A possible Prop 8 solution?
Nov. 5th, 2008 04:32 pmI was just thinking about the apparent passage of Proposition 8 in California, which re-bans same-sex marriage by amending the state constitution.
Now, that same state constitution guarantees equality before the law to all citizens. This amendment clearly violates that principle.
Absent a successful legal challenge based on that conflict (several have already been filed), it seems to me that there is only one way to resolve it: while Prop 8 remains in effect, the state of California must refuse to issue marriage licenses to anyone.
It's not likely that this would happen, especially considering that the legal challenges to Prop 8's passage have a good chance of succeeding...but wouldn't it be awesome, in an odd way, to see? It would certainly stick in the craws of the fundies who pushed so hard for this discriminatory measure to succeed.
Now, that same state constitution guarantees equality before the law to all citizens. This amendment clearly violates that principle.
Absent a successful legal challenge based on that conflict (several have already been filed), it seems to me that there is only one way to resolve it: while Prop 8 remains in effect, the state of California must refuse to issue marriage licenses to anyone.
It's not likely that this would happen, especially considering that the legal challenges to Prop 8's passage have a good chance of succeeding...but wouldn't it be awesome, in an odd way, to see? It would certainly stick in the craws of the fundies who pushed so hard for this discriminatory measure to succeed.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-05 11:23 pm (UTC)And it would be HILARIOUS!
no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 02:23 am (UTC)http://deborahjross.livejournal.com/79249.html
From the article: The petition charges that Proposition 8 is invalid because the initiative process was improperly used in an attempt to undo the constitution’s core commitment to equality for everyone by eliminating a fundamental right from just one group – lesbian and gay Californians. Proposition 8 also improperly attempts to prevent the courts from exercising their essential constitutional role of protecting the equal protection rights of minorities. According to the California Constitution, such radical changes to the organizing principles of state government cannot be made by simple majority vote through the initiative process, but instead must, at a minimum, go through the state legislature first.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 03:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 06:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 06:38 pm (UTC)They make Jesus cry.
Looks promising
Date: 2008-11-06 01:38 pm (UTC)Re: Looks promising
Date: 2008-11-06 07:25 pm (UTC)Also, if it can be sent off to Limbo for a while ... maybe, just maybe, some of these people will see that though gay marriage is continuing, their own marriages have yet to implode.
Does anyone know -- did America have a similar reaction to the first inter-racial marriages? I know my mother and father still had to deal with a bit of that in the late '60 - '70s (Hispanic/Native American + Irish/German), but America seems to have grown up about that. I must hope it will over this issue too.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 03:14 am (UTC)HA HA HA.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 06:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 07:27 pm (UTC)Let us hope, that they were so concerned about the "eroding of marriage" that they pulled out all the stops, and took a damaging bite to their financial structures.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-06 02:08 pm (UTC)all state marriage ban
Date: 2008-11-06 06:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-11-11 03:03 pm (UTC)