(no subject)

[nigeltde]

Further to the landmark ruling in California, and following Marty Lederman's quick post at Balkinization, I want to repost a little bit of the majority opinion (from page 101):

There is no persuasive basis for applying to statutes that classify persons on the basis of the suspect classification of sexual orientation a standard less rigorous than that applied to statutes that classify on the basis of the suspect classifications of gender, race, or religion. Because sexual orientation, like gender, race, or religion, is a characteristic that frequently has been the basis for biased and improperly stereotypical treatment and that generally bears no relation to an individual’s ability to perform or contribute to society, it is appropriate for courts to evaluate with great care and with considerable skepticism any statute that embodies such a classification.

FUCKING. YES.

Comments

[glynnis.livejournal.com]

Crappily, it's not going to last. The fundies in CA are already slathering to get it on the ballot in November and vote to reinstate the ban. Funny how when it's something like this, they're all let the people decide, but when it's something they're against but that is popular among most people, they're like, "Let the government decide!" Fucking hypocrites. There is no government-related reason why same-sex couples shouldn't be allowed to get married. And on top of that, it doesn't hurt anyone and makes thousands of people happy. How is that wrong?

I was hugely disgusted with my state in 2000 when they voted to ban gay marriage. Maybe enough people have realized in the intervening eight years that the government has better things to do, but I doubt it.

Now I'm like gay marriage Eeyore or something. :/

[nigeltde]

heh. I absolutely love that icon of yours.

I don't live in America and so don't have experience of the day-to-day cultural vibe regarding SSM, but I do think it's gotta happen, probably by a slow crawl, but it will happen over the next decade (assuming a Democrat gets in in November...). We're slowly getting there here in Australia. And although I am a bit confused by the phrasing in this article it looks like Arnie's against the ammendment.

I totally agree with you on the fundies, though. They're so confused about it, blabbing on about activist judges and rebel elected officials and "the people." Go and talk to "the people" in San Franciso, assholes! Go read the Constitution! We'll uphold your right to your dickfaced religious beliefs if you uphold our rights to not be second-class fucking citizens.

[glynnis.livejournal.com]

I think Ahnold's trying to have it both ways (which makes you think he'd support the amendment, hur hur hur). In the past, he's said he's pro-gay-marriage, but claimed that he didn't want to go against the will of the people by overturning the 2000 law. Now that the court has done it for him, he says he'll support the court. Either way, he can make it look like it's not his fault.

Hopefully the people of this state will have done some growing up in the past 8 years and have realized that letting people who love each other get married isn't a bad thing nor does it somehow "cheapen" their own relationships.

Eee! Crack Fox!

[ecce-homosexual.livejournal.com]

okay, okay, but it's still weird that you want to pants my mum

[nigeltde]

Listen, son, you're not too old for me to get out the wooden spoon. I'm going to have a word with your mother about this sort of behaviour.q