From the New York Times:
Saying that it unfairly targets gay men and women, a federal judge in San Francisco struck down California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage on Wednesday, handing supporters of such unions a temporary victory in a legal battle that seems all but certain to be settled by the Supreme Court.
The judge stayed his decision immediately so as to block any marriages until appeals are heard by higher courts. The proponents of Prop. 8 believe higher courts will be more sympathetic to their quest for legal discrimination.
(NYT continued) "In America, we should respect and uphold the right of a free people to make policy choices through the democratic process--especially ones that do nothing more than uphold the definition of marriage that has existed since the foundation of the country and beyond," said Brian Raum, a senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, which argued for the defense.
While this ruling doesn't apply to other states that have banned gay marriage, it does set an important federal precedent as this ruling came from a federal court - *IF* it is upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court. Let's hope for the best.
Either way, chalk this one up for the good guys.
Oil,
Please no, not Jerry Pournelle. That guy is an unmitigated eugenicist. He's scum who has ridden the coattails of literary artists to celebrity. I listened to this guy in lecture when I was a complete illiterate to political machiavellianism and walked away shaking my head thinking that the guy was immensely disturbed.
If that's the best argument the conservatives have, that's pretty weak. This is not a states' rights or "legislative" issue. Those are false arguments to de-legitimize the court's ruling. It's an inconvenient analogy, but replace this with inter-racial marriage. The states' rights advocates argued loudly that it was a "legislative" issue that should be left up to the states. Can you imagine what we would look like today as a country if interracial couples couldn't travel to some states? They would run the risk of arrest even if they changed planes in certain cities? That's how stupid the anti-gays are being. This is a human right and a constitutional right. It doesn't affect anyone outside of a certain relationship just as my marriage doesn't affect yours (if you are). If we depended on popular vote on these kinds of issues, we would still have segregated schools, women wouldn't be able to vote, and inter-racial couples couldn't marry.
Here's a link to a well written counterpoint. This is the sort of argument the right should be looking to use, rather than the crap that spews from the likes of Angle, Bachmann, Palin, et al. Unfortunately, great thinkers like Pournelle, Buckley, etc. were read out of the Conservative ranks when Rumsfeld and Cheney took over.
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/2010/Q3/view634.html#Thursday
This is a good day for all of us- gay or otherwise. The repubs like to preach less government when they actually believe in ever more invasive government. What is worse: government buying into an auto manufacturer's recovery or government in your home telling you who you can marry, what you can and cannot do with your body (abortion) and when and how you are, or are not, allowed to die. The hypocrisy of the Repubs is sickening. I may bitch a little about bailing out the auto dealers and banks but I become explosive when government tells me how to live my personal life. So high fives to all of us Americans today who re-won (however temporary) a victory called self-freedom.
Aaah, The good ole' days when everyone knew their place. I wonder if he used the word 'uppity' in his closing statements?
So Brian Raum is all for mob rule of the country huh? I guess he thinks the unpopular Brown v. Board of Ed ruling in 1954 and the 1964 Civil Rights Act should never have occurred either because they were "unpopular" at the time? And still unpopular now in certain circles (i.e. Rand Paul).
I don't have a lot of hope if this makes it to the Supreme Court. Clarence Thomas (you can barely see Scalia's lips move when Uncle Tom talks), Scalia, Alito and Roberts will vote no right off the bat. It will be a 5-4 decision one way or another.
Not only is this a win for the good guys (and gals), it's a blow against the LDS Church and the millions of dollars they shamelessly spent sticking their polygamist noses into other people's lives.