Gay marriage is now legal in California

[w8ng4msrgt]

SAN FRANCISCO - In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation's biggest state to tie the knot.

Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in an opinion written by Chief Justice Ron George.

Outside the courthouse, gay marriage supporters cried and cheered as news spread of the decision.

"Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," the court wrote.

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.

"Today the California Supreme Court took a giant leap to ensure that everybody — not just in the state of California, but throughout the country — will have equal treatment under the law," said City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who argued the case for San Francisco.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080515/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage)

[Nell]

Awesome! That is very, very cool.

[Sarabei]

FINALLY!! I hope every state follows suit!!

[Athena]

Well, I disagree that "domestic partnerships" aren't good enough, unless they legally function differently. So long as the legality is all the same as a marriage, I don't mind them calling it by a different name. I think that bringing the argument down to the word used to describe the relationship kind of cheapens the issue; makes it seem petty.

It's stupid anyway, though. The government should not be in the marriage business, period.

Now that my grouchiness is out of the way, I do think this is a good thing, overall.

[Countess Olenska]

Equal rights!! WOO HOO!

Legal Unions shouldn't be differentiated by the genders involved in them. I'm all for it.

[swivel]

Best news I've heard this year!

I was in a bit of a funk when I got home. Saw this, and started bouncing around the room.

Seriously, I hate faggots, and it is about damn time they get to suffer with the rest of us!

[dop]

Fantastic, Great news.

[gprime]

I've got a mixed mind on this one. Obviously, since I think federal policy is not justified in discrimination, as long as government stays in the marriage business, such progress is quite welcome. But my chief issue is that by continually passing laws or rendering verdicts in EITHER direction, it re-enforces the message that governmental intervention into marriage is legitimate. And, given the supposed intimate significance of marriage, if government is welcome there, where the hell do we draw the line?

[Countess Olenska]

gov't intervention to control religious persecution..What about that?

Me thinks you are a little into anarchy.

[AnalBreeze]

Gay marriage is now legal in California? Woo-Hooo!

This means absolutely nothin' to me! Who cares!
What next? you can marry your horse?
And I'm NO I'm not a Homophobe... I'm a HomeOwner! so save it! :rolleyes:

[Countess Olenska]

I could care less what consenting adults do together. Tax the shit out of it and lets move on.

Your a damn homeowner...

[Morbid]

It's about fucking time. I cannot wait for other states to follow suit. My Christian Conservative buddy must REALLY be thinking the end is closer than he did the last time he told me 10 years ago when discussing this very subject.

It was when he explained why he was not having kids since it would be pointless as Jesus was on his way and the date for the Second Coming Of Holy Asskicking was right around the corner. Of course he is now married with two kids. :rolleyes:

But anyway, this is good news and shows that eventually society does continue to progress. Congratulations you fucking homos.

[swivel]

It's about fucking time. I cannot wait for other states to follow suit. My Christian Conservative buddy must REALLY be thinking the end is closer than he did the last time he told me 10 years ago when discussing this very subject.

It was when he explained why he was not having kids since it would be pointless as Jesus was on his way and the date for the Second Coming Of Holy Asskicking was right around the corner. Of course he is now married with two kids. :rolleyes:

But anyway, this is good news and shows that eventually society does continue to progress. Congratulations you fucking homos.

Yup. Once again we make ethical progress and drag the religious along, kicking and screaming...

[gprime]

gov't intervention to control religious persecution..What about that?

Me thinks you are a little into anarchy.

What exactly do you mean? I realize that most mainstream religions discriminate, but it is their right to do so. All non-government entities have that right, or at least ought to, though the law fails to reflect that fact.

Much as I hate religion and want to see it lose all credibility among the non-retarded, I'm even less inclined to back governmental power in unwelcome domains. I'm not generally a fan of marriage, but hold that it is functionally little more than a legal agreement. Thus, to have any standing for state purposes, it should a secular contract of mutual union that follows the standard policies that govern business contract drafting.

And for the record, I am not an anarchist, but a minarchist.

[jlt080405]

It's about fucking time. Congratulations you fucking homos.

Thank you Morbid! :) Although it doesn't afford my family any of the same legalities here in Michigan (One of the states that explicitly defines marriage as that between man and woman, and also does not allow a civil union granting the same legal rights for (committed, tax-paying, homeowning) fucking homos such as ourselves as those that can legally marry, maybe some day it will.

[w8ng4msrgt]

Thank you Morbid! :) Although it doesn't afford my family any of the same legalities here in Michigan (One of the states that explicitly defines marriage as that between man and woman, and also does not allow a civil union granting the same legal rights for (committed, tax-paying, homeowning) fucking homos such as ourselves as those that can legally marry, maybe some day it will.
Hi Jess,

Please don't take this as an attack towards your personally but I do want to bring a few things up. Especially the tax paying and home owner status.

If the US would recognize same sex marriages if would cut hundreds of millions if not more in tax loopholes.

How you ask? Well it looks like you are a homeowner with a child. Not knowing how your relationship is I have to make some assumptions.

I will assume you are the homeowner and make more money. You file as single and itemize. The interest deduction pretty much wipes out your tax bill.

Your partner Tonya claims single, head of household, and gets the earned income credit and a $3-4000 return.

[jlt080405]

I appreciate your response, I am actually Tonya though not jess.

Forgive me, although I do have some limited college I am rather uneducated and therefore do not always articulate myself so eloquently. I also realize I am not the most grammatically correct.

My reference in parentheses was more to exemplify that we are contributing members of society attempting to lead lives that are as secure, fulfilling and productive (i could add a million descriptives here) as possible. I might have also said normal but I am not convinced there is no such a thing.

Without disclosing any of our financial situation, I can tell you that the financial, tax or monetary exchange for all of the other rights that we would have access to isn't even a thought. We get penalized in so many other ways that completely offsets any tax loophole. The tax filing status you are way off on. Quite honestly that is a moot point to me. Don't straight couples have the option to lose that "loophole?" There are companies that allow for same sex and partner's children as dependants on health care and other insurances. Those are companies that thankfully I am qualified to work for. Those things are not pre-tax deducted as they are for the primary beneficiary. Really another moot point i guess.

Where would our daughter go if the biological mother were to pass? Not to me, can you place a monetary value on that? I can't. I have been Joelle's "other" mom since she was a little over a year old. Her "father" has never wanted to be a part of her life and consequently never has. He is currently incarcerated and I suspect that will remain as such for quite some time. You can basically say that he is a career criminal.

Unfortunately, I have some illnesses that can at times be serious. If I were in a hospital with decisions I could not make and my family fought my living will (Which i have personally seen happen) would my partner, who knows exactly what I would want, be able to make those decisions? Christ here in Michigan (where I live) you cannot even come visit someone in a hospital unless the patient gives you a code, if they are able... and if they're not I guess you would have to be an immediate family member. I know when my own mother was admitted last year I called the hospital to find out what room she was in so I could come see her and they asked me for the code... I seriously had to contact my sister, who had taken my mother to the hospital, before I could get her room number.

God forbid what if jess and joey were both seriously injured, my god would i be able to even see my own daughter and partner in the hospital? Let alone be a part of ANY medical decisions that are made?
Thankfully, both of our families are incredibly supportive of our family and also a big part of our lives. So, quite honestly I don't have to worry about it as much as some others do.

I cannot begin to tell you how many ways it impacts our lives on a daily basis. The legalities of it all are things that most people would not even be aware of unless for some reason they were exposed to it. I don't even want to go into it all. No offense intended, but I am sure in many more ways than most people could begin to imagine. I don't take offense to anything anymore, I have been living this lifestyle for over 20years now. I have either experienced myself, or had close friends experience, many many many things that I have had to learn to deal with in whatever way I think is best at that time. Which is something that seriously depends on a million of variables and has to be based on each individual situation or experience.

I could go on and on and on...honestly i could. I have barely scratched the surface. Quite honestly, I really do not like to discuss it. I hope I don't have to make many more comments about it either. I don't like to feel like I have to defend myself for living the only way I have found to be happy. Even if that is not your or anyone else's intentions in asking questions. If any of the above offends anyone in anyway that is not my intention. I have never asked for anyone's sympathy for the way I have "chosen" to live, after all, I could have chosen to be celibate and single with no children I guess.

I have friends that do not really understand or completely accept my lifestyle. I don't condemn anyone for not sharing my view. I am simply happy to see the news about California :) And in case anyone was going to ask, I would have been more than happy to see a civil union that would allow the same legal benefits. It really isn't about the title

[swivel]

Thank you Morbid! :) Although it doesn't afford my family any of the same legalities here in Michigan (One of the states that explicitly defines marriage as that between man and woman, and also does not allow a civil union granting the same legal rights for (committed, tax-paying, homeowning) fucking homos such as ourselves as those that can legally marry, maybe some day it will.

I'm sorry you are living through a transitional phase in our moral development. However, I am not sorry that you missed out on feeling the natural passions you experience while living any time in the previous 30,000 years.

Our society still sucks when it comes to the treatment of gays. It will suck for a little bit longer, but we are almost there. We just need the current generation of moral conservatives to kick the bucket, and for religion to loosen its grasp on people's evil impulses.

I can't help but marvel at our progress, though. My uncle was openly gay during the 70's and 80's and died of AIDS in 1991. He was a pariah. Most of my family (my mother being the only real exception) rejected him and he died with only a few of us at his bedside, truly loving him.

10 years later and I knew dozens of people living openly-gay lifestyles with no stigma. I see homophobes treated with more scorn than gays. Another generation and we can work on the acceptance of Hispanics!

[jlt080405]

I'm sorry you are living through a transitional phase in our moral development. However, I am not sorry that you missed out on feeling the natural passions you experience while living any time in the previous 30,000 years.

10 years later and I knew dozens of people living openly-gay lifestyles with no stigma. I see homophobes treated with more scorn than gays. Another generation and we can work on the acceptance of Hispanics!

Thankfully, I am a person who likes to feel my emotions. Although my passions at times have been known to be rather extreme to some.

I can appreciate your experiences with your uncle as well.

[Pete Bondurant]

Another generation and we can work on the acceptance of Hispanics!

Interesting thought I have just had. When the Mexican immigrants take over California in the near future, will this state not become more conservative? Most of the average working-class Mexicans and Central American peoples do not seem to be very receptive to the homosexual lifestyle such as it exists in the United States and Western Europe. It is just a speculation on my part, but it seems that this will be a by-product of open immigration that American liberals have not considered.