CA Supreme Court Invalidates SanFran Same-Sex Marriages

objra10objra10
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Reading opinion now.... thoughts?



It appears that the court didn't rule that homosexual marriages were on their face unconstitutional, but that the city cannot supercede state law. They voted unanimously that the city cannot issue same-sex marriage licenses and voted 5-2 to nulify all previously issued licenses.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    alex londonalex london Posts: 613member
    OK OBJRA10 I'll post a reply in your thread if you do the honours in mine. If it's a point of law that the State supercedes the City then I guess this is correct. On principle though, and as a married straight man, I welcome same-sex marriage. I don't agree that marriage is all about having children and " the family". Me and the missus are a family, thanks to the marvels of genetic malfunction we can't add to it, but we're still very married.
  • Reply 2 of 8
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by OBJRA10

    Reading opinion now.... thoughts?



    It appears that the court didn't rule that homosexual marriages were on their face unconstitutional, but that the city cannot supercede state law. They voted unanimously that the city cannot issue same-sex marriage licenses and voted 5-2 to nulify all previously issued licenses.



    Seems very reasonable. If you want rights changed, you better change the state law or amend the Constitution on the federal level.



    Nick
  • Reply 3 of 8
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    Seems very reasonable. If you want rights changed, you better change the state law or amend the Constitution on the federal level.



    Nick



    Right-- or challenge the law in court.
  • Reply 4 of 8
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    I applaud the CA court, this was obvioucly against the law, I am not talking about wether or not it is right, but I am simply saying that the SF folks went about it all wrong.



    I do however fear that this, all be it a state matter could somehow find its way to the 9th ciruit court of appeals.
  • Reply 5 of 8
    hegorhegor Posts: 160member
    As a form of civil disobedience I approve the marriages performed in SF. The public officials who defied state and federal laws put this issue on the front burner where it belongs. Marriage should be a contract between consentual adult parties, the government shouldn't be involved in who marries who. The courts should only be involved in dissolution when needed.
  • Reply 6 of 8
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    So government officials should disobey the law whenever they feel it's the right thing to do?
  • Reply 7 of 8
    audiopollutionaudiopollution Posts: 3,226member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    So government officials should disobey the law whenever they feel it's the right thing to do?



    Only international law, right?
Sign In or Register to comment.