Pages

Feb 7, 2012

Prop 8 is Unconstitutional

I'm still processing all I've heard on Rachel Maddow tonight, listening to attorney Ted Olsen, who looks, amazingly, like my grandpa's brother, my Great-Uncle Dale - he sounds like him, too. I am enjoying the deep rumble his voice reaches now and again, so much like my motorcycle. It's good, but I digress.

More importantly, I'm listening to his words regarding California's Proposition 8, which had authorized a civil right to marry the one you love. The Court had said "selecting out a group by particular characteristics," to prevent people from marrying one they love, is without merit.

My friend had married her same-sex partner in California before Prop 8, so I asked her what the impact of today's ruling was for her; the impact may be minimal, since she has rights in Alaska as a state employee, for her civil union to be recognized for benefits, signed off by no less than former Governor Sarah Palin.

I'll wait for her answer back, but I feel joy that she gets the same civil right I have - and far be it from me to prevent anyone from enjoying the misery of marriage; she and her wife are so strong and beautiful - I am delighted they get to keep their legal relationship.

Won't it be great when a legal marriage that occurred in California is recognized across these United States, from Sea to Shining Sea.
.

3 comments:

Shripathi Kamath said...

The year 2018 is my prediction. The decision may not even be taken up by the SCOTUS on appeal, since it is California centric. The judges were VERY careful in issuing the ruling that this is NOT sanctioning gay marriage, but that Prop 8 is unconstitutional because it serves NO purpose other than to deny rights to a group without basis.

That makes it tough to appeal.

What is remarkably activist is the dissent. N. Randy Smith, the dissenting judge is a Bush the Younger appointee, and a BYU graduate. His mentor is a legal counsel to the Prop 8 backers, and in dissent he cited a Scalia opinion on declaring sodomy bans unconstitutional.

Here's the catch: The Scalia opinion was in dissent. That means, he is citing a losing proposition as precedent.

Too bad there isn't a hell for bigots to burn in.

Akathunder said...

Bigots are the intellectually challenged part of America.

Mich9 said...

google knows it :-D