Rod & Betty Jo wrote:
Lew Hodgett wrote:
The ninth circuit court just handed down a decision allowing same sex
marriage here in California.

Time to watch the bible thumpers knee jerk reaction like they just had
a 2300 Volt probe stuck where the moon doesn't shine.

Lew

But first we get to see religious intolerance here....lucky us.

Having a state Supreme court act as King without regard to both the CA
legislature and the CA 2000 public initiative should give anyone pause. This
is clearly a arrogant attempt to place their view above the will of the
people, a fine example of the all knowing all powerful Big brother. Even
worse the imagined "social injustice" doesn't exist as CA has a very
comprehensive domestic partner act. Possibly a insight as to what kind of
federal judges we may get under a Obama presidency. That the highest court
in the state chooses to overturn a 5000 year old word or concept definition
might also tell you they don't have nearly enough to do in their normal day
job. Rod




Rod -

Since I allege that I am some form of Constitutional "Originalist"
and do not like people fiddling with a so-called "Living Constitution":

I think you're wrong here as a matter of law. The Equal Protection
clause of the 14th Amendment makes it pretty plain:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,
without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the ***equal protection of the laws***. (Emphasis mine.)

It doesn't matter how offensive, immoral, other otherwise yucky people may
view homosexuality. It has nothing to do with the definition of the word
"marriage". This is exactly about whether the law will treat everyone
equally. I would also view any legislative attempt to do an end-around
(pardon the pun) this finding by the court as blatantly un-Constitutional.

As a root cause matter, the *real* problem here was ever letting the
government get involved in *any* kind of marriage. The only role
government should have in marriage is enforcement of contracts and
property rights - as it would in any other voluntary arrangement
between free citizens and to interdict in the interests of minor
children whose parents are not caring for them. That's it.

In short, so long as adults engage in voluntary, consensual behavior
that is not otherwise fraudulent, forceful, or threatening, they must
be treated as exactly equal before the law.

If it makes you feel any better, by the exact same kind of reasoning,
cultural conservatives and people of religious conviction ought to
be free to openly condemn homosexuality as immoral without living
in fear of being brought up on hate speech charges. Like I said
(well, really the 14th Amendment), *equal* protection...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/