California: Ban on Same-sex Marriage?

One of the most debated initiatives that got attention in this year's California's General Election is the following, Proposition 8:



So it's a really brief initiative, which would amend the state constitution to say, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

Now note, that California has already passed a similar initiative that has the exact same wording embedded now in our Family Code 300 and 308 that state this (Proposition 22, voted in favor for by 61% of the state voters in March 2000). This was just overturned on May 15th, 2008, by 4 Supreme Court Judges on the basis that it was unconstitutional against the state constitution.

In my opinion, Prop 8 initiative is sort of a "okay, so we fucked up, here's how we fix that, let's amend the state constitution so that the people's will and votes would remain legal" type of response.

Personally, I don't think it's constitutional to deny liberty of anyone wishing to get married, whether they are gay or not. However, even if gay marriage does become/stay legal in the state of California, presently it will not be recognized on a national level because the same motive as this one has already been embedded in the national constitution. Note: California has a Family Code law that gives/allows mostly all the same benefits, privileges and responsibility as a married couple to same-sex unions under a domestic partnership.

I thought I'd like to see the response / opinions of people from other states / countries on this. This is a pretty radical initiative in a sense that it does not allow for people to make a decision without letting their traditional/religious/moral values get in the way with their rational thinking. The main question on hand is that legally, should we ban couples of the same-sex from getting "married?" Should "marriage" be something that's defined by law? What are your thoughts on this? Do you think it will affect your state in the future if California votes on this measure either way?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Nehmi

Here's an easy solution:

Create a same-sex union whereby, people are granted the same sort of rights attributed to marriage. You can call it whatever you want... gay fuckers union... homosexual union...

This gets all the "but marriage is between a man and a woman" people off your back.

Maybe you didn't read my post.. California already does have a domestic partnership law in place that allows for most of the same rights given to married couples. As far as domestic partnerships go in California, they get everything short of Federal Tax benefits (because gay marriage is not recognized federally) and a marriage license. And yet we still have quite a bit of people opposing to this initiative.

Originally Posted by a lurker

If you're okay with giving gay couples full civil rights, why are you unhappy with calling them marriages? Personally, I don't like having marriages and civil unions separated by sexuality because our country has a problem with separate but equal institutions. I wouldn't have a problem with civil unions being performed by judges and marriages being performed by priests.

This is pretty much spot on with the questions arising from the opposing side of this initiative, and also what the "yes" side seems to have problems answering.

There's nowhere I can't reach.