Gay Marriages approved in Maine.

  • News
  • Thread starter turbo
  • Start date
  • #26
As much as anything I think it is a 14th Amendment Equal Protection issue.
I believe that was the primary thrust of the argument from the lawyer in the California Supreme Court case, referencing more specifically the equal protection clause in the state constitution. Sadly the judges did not seem very impressed and the lawyer did not fair well when prodded further on the issue by the judges. Perhaps he was flaberghasted that they did not see the immediate truth behind his argument.

I hadn't heard anything lately. A quick news check says the decision from the California Supreme Court is due by June 1st.
 
  • #27
Moonbear
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,490
51
That gets back to what I see as the hypocrisy in the argument that we need to "preserve the sanctity of marriage". The only sanctity exists in the eyes of churches that already have the right to refuse gay marriages through the protection of religious freedom. There has never been any "sanctity" in a marriage performed by a justice of the peace. A civil marriage is merely a legal agreement. Conversely, through the same protection of religious freedom, it seems to me that churches have the right to recognize gay marriages if they choose or are "spiritually compelled" to do so.
Indeed, I don't think that having a legal right to a civil ceremony compels any religious organization to perform the ceremony. As an example, Catholic churches already refuse to marry anyone who was previously divorced. Those same people can be legally married in a civil ceremony, but the church reserves the right to refuse it on religious grounds.

I hope the word spreads about the points Turbo mentioned, that the opposition to this law are trying to get the measure on the ballot at a time when they think only the religious right will be motivated to vote...everyone else in the state who thinks this is a change for the better needs to get their vote in too.
 
  • #28
turbo
Gold Member
3,077
45
I hope the word spreads about the points Turbo mentioned, that the opposition to this law are trying to get the measure on the ballot at a time when they think only the religious right will be motivated to vote...everyone else in the state who thinks this is a change for the better needs to get their vote in too.
There is one thing that the same-sex marriage advocates have in their favor, if they figure out how to make it work. Nobody in this state needs to be physically present at the polls to vote. Voters can request absentee ballots and they will be mailed to their homes with no questions asked. Even if there is nothing on the ballot (apart from this marriage issue) that might compel the voters to travel to their polling places, wait in line, etc, how hard can it be to open an envelope, mark your ballot, sign the postage-paid envelope and drop it in the mail?

My wife and I vote by absentee ballot in every election because of my reactions to fragrance chemicals, and it works out well. We have time to go over each race and each item, and if we want additional time to research a bond issue (for example), it's easy to get on-line and get pros and cons.
 
  • #29
LowlyPion
Homework Helper
3,090
4
I believe that was the primary thrust of the argument from the lawyer in the California Supreme Court case, referencing more specifically the equal protection clause in the state constitution. Sadly the judges did not seem very impressed and the lawyer did not fair well when prodded further on the issue by the judges. Perhaps he was flaberghasted that they did not see the immediate truth behind his argument.

I hadn't heard anything lately. A quick news check says the decision from the California Supreme Court is due by June 1st.
I didn't really follow the argument before the California Supreme Court before.

So .... (http://www.mercurynews.com/crime/ci_11838385" [Broken]).

After reading the discourse, it seems to me that there are a number of procedural issues at play that offer the court some shelter in allowing it to stand. But I would think that it is still possible that the Cali-Supremes could cancel it despite the difficulties of the moving parties in articulating a definition of "inalienable". (Rather than "inalienable" I think the real hinge-pin is simply fairness.)

The equal application argument is not negated by the fact that there has been a California Constitutional amendment passed on a ballot. There still remains the fundamental Federal equal protection considerations in the 14th Amendment, irrespective of what the California Constitution may say. At the end of the day, prohibiting gay civil marriages may not be an option, if it is selectively discriminating in providing distinctions and advantages to heterosexual partners, and denying the same rights and responsibilities to same sex unions.

We shall see where it all ends up, but I think if it is allowed to stand there won't be an end until there is no prohibition anywhere.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Related Threads for: Gay Marriages approved in Maine.

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
77
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
10K
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
Top