The fight for gay marriage in CA is not over.

[rinsd]

Conservative asshats are putting a CA Constitutional Amendment on the ballot this fall.

We must all work to make sure each and every one of us enjoys equal rights under the law and that includes marriage and the state benefits/rights derived from it.

AP
updated 2 hours, 19 minutes ago

SAN FRANCISCO - Even as same-sex couples across California begin making plans to tie the knot, opponents are redoubling their efforts to make sure wedding bells never again ring for gay couples in the nation's most populous state.

A conservative group said it would ask California's Supreme Court to postpone putting its Thursday decision legalizing gay marriage into effect until after the fall election. That's when voters will likely have a chance to weigh in on a proposed amendment to California's constitution that would bar same-sex couples from getting married.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24665965/

Here is the copy of the decision by the CA Supreme Court (Republicans mostly, that were re-confirmed in 2006 by an avg of 70% of the vote)

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF

[ronnykmarshall]

1. and it's even worse.

If that piece of shit passes, not only will it over turn gay marriage .... but domestic partnerships statewide and ALL laws protecting gays.

There is a special place in hell for these vile fuckers.

God help anyone that tries and talks to my parents about supporting this shit.

[rinsd]

4. This one also does that?

I knew there were a couple of propositions floating around that did that but I thought this one was marriage only.

Every decent person in CA must fight this. Gay, straight, trans etc.

We cannot allow the denial of rights to be codified in our Constitution.

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. I'm not too sure about that

If gay marriages are legal, wouldn't it be an ex post facto law if they were later made illegal? I would think that all this constitutional amendment would do is prohibit any further gay marriages from happening.

[terrya]

2. They'll TRY to put an amendment on the ballot.

Schwartzenegger said that he would oppose any attempt to amend the state constitution.

Personally, I don't think it will work. California isn't Idaho or Texas. I think the good folks of California will have legal same-sex marriage.

[rinsd]

7. We will know at the end of June.

"California's secretary of state is expected to rule by the end of June whether the sponsors of the anti-gay marriage ballot measure gathered enough signatures to put the amendment on the ballot."

Supposedly they gathered over 1 million sigs.

[acmavm]

3. Good grief, just let it go. Why do they keep fighting this pointless

fight? Let whoever wants to marry, marry.

Why do they keep fighting this? They'll spend millions upon millions to keep gays from being married but they won't support healthcare for poor children?

What the fuck is wrong with this country?

Never mind.

[terrya]

5. They hate gay and lesbian people.

That's why.

There are no reasons, legal or otherwise, to deny gay and lesbian couples the right to legal same-sex marriage.

It's all about hatred of gay and lesbian people and hatred of homosexuality in general.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. THAT will get the base to the polls who otherwise

would stay home....

Yep, it is cynical but that is what gets the values voter to the polls even in really bad years

[wmbrew0206]

8. Here is what my my father,who oppose it ,says..

He has no problem with gays having civil unions, but disagree with it being called a marriage. A "Marriage" is a religious ceremony and religions look upon marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

To be fair, he also thinks that the government shouldn't be involved in "marriage licenses" but should just preform a civil union for everyone and let the church, mosque, temple, etc decide "marriages."

[mitchtv]

9. that argument is a cop out

and easily countered by separate but equal doean't work

[wmbrew0206]

11. How is that seperate but equal if everyone has the same rights?

If the government gets out of the marriage business and only give civil union, then every civil union will have the same legal rights.

What "Marriage is", is left up to the respective religions to determine for themselves.

Everyone would have the same legal rights since everyone would have a civil union. The only difference between a civil union and a marriage would be what a non-government entity decided to call it.

[mitchtv]

12. But that's not that's going to happen

You describe an ideal situation where the Govt is not in the marriage business.I believe that is the way to go. What they plan is civil unions for Gays, marriage for strates. That's where is where you will find separate but unequal.

[wmbrew0206]

13. I see, wasn't sure which part of my first post you were responding to