California’s ban on same-sex marriage was thrown out by a federal judge who ruled it deprives gays and lesbians of equal rights under the U.S. Constitution, setting the stage for an appeal that may reach the Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco struck down the state constitutional amendment, Proposition 8, passed in 2008 by 52 percent of California’s voters. He sided with the city of San Francisco and couples from Berkeley and Burbank, who argued the amendment violates the federal constitution.
SOME DATA: About 18,000 gay couples married in California before Proposition 8 was passed. As of 2006, there were an estimated 109,000 gay couples in California, more than any other state, according to U.S. Census data compiled by the University of California, Los Angeles.
Seems to me that the judge made a decision based on the rule of law. The majority of voters made a decision based on their convictions of Biblical authority, morality, right and wrong, whatever you choose to call it.
We all know that just because the voters (or legislators for that matter) approve of a law does not mean it’s constitutional. Hence the judicial review.
This begs the question: Were the drafters of the constitution intending the equal rights clauses to extend to sexual preference? If they were, then the judge made the correct ruling. If not, then the justice system is presupposing conclusions to constitutional language that was never intended.
Looks like, in the opinion of the court, everyone should be allowed to marry, divorce and lose half of everything they own!
There’s my $0.02 worth!
      It's a Good Life! . . . .
