has blurred the line between the Separation of Church and State and allowed religious bigotry to "define" what a marriage is.
If every citizen were required to stand in front of a judge to get legally married, the incoherent rants of religious bigots would be relegated to their proper, marginal place and this whole initiative to deny gay people the franchise of marriage would be a non-starter.
To that end, there should be a counter-initiative to deny the clergy the power to perform civil contracts. I'm sure such an initiative would lose at the ballot box, but it would highlight what is a fundamental flaw and inequity in the system and might make the religious think twice before denying others their civil rights.
the fact is that irrespective of the clergy, a marriage license says man and woman. california had to have new licenses printed. even in a state that does not have a law prohibiting it, the courthouse is not going to issue a license.
i characterize it as there is nothing stopping a state with no laws prohibiting gay marriage from changing the license to say "man/woman marries man/woman" except the cowtowing to the church and centuries of bureaucracy.
It's only because clergy are acting as agents of the state in this matter that religion has any kind of place in this argument. They have been allowed to put forth arguments that they would be forced to marry gay people, for example, or risk civil rights lawsuits.
My point is that if they weren't allowed to administer civil contracts in the first place, they wouldn't be in a position to make such an argument.
Again, marriage as relates to the state is a civil contract and no clergy should be recognized as de facto agents of the state. It is a direct violation of the Separation of Church and State and this power should be taken away from them.
Ever prescient, Stanford Professor Larry Lessig argued months ago that turning to the judiciary to defeat Proposition 8 would be folly. I am sorry to say he was correct.
"It's wrong to have millions of Americans living as SECOND-CLASS CITIZENS in this nation. And I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS ELECTION so that together we can bring about real change for all LGBT Americans. I WILL NEVER COMPROMISE ON MY COMMITMENT TO EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL LGBT AMERICANS. As your President, I WILL USE THE BULLY PULPIT to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws. I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does. Americans are YEARNING FOR LEADERSHIP that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible. I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country. To do that, WE NEED LEADERSHIP that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit. JOIN WITH ME, AND I WILL PROVIDE THAT LEADERSHIP. Together, we will achieve real equality for all Americans, gay and straight alike.” -- Barack Obama (February 2008)
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” -- Martin Luther King Jr.
-- Lenny Bruce
The court concluded that the will of the people, as expressed thru their vote, will stand. Too bad you don't agree. If they did otherwise and usurped the peoples vote, the anger and resentment would've set the LBGT rights movement back a good 30 years. That's what Lessig was trying to get across to you.
Now since you're obviously passionate and want to do something about it... get your friends and go change some minds... DISCUSS, DEBATE, EXPLAIN and EXPRESS your views and reasoning person by person. Get good walking shoes and leave the vitriol at the door. That is the only way get this thing overturned and simultaneously propel the LBGT cause forward.. because you'll now have the understanding and backing of 'we the people'.