California Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban

By Booman Tribune

by BooMan

Marriage Equality in California!

 

The California Supreme Court has overturned a gay
marriage ban in a ruling that would make the nation's largest state the
second one to allow gay and lesbian weddings.

The justices' 4-3 decision Thursday says domestic partnerships are not
a good enough substitute for marriage. Chief Justice Ron George wrote
the opinion.

The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay
rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted San Francisco's
monthlong same-sex wedding march.

The case before the court involved a series of lawsuits seeking to
overturn a voter-approved law that defines marriage as a union between
a man and a woman.

With the ruling, California could become the second state after Massachusetts where gay and lesbian residents can marry.

"What happens in California, either way, will have a huge impact around
the nation. It will set the tone," said Geoffrey Kors, executive
director of the gay rights group Equality California.

California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic
partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses,
including the right to divorce and to sue for child support. It's
therefore unclear what additional relief state lawmakers could offer
short of marriage if the court renders the existing ban
unconstitutional.

A coalition of religious and social conservative groups is attempting
to put a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine
California's current laws banning gay marriage in the state
constitution.

The Secretary of State is expected to rule by the end of June whether
the sponsors gathered enough signature to qualify the marriage
amendment, similar to ones enacted in 26 other states.

By naacprepMay 16, 2008 - 12:06pm

Why don't you go try to comprehend the constitution?

Listen hatey you are a joke. No one cares about your nonsense. I mean in one post you contradict your self:

"And voting on a matter is not "Mob Rule".
And the courts do not and should not have the power to "Make Law". Their role is solely to interput
the law.

...

If you can't comprehend that, then move somewhere that you don't have Constitutional protections."

First of all I assume you mean interpreting the law as in saying "thats bad - change it". That isn't how it works. They strike down laws that are unconstitutional. Secondly mob rule can occur and that is exactly what the courts are for. They are a constitutional protection.

I see you are as stupid as back when you tried to tell us the democrats were trying to enslave people of color.