Community | August 12, 2010 | 69 comments

Prop 8 | California's Same-Sex Couples Can Legally Wed Beginning August 18 | Added Updates and Opinions

source: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/11/california.same.sex.ruling/index.html?hpt=T1

Image
EthicalVegan

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/11/california.same.sex.ruling/index.htm...

THE NEW YORK TIMES BREAKING NEWS 3:44 PM ET

Judge Says Ban on Gay Marriage Can End on Aug. 18

_____

CNN BREAKING NEWS

Judge lifts temporary stay on same-sex marriage in California. Couples may wed beginning August 18.

_____

LOS ANGELES TIMES BREAKING NEWS


Judge keeps gay-marriage ruling on hold
By Maura Dolan | 12:44 p.m.

The federal judge who last week overturned the state's gay marriage ban, Proposition 8, agreed to a continued hold on his ruling while foes appeal.




http://libsyn.com/images/audioaddict/gay_marriage_large.jpg
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Politics,   Culture,   25 more
  2. tags:
    Human Rights,  California,  LGBT,  Gay Rights,  4 more
  3.     
    |

69 comments // Prop 8 | California's Same-Sex Couples Can Legally Wed Beginning August 18 | Added Updates and Opinions

  • EthicalVegan
  • EthicalVegan
    • 0
      EthicalVegan  
    • Image

    • SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IS ABOUT EQUALITY, NOT RELIGION

      http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/08/15/Allen.same.sex.marriage.pulpit/index.html?...

      Same-sex marriage is about equality, not religion

      O.C. Allen, Special to CNN

      August 15, 2010 10:26 a.m. EDT
      tzleft.allen.oc.courtesy.jpg

      STORY HIGHLIGHTS

      * O.C. Allen says he is a product of "The Black Church," which helped shape him into a pastor
      * When he announced he was gay, he found that God's love and the church's love can differ
      * He and partner married; he says he realized marriage about right to equal benefits under law
      * Allen: Gay and heterosexual couples must see their commonality

      Editor's note: Bishop-elect O.C. Allen III is senior pastor of The Vision Church of Atlanta, and founder of The United Progressive Pentecostal Church Fellowship, an alliance of faith leaders and churches. He shares his thoughts on why marriage matters in the "The Black Pulpit," a weekly series of opinion pieces that explores faith in the black community. Next week: A view from a Buddhist female priest. CNN's "Black in America: Churched" premieres October 14.

      _____

      (CNN) -- I am a product of the "The Black Church." It shaped me into who I am today: a Christian pastor aware of God's amazing grace and love.

      When I announced I was gay, the church limited that grace and love. Although I had no doubt that God loved me, I discovered that God's love and the church's love can be two different things.

      To be Christian is to be inclusive of people who love one another. This is why I support same-sex marriage.

      As a pastor, I have counseled countless heterosexual and homosexual couples, and have observed that no matter the race, background or sexual orientation of the couple, a healthy relationship requires commitment, genuine respect and mutual love.

      Though my partner and I had a commitment ceremony in 2003, and obtained a marriage license this past July in Washington D.C., we learned that marriage is more than our religious convictions and our commitment, but also about laws that will protect us.

      Marriage equality is not about religious rights, but the right to equal benefits. At the end of 2003, the U.S. Government Accountability Office identified 1,138 federal provisions where marital status is a factor in determining or receiving benefits, rights and privileges.

      These include next-of-kin hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent; automatic inheritance in the absence of a will and inheritance of jointly owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship. These benefits allow all marriages access to the social and emotional supports that can produce healthy families and communities.

      I affirm the role of religion in our society. But no matter how powerful religion is, in the United States, the laws of the church and the laws of the government are intentionally separate.

      Another view from the pulpit: Same-sex marriages will hurt families

      In 1968, 73 percent of Americans disapproved of marriage between blacks and whites. Then, it was argued that interracial marriage would hurt families and dismantle societal structures. In 1967, the Supreme court ended race-based restrictions on marriage in Loving vs. Virginia.

      Today, support of interracial marriage is stronger than it has ever been. So is support of same-sex marriage. Like interracial couples, gay couples are seeking equality under the law, asking their government for these rights, not individuals, or religious bodies.

      If same-sex marriage is about love and religion is about love, then in this debate, love must go both ways. We must not be hateful in our disagreements over marriage. Verbal and emotional abuse should have no place in our sacred places of worship. The pulpit should not be used as a place of abuse even if one disagrees with same-sex marriage.

      Jesus never mentioned homosexuality in his 33 years of life. But in Mark 12:31, he did emphasize, "...thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these." The apostle Paul said: "Be kindly affectionate one to another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one another." I wonder what the debate over same-sex-marriage would be like if we applied this basic scripture?

      True equality can begin when we see others as we see ourselves. I believe there is room to disagree, but just because we don't agree on my legal rights does not mean I am not entitled to them.

      The gay community must also learn how to love those who disagree with them. If heterosexual couples and gay couples could see their commonality, equality would not just be the law of the land, but it could be a new law for humanity that governs our fragile future.

      The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of O.C. Allen.

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
  • glueandglitter
  • ThresholdBroken
  • eden49
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  
    • Image

    • http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/state&id=7608408&cmp=emc-kabc-Eyewitness_News,_Southern_Californias_News_Leader-081310-top1-7608408

      L.A. officials prepare for gay unions Aug. 18
      Friday, August 13, 2010

      Amy Powell

      WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. (KABC) -- Prop 8 supporters are gearing up for the latest battle to stop same-sex marriages, but the weddings will resume in California next week if there is no further court action.

      Supporters of the same-sex marriage ban want to stop any marriages from taking place while the issue makes its way through the court system. They filed an emergency appeal with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

      If the appeals court does not take action, the same-sex marriage ban will be struck down Wednesday, Aug. 18 at 5 p.m. At that point, couples are expected to start lining up.

      Los Angeles County offices generally close at 5 p.m., but the county said it will be offering extended hours so it could start issuing marriage licenses and make civil ceremonies available to couples who want to get married right away when the ban is lifted.

      Prop 8, which banned same-sex marriages, was approved by 52 percent of the state's voters in 2008, but last week Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that the same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional.

      On Thursday, the judge, who is openly gay, rejected a request to delay putting his order into effect until the appeals court ruled.

      "So this is just a continuation of his judicial tyranny to destroy the will of the people and to impose the will of the minority upon the majority," said Don Grundmann, a Prop 8 supporter.

      Legal experts said Prop 8 supporters might have a tough time making a case to block the weddings, because the judge's decision can only be appealed with the backing of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger or Attorney General Jerry Brown.

      "[Prop 8 supporters] may very well not have standing to intervene and ask the federal court. So it might be up to the governor, the attorney general to make the decision," said Stan Goldman, a Loyola Law School professor.

      As of right now, Schwarzenegger and Brown have said they have no reason to oppose gay marriage.

      Gay couples were happy with the judge's decision but disappointed about having to wait.

      "Hang in there. It's going to happen.It's absolutely going to happen. The truth is on our side, history is on our side and now the law is on our side. It's just a matter of time," said Paul Katami a supporter of same-sex marriage and a plaintiff in the Prop 8 case.

      West Hollywood officials said they have been getting hundreds of calls from couples eager to get married next week. They are hoping to deputize additional city workers to perform marriage ceremonies at city hall and Kings Road Park.

      The city's mayor pro-tem said the city is talking with county officials to see if they can issue marriage licenses themselves when the ban is overturned.

      "Windows of opportunity open, and then they close. It opens again, but we still have federal courts involved. It may close again, so I think a lot of couples want to take advantage of this moment," said West Hollywood Mayor Pro-Tem John Duran.

      (Copyright ©2010 KABC-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)

    • 2 years ago
  • QuestionGeek
  • ampersand
  • eden49
  • EthicalVegan
  • eden49
  • freecrack
  • EtVoila
    • +1
      EtVoila  

    • Oh, this makes me SO SO SO SO SO happy! A very dear friend of mine lives in California, and he can at last marry the love of his life! I'm so happy for them, and for everyone who is finally recieving this most basic of rights. I feel that America is moving forward, baby step by baby step.

      Love will always prevail!

    • 2 years ago
  • AreOh
    • +2
      AreOh  

    • While we should have never voted on Prop 8 in the first place, I'm glad we are taking steps to redact this ridiculous law. If you are a US citizen, and actually care about our country, it is an embarrassment that we still contesting basic civil rights in this day and age. We have to do better.

    • 2 years ago
  • QuestionGeek
  • freecrack
  • LaBelleBlog
  • alexandrek
  • freecrack
  • H2O_4U
  • alexandrek
  • H2O_4U
  • eden49
    • +3
      eden49  

    • ...thanks for this fantastic, detailed post...you do things with such an amazing passion...rock n roll, matey...

    • 2 years ago
  • donnyjenkins
    • +3
      donnyjenkins  

    • Why should a judge or the state or the country care who you love? This is definitely a step towards equality but we still have a long way to go.

    • 2 years ago
  • unimatrix0
    • +6
      unimatrix0  

    • The fact that the Judge is a "conversative/libertarian republican voting nutjob" only makes the victory that more sweet, and that more convincing.

      The sooner the "conversative/libertarian republican voting nutjobs" realize the moral hypocrisy and religious bigotry that stands behind those who would deny gay marriage, the better.

      After all, isn't the goal to get everyone to recognize that justice requires equal treatment under the law? Isn't the goal to get everyone to recognize that moral or religious contempt for homosexuals and their relationships is not reason enough to deny gays the right to same-sex marriage?

    • 2 years ago
  • H2O_4U
    • -2
      H2O_4U  
    • unimatrix0:

      conversative/libertarian Republican-voting asshats will never EVER realize their hypocrisy and religious bigotry, this is why many people tried to stop this judge form ever reaching the bench
      they would rather see gays be exterminated, simple fact, they are just covering up their social terrorism

      please, grow up, and don't defend them

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
  • angelaguayo
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  
    • angelaguayo:

      Oh, yes, I once again ALMOST burst into tears, but there's a way to go, yet. But I'm more and more optimistic each and every day... and each and every news item that makes more people aware.

    • 2 years ago
  • versasrev
  • H2O_4U
    • -2
      H2O_4U  

    • i am sorry but has anyone done any research on this judge. he is a conversative/libertarian republican voting nutjob. Don't believe this is a good step forward!! This decision should be handled by a democratic and progressives judge

    • 2 years ago
  • KateLove
    • +4
      KateLove  
    • H2O_4U:

      I'm sorry, but I believe your first statement is a question so that period should be a question mark. Also, you can't pick and choose your judge. Isn't the fact that he was once considered "too conservative" to have a chair mean all the more for this victory? That maybe even the other side sees the light of equality for gays, lesbians, and all other queers?

    • 2 years ago
  • H2O_4U
    • -2
      H2O_4U  
    • KateLove:

      the right is wrong 100% of the time, if you want conservative judges bossing you around, take it to another state or better yet, another country
      and if you want to attack me for speaking the truth, it just shows who the real hateful person

    • 2 years ago
  • versasrev
    • +3
      versasrev  
    • H2O_4U:

      You do know the "the right" makes up about 40% of the U.S. populations. With that in mind you are just forcing decent, as opposed to the idea of compromise and unity. I believe that this ruling was in favor of such a spirit, and as such shows that people of differing belief structures can work together and make a better future.

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +3
      EthicalVegan  
    • H2O_4U:

      Anything and everything positive helps, and I really LOVE the idea that someone oh-so-conservative would take this approach, if you will. I think it only strengthens the cause for human rights. I'm excited!

    • 2 years ago
  • H2O_4U
  • H2O_4U
    • -2
      H2O_4U  
    • versasrev:

      "compromise and unity" are what made prop 8 pass, the ruling is fine but the judge is not
      and just because 40% of people are insane, doesn't mean we should bother listening to them

    • 2 years ago
  • versasrev
    • 0
      versasrev  
    • H2O_4U:

      Whether they are right or not, we still have to work with them. If we believe that a group of people are wrong for whatever reason; then it is our responsibility to listen to and understand them, so that we can find an appropriate way to explain to them their failings.
      Without understanding we are doomed to an eternal conflict.

    • 2 years ago
  • alexandrek
  • versasrev
  • QuestionGeek
  • H2O_4U
  • H2O_4U
  • versasrev
    • 0
      versasrev  
    • H2O_4U:

      I don't know how many times I have to pull the Gallup stats on gay marriage out, but if I need to again I will...

      Essentially the stance is 50/50 for the nation as a whole. When we compare this to other hot button issues like abortion (also 50/50) we see that it becomes a social necessity to allow these issues to exist, even if one does not agree with them. Practicably speaking of course.

      As for politics, I believe in functionality over ideology (left or right) any day. Besides, I don't see how this issue as anything but a legal issue of citizens denied their guaranteed rights.

    • 2 years ago
  • H2O_4U
  • dabne
  • randallr01
    • +4
      randallr01  
    • dabne:

      When you show me a substantial group of polygamists who want the right to marry more than one person at a time, THEN we'll talk.

      OR, when you show me a substantial group of people born who are simultaneously in love with 12 women at a time, THEN we can talk.

      I'm not against polygamy (I just don't think it works), but wanting more than one wife ≠ being attracted to the opposite sex. The polygamist desires lots of spouses; the gay person wants a partner?? Not the same.

      You, my friend, are not thinking this issue through. If you wanna legalize polygamy, go for it! But that has nothing to do with gays.

    • 2 years ago
  • randallr01
  • EthicalVegan
  • glueandglitter
  • EthicalVegan
  • littlwarrior
    • +2
      littlwarrior  

    • All i have to say is yay! One small step for gaykind, one giant leap for the world as a whole. I heard somewhere that we should judge a civilization based on how it treats its minoritys. If it treats them well they are civilized poorly and they are not. America is one step closer to being civilized.

    • 2 years ago
  • Jasmine_Gonzales
  • EthicalVegan
    • +4
      EthicalVegan  
    • Image

    • The Advocate...

      http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/08/12/Calif_Marriages_to_Resume/

      Posted on Advocate.com August 12, 2010
      Walker Extends Temporary Stay in Prop. 8 Case
      By Advocate.com Editors
      JUDGE VAUGHN WALKER 081210 X390 | ADVOCATE.COM
      Judge Vaughn R. Walker on Thursday denied anti-marriage equality forces' attempts to halt marriages for same-sex couples pending appeal, but extended a temporary stay to August 18, allowing Prop. 8 supporters time to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

      Some city clerks in California had already given notice that they would be performing ceremonies if the stay was immediately lifted.

      Though he put a temporary stay on his judgment last week, Walker wrote in his opinion in the case that "California is able to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, as it has already issued 18,000 marriage licenses to same-sex couples and has not suffered any demonstrated harm as a result[.]"

      "Moreover," Walker wrote, "California officials have chosen not to defend Proposition 8 in these proceedings."

      Walker ruled last week that the 2008 ballot measure violated both equal protection and due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution.

      "Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license," Walker wrote in a decision deemed by many legal observers to be both straightforward and breathtaking in its scope.

      Prop. 8 proponents have appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

      Story developing...

    • 2 years ago
  • QuestionGeek
  • EthicalVegan
    • +5
      EthicalVegan  
    • Image

    • http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/08/12/129160209/same-sex-marriages-ok-a...

      From NPR...

      Calif. Same-Sex Marriages OK As Of Aug. 18: Judge

      The federal judge who overturned as unconstitutional California's Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage lifted the stay on his decision, but delayed its effective date to Wednesday, Aug. 18.

      The decision of U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker doesn't end the matter, however, since it's expected that supporters of the ban will immediately appeal it to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

      Walker's ruling means that state and local officials can start issuing marriage licenses to gay couples in the state.

      From the conclusion of Walker's denial of a continued stay:

      The evidence presented at trial and the position of the representatives of the State of California show that an injunction against enforcement of Proposition 8 is in the public’s interest. Accordingly, the court concludes that the public interest counsels against entry of the stay proponents seek.

      None of the factors the court weighs in considering a motion to stay favors granting a stay. Accordingly, proponents’ motion for a stay is DENIED.

      http://amyking.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/phyllis-lyon-and-del-martin-in-2004.j...

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  
    • Image
    • EthicalVegan:

      http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abraham/detail?entry_id=69984

      San Francisco Chronicle...

      Same-Sex Marriage Stay Lifted, but marriages delayed seven days

      The same Federal Judge who declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional eight days ago, just lifted the stay blocking legal same sex marriages from taking place in California. Judge Vaughn Walker, U.S. District Judge for The Northern District of California in San Francisco, just lifted the stay minutes ago. But same-sex marriages can't start until August 18th. That's an adjustment of sorts to California Attorney General Jerry Brown's tweet:

      JerryBrown2010 Hoping Judge Walker will allow same-sex couples in CA to marry while the Prop 8 case appeal is pending. We should find out before noon.

      The problem, it would seem, is that an appeal can be filed during that gap in time before same sex marriages can commence. Why that gap exists is a mystery, other than that Judge Walker's giving opponents time to file an appeal. So, this thing's not out of the woods. Stay tuned.

      Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abraham/detail?entry_id=69984#ixzz0wQMXG42t

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  
    • EthicalVegan:

      http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15758938?nclick_check=1

      http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site571/2010/0812/20100812_020658_pr...


      Judge says gay marriages can start, but gives time for appeal
      By Howard Mintz hmintz@mercurynews.com
      Posted: 08/12/2010 12:42:53 PM PDT
      Updated: 08/12/2010 01:07:04 PM PDT

      San Jose Mercury News...

      Click photo to enlarge
      Waiting. SF City Hall. Tessmarie Canales with flag and Patrick Stewart. Both of San Francisco

      A San Francisco federal judge today ruled that same-sex marriages should resume immediately in California, but put his decision on hold to give an appeals court an opportunity to consider whether to allow the marriage licenses to be issued while the legal challenge to the state's gay marriage ban proceeds.

      Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who a week ago struck down Proposition 8 as unconstitutional, found there is no longer reason to bar same-sex couples from the equal right to wed, particularly in view of the fact that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown -- the state's top officials -- agree that the marriages should be legal right away.

      The judge put his order on hold until Aug. 18 for the appeals court to review the matter. Otherwise, he ordered the state to cease enforcing its ban on same-sex marriage.

      The decision came as gay and lesbian couples lined up at San Francisco city hall, a few blocks away from the federal courthouse, hoping the judge would permit them to get married today.

      Walker's ruling invalidating the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage has already been appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Proposition 8 proponents have indicated they will seek an emergency stay from the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit of any order from the judge that would allow same-sex marriages to take place while the broader legal challenge proceeds, a process expected to stretch for
      Advertisement
      another year or two and ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

      While gay and lesbian couples have been hoping for the past two weeks to start marrying, the legal realities suggest many obstacles remain in the short term.

      Legal experts predict that either the 9th Circuit or the Supreme Court is likely to put Walker's ruling on hold while appeals hash out the larger question of whether Proposition 8 tramples on the equal rights of the state's same-sex couples. Lawyers for the two same-sex couples who sued to overturn Prop. 8 argued that they should be able to marry immediately, but Proposition 8 lawyers have argued that allowing same-sex marriages in the interim could foster legal confusion across California.

      And if there is a window of time when same-sex couples marry while the Prop. 8 legal challenge is on appeal, there is no guarantee those marriage licenses will remain in force if Walker's decision is ultimately overturned. Gay and lesbian couples who marry now are in a different legal posture than the approximately 18,000 couples who married during the months before voters approved Proposition 8 in November 2008 -- marriages that remain valid.

      In that situation, the California Supreme Court in May 2008 had struck down the state's prior laws banning same-sex marriage. Between May 2008 and November 2008, there was no law in California barring same-sex couples from marrying and the state Supreme Court had in fact legalized gay nuptials. As a result, even when the state Supreme Court later upheld Proposition 8 in 2009, the state's high court found that the law could not be applied retroactively to those 18,000 couples who married before voters effectively wiped out the court's prior ruling.

      Legal experts say marriages that would take place now are on different legal footing because while Walker has declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional, that law, which amended the state constitution, does exist on the books. If the 9th Circuit or later the U.S. Supreme Court upholds Proposition 8, legal experts say any same-sex marriages that occur after its passage would be on shaky ground.

      Nevertheless, county officials across the state have been bracing for the possibility that same-sex couples will seek marriage licenses if Walker gives them the go-ahead. Santa Clara County Clerk-Recorder Regina Alcomendras said this morning her office ready for any type of marital crush.

      "I've got extra staff all ready to deploy," she said, adding that she is authorized to have up to 20 employees to perform marriages. "We will be prepared for anything. We will move quickly. I'm trying to make concessions if there's a spike in volume."

      Contact Howard Mintz at 408-286-0236

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  
    • Image
    • EthicalVegan:

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/richard-adams-blog/2010/aug/12/california-gay-ma...

      The Guardian|UK...

      California gay marriage ban to remain until 18 August, judge rules

      Gay and lesbian couples in California put marriage plans on hold as Proposition 8 judge keeps ban in place until 18 August

      Same-Sex Marriage Supporters In California Celebrate After Judge's Ruling Gay couples in California who hoped to be able to marry today, face a wait of at least a week after latest ruling by Judge Vaughn Walker. Photograph: Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

      Hundreds of gay and lesbian couples in California put their wedding plans on hold, after the judge who threw out the state's Proposition 8 ban announced that his temporary bar on same-sex marriage would remain until 18 August.

      US district judge Vaughn Walker – who last week ruled that the Proposition 8 amendment was unconstitutional – announced today that he had denied a request for a permanent injunction to halt gay marriages while the issue works its way through the legal system.

      But initial cheers turned to groans among gay marriage supporters gathered outside the courthouse in San Francisco, when they learned the bar would not be lifted until next week – a delay which allows opponents to ask a higher court to issue a further ban while their appeal is heard.

      Backers of the Proposition 8 amendment to the California state constitution, which was passed by voters in 2008, are expected to petition the US 9th Circuit Court to issue a stay on further gay marriages while the court considers Walker's ruling – but that is likely to take several days.

      The news came as a bitter disappointment to the hundreds of gay and lesbian couples who were awaiting the decision, and had hoped to take advantage of any window of opportunity that Judge Walker allowed.

      In West Hollywood, California, city officials had set up a special marriage tent to hold civil ceremonies for the throng of couples. Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaragosa had offered to immediately start performing marriages on the steps of City Hall.

      Rob Huntley, who said he had intended to marry his partner Scotti Maldonado as quickly as possible, told MSNBC before the judge's decision: "We want to do it this afternoon, when we can ensure we have the right to do this."

      If a further injunction is not issued, the earliest gay couples will be able to marry is 19 August when local authority offices open at 9am.

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  
    • Image
    • EthicalVegan:

      http://www.stoppingthehate.com/Images9/gay-marriage.jpg

      http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/08/12/walker-lifts-stay-on-prop-8-ruling-gay-marri...

      The Wall Street Journal...

      * August 12, 2010, 3:52 PM ET

      Judge Lifts Stay on Prop. 8 Ruling; Gay Marriages to Resume Aug. 18

      By Ashby Jones

      This just in: San Francisco Federal Judge Vaughn Walker on Thursday lifted the stay on his ruling from last week, in which he found that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

      One caveat: Walker extended a temporary stay until August 18, in order to give Proposition 8 supporters — and the defendants in the case — time to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit. So gay marriage cannot yet resume in the Golden State. Click here for the LA Times article.

      Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown had urged Walker to permit same-sex marriages to resume, arguing the state was well-equipped to handle them.

      In weighing whether to put a ruling on hold, judges consider the likelihood that higher courts would uphold their ruling and whether irreparable harm would be caused by a postponement.

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  

    • Los Angeles Times

      Judge keeps California gay marriage ruling on hold

      The federal judge who last week overturned the state's gay marriage ban, Proposition 8, agreed to a continued hold on his ruling while foes appeal.

      Proposition 8: The battle over gay marriage

      By Maura Dolan, Los Angeles Times

      August 12, 2010|12:44 p.m.

      Reporting from San Francisco —

      A federal judge Thursday refused to permanently stay his ruling overturning Proposition 8 but extended a temporary hold to give supporters time to appeal the historic ruling.

      U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who overturned the measure on Aug. 4, agreed to give its sponsors until Aug. 18 to appeal his ruling to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. No new marriages can take place until then.

      Walker's decision came after supporters of the same-sex marriage ban warned that they would take their case to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary to ensure that his ruling did not take effect.

      http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0813-gay-marriage-california-20100813,0,...

    • 2 years ago
  • Chopstick
    • +1
      Chopstick  

    • http://cnn.com/live

      I was going to be shocked if the judge did not lift it after it was ruled unconstitutional. Yes, the voters of Califorina voted for it (barely); however, this is NOT a democracy. It is a democratic republic.

      I was watching the live feed on cnn.com/live and overheard a passerby saying that it was a shame that this was going to be overturned becuase it was voted for by the people. "I thought this country was a democracy anyway." WRONG.

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +2
      EthicalVegan  

    • Here's the original article, leading into the POSSIBILITY of a stay:

      Decision on stay expected in California same-sex marriages case
      By the CNN Wire Staff
      August 12, 2010 1:57 a.m. EDT

      Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- A federal court in California will rule Thursday on whether to keep a temporary stay in place in the case that overturned the state's ban on same-sex marriages.

      The United States District Court for the Northern District of California will announce its decision between 9 a.m. and noon (12 p.m. and 3 p.m. ET).

      If the stay is lifted, same-sex marriages will be legal in California.

      Last week, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage, ruling that voter-approved Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.

      The 136-page opinion is an initial step in what will likely be a lengthy fight over California's Proposition 8, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

      At question in the trial was whether California's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay couples' rights to equal protection and due process, as protected by the U.S. Constitution.

      The high-profile case is being watched closely by both supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage, as many say it is destined to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If it does, the case could result in a landmark decision on whether people in the United States are allowed to marry people of the same sex.

      Same-sex marriage is currently legal in five U.S. states -- Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa and New Hampshire -- and in the District of Columbia, while civil unions are permitted in New Jersey.

      "Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples," Walker, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President Ronald Reagan, wrote in his opinion.

      "Race restrictions on marital partners were once common in most states but are now seen as archaic, shameful or even bizarre," he added. "Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage; marriage under law is a union of equals."

      After the ruling, elated supporters gathered to celebrate the judge's opinion in San Francisco's Castro district.

      People waved rainbow flags and U.S. flags, and carried signs that read, "We all deserve the freedom to marry," and "Separate is Unequal." Similar rallies unfolded in Los Angeles and San Diego.

      "For our entire lives, our government and the law have treated us as unequal. This decision to ensure that our constitutional rights are as protected as everyone else's makes us incredibly proud of our country," said Kristin Perry, a plaintiff.

      Perry and Sandy Stier, along with Jeffrey Zarrillo and Paul Katami, are the two couples at the heart of the case, which, if appealed, would go next to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals before possibly heading to the U.S. Supreme Court.

      Opponents of same-sex marriage have said their best bet lies with higher courts and have vowed to appeal the federal judge's ruling.

      In a national survey conducted by Gallup in May, 53 percent of respondents said same-sex marriages should not be recognized by law, while 44 percent said they should.

      Proposition 8 is part of a long line of seesaw rulings, court cases, debates and protests over the controversial issue of same-sex marriage. It passed in California with some 52 percent of the vote in November 2008.

      "Big surprise! We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, after the biased way he conducted this trial," Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, said last week. "With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman."

    • 2 years ago
  • timetide
    • +1
      timetide  

    • I am, 100% for Same-sex marriage. i want to marry the man I love one day and do not believe the government has the right to limit to tell me no you can't. But heres the kicker, if I was currently engaged i would wait for this legal battle to be over rather than risk my marriage being thrown into limbo. I'm cofident that we will win this battle, but this situation has reached the political equivilant of a quagmire and tossing more potentialy confusing legal issues might send it up in flames.

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan
    • +3
      EthicalVegan  
    • timetide:

      Read more about the Civil Rights Movement, and try not to worry. Yes, there will be minor setbacks, but we're moving in the right (make that LEFT!) direction.

      My wishes are for you and yours to marry, and be able to stay married, and have the happiness and love and everything else good that you've wanted... and deserve!

    • 2 years ago
  • EthicalVegan

top videos