The dissenting view in Proposition 8 is also important, as it does not argue against the substance of the issue. It is purely focused on state rights related to the procedural issue of standing. In terms of the substance of the marriage issue, that dissenting opinion describes the issue of marriage equality as "a realm of controversy where the legal community and society at large are still formulating ideas and approaches to a most difficult subject." In other words, even the dissenting opinion in that case does not reverse the ongoing legal and societal trend toward marriage equality. If anything, that language leaves the door open for a broader ruling at some point in the future, more likely than not making another contribution toward expanding equal protection to marriage.
Both rulings are small but important steps. They provide a foundation for additional progress.
Nothing. I do not care about them.What do you have against Polygamy? It's not hurting you right?
Gays are not defined by they sexual behavior.You don't think other groups whose identities are defined by their sexual behaviors are not going to run with this precedent? Really?
If there's a god, damn it she won't mind.
If there's a god, baby she won't mind.
Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.
Gays are identified by what they are attracted to and who they have sex with
So are Polygamists. Who are you to judge them and insinuate they are second class citizens? Bigot
You just insinuated they are second class citizens. BigotNothing. I do not care about them.
Yes they areGays are not defined by they sexual behavior.
In a perfect world, DOMA gets wiped from the boards and the discussion on marriage altogether ends here, never to be brought up again - on either side - unless the talks concern abolition of the practice in its entirety.