The prospects of same-sex marriage in California grew dimmer Thursday, when two Supreme Court justices who helped create the right for gays to marry in last year's historic decision expressed deep reservations about attempts to strike down a statewide referendum passed last fall to ban the practice.
"You would have us choose between these two rights: the inalienable right to marry and the right of the people to change their constitution," said Justice Joyce L. Kennard, one of those two key judges. "You ask us to willy-nilly disregard the right of the people to change the constitution of the state of California. But all political power is inherent in the people of California."[Chief Justice Ronald] George seemed to suggest Thursday that until the people of California raise the barrier for amendments, the court has little power to overturn their decisions.
I cannot believe that I am hearing that language from the California Supreme Court. But there you have it. The sovereignty of the people of the State of California to change their own constitution.
6 comments:
Wonderful news....SO FAR.
If anyone thinks that this fight is over, they are wrong.
The survival of Conservatism necessitates that we remain vigilant....ALWAYS!
Te rogamus audi nos.
I'm not a Lawyer, *but I have a new Blog-Friend that is...*
The ghe lifestyle is a choice, and no Law of the Land proscribes it.
The word marriage is a label, and per our Law is between a man and a woman.
Tough noogies, my ghe friends, have a domestic partnership, or create a new word in the lexicon, like "Garriage"....you have the same rights as married couples, just not the label.
This is the definition of scared for life.
Holds my breath....
So far, good news.
I hate the term "right to marry." I don't have a right to marry. If I never found a suitable husband, would all the men who rejected me in the past have infringed on my "right" to marry?
No.
Post a Comment