The California Supreme Court has overturned a law banning same-sex marriages. It is a seismic decision that is likely to add the issue to the presidential campaigns and trigger additional state constitutional amendments — and perhaps a federal constitutional amendment. The opinion is below.
The law in question was a1977 statute defining marriage as between a man and a woman. In 2000, Californians reaffirmed the law, though this was a symbolic resolution.
The California courts stopped San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom from continuing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2004. However, that was due to the lack of his authority. The court reserved the question addressed today: the constitutionality of the underlying law.
There is already a move to amend the California constitution, which is likely to be accelerated by this decision. However, as a decision based on state law, the U.S. Supreme Court should defer to the highest state court on the question.
The decision was written by Chief Justice George with concurrences from Justices Kennard, Werdegar, and Moreno.
The Court concludes:
In the present case, it is readily apparent that extending the designation of marriage to same-sex couples clearly is more consistent with the probable legislative intent than withholding that designation from both opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples in favor of some other, uniform designation. In view of the lengthy history of the use of the term “marriage” to describe the family relationship here at issue, and the importance that both the supporters of the 1977 amendment to the marriage statutes and the electors who voted in favor of Proposition 22 unquestionably attached to the designation of marriage, there can be no doubt that extending the designation of marriage to same-sex couples, rather than denying it to all couples, is the equal protection remedy that is most consistent with our state’s general legislative policy and preference.
Accordingly, in light of the conclusions we reach concerning the constitutional questions brought to us for resolution, we determine that the language of section 300 limiting the designation of marriage to a union “between a man and a woman” is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute, and
that the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available both to opposite-sex and same-sex couples. In addition, because the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples imposed by section 308.5 can have no constitutionally permissible effect in light of the constitutional conclusions set forth in this opinion, that provision cannot stand.Plaintiffs are entitled to the issuance of a writ of mandate directing the appropriate state officials to take all actions necessary to effectuate our ruling in this case so as to ensure that county clerks and other local officials throughout the state, in performing their duty to enforce the marriage statutes in their In the present case, it is readily apparent that extending the designation of marriage to same-sex couples clearly is more consistent with the probable legislative intent than withholding that designation from both opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples in favor of some other, uniform designation. In view of the lengthy history of the use of the term “marriage” to describe the family
relationship here at issue, and the importance that both the supporters of the 1977 amendment to the marriage statutes and the electors who voted in favor of Proposition 22 unquestionably attached to the designation of marriage, there can be no doubt that extending the designation of marriage to same-sex couples, rather than denying it to all couples, is the equal protection remedy that is most consistent with our state’s general legislative policy and preference.
Accordingly, in light of the conclusions we reach concerning the constitutional questions brought to us for resolution, we determine that the language of section 300 limiting the designation of marriage to a union “between a man and a woman” is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute, and that the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available both to opposite-sex and same-sex couples. In addition, because the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples imposed by section 308.5 can have no constitutionally permissible effect in light of the constitutional conclusions set forth in this opinion, that provision cannot stand.
Plaintiffs are entitled to the issuance of a writ of mandate directing the appropriate state officials to take all actions necessary to effectuate our ruling in this case so as to ensure that county clerks and other local officials throughout the state, in performing their duty to enforce the marriage statutes in their jurisdictions, apply those provisions in a manner consistent with the decision of this court. Further, as the prevailing parties, plaintiffs are entitled to their costs.
Personally, I have long preferred to get rid of the term “marriage” in favor of a single civil union standard, click here.
For a copy of the opinion, click here
Hnrast:
Are you working on that “talking snake” problem for me yet? Remember Cheney doesn’t count as a counter-example.
Clint:
You said to Hnrast: “I agree with you on all the points of the gospel.”
*****************************
Do you really want to be strapped with the following divisive comment from HnRast?
“Jesus also drew a line in the sand, thus forcing humanity the subjects of his kingdom to choose sides, a person will either choose to stand with Jesus, or a person will choose to crawl on the outside with Satan to be tormented in hell forever.”
I am sure your Jewish friends would be surprised to know that unless they repent, they are to be “tormented in hell forever,” while you and Hnrast sip sodas on the portico in Paradise. Do you really believe that? What about the millions of persons who are Buddhists or Taoists or just skeptics? Off to hell in a hand-basket too? A word to the wise, be careful agreeing with anyone “on all points.” They taste terrible sometimes.
Can-o-worms….
Hnrast,
I’m thankful for you unashamedly bringing Christ and His message. I agree with you on all the points of the gospel. I firmly believe there is eternal life only in a life-consuming reliance on what He did on the cross. I also believe that not one person here, including myself, deserves anything but eternal separation from Him for our previous and/or current rejection of Him.
I would like to say something I do disagree with you in–the way you present truth. These people like dialogue. Reason with them in humility as a person who deserves hell as much as the worst of them. The truth of Scripture should absolutely not be compromised, but if your heart is more to prove you are right than to affectionately want them to experience and trust Christ, then they will continue to pick you apart.
I do appreciate your sound understanding of the gospel and your willingness to bring the very Good News.
hnrast:
“Do yourself a big favor, stop making a fool of yourself and find someone honest you trust who can explain this to you,…”
**********************
Thanks for the advice, and I already have had that conversation. That person gave me reasons for his beliefs or non-beliefs and didn’t quote verses from a book he had barely read and understood even less. That’s why I am trying to help you.
mespo727272,
Do yourself a big favor, stop making a fool of yourself and find someone honest you trust who can explain this to you, “the man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment: “For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ”.
hnrast:
“Nahum is not passing judgment on God he is merely describing the character and the nature of God.”
*******************
You and I don’t speak the same language if you say that calling another being jealous, vengeful, destructive, and full of wrath is not judging them. They are precisely words of judgment which you cannot see due to your warped perspective. Facts describe people, opinions like those judge them. Let’s take a test: I ‘ll call you those words and you tell me you feel “described” and not judged.
on another point, I have not embraced homosexuality merely the right of those who do to co-exist which you in your simplistic, judgmental way cannot tolerate. You see, your religion is inherently intolerant and it derives that from the words in your Bible which clearly support that interpretation. The moderates among you are more tolerant, they just cherry pick the tolerant parts to believe. I must admit that you are closer in your theology to the actual text of the work, but that does you no credit.
And while we’re on it, how about some proof outside of its pages that the fantastic elements of Bible (i.e the talking snake, parthenogenesis, humans flying without technology, etc.) are not merely some ancient text written by man to keep other people in line. You do that and I am interested in more conversation, otherwise I ‘ll leave you to preaching to the choir.
Finally on the age thing, I am old enough to know a grifter when I see one, and nowadays the con always seems to involve a pulpit.
mespo727272,
Please tell me how old are you? On the passage above the prophet Nahum is not passing judgment on God he is merely describing the character and the nature of God. Your must understand that your beef is with God, I am only pointing you to the way, to Jesus Christ who is the way and the truth and the life, that leads to repentance.
When Jesus Christ came down from Heaven as the God-Man he divided time in half, B.C. Before Christ, from the Latin Ante Christum and A.D.In the Year of Our Lord Jesus Christ from the Latin, Anno Domini Nostri Jesu Christi. Jesus also drew a line in the sand, thus forcing humanity the subjects of his kingdom to choose sides, a person will either choose to stand with Jesus, or a person will choose to crawl on the outside with Satan to be tormented in hell forever.
My question to you is what are you going to do with Jesus Christ since you cannot get away from Jesus? You will have an encounter with Jesus now or you will have an encounter later on, on your way to hell, you can bet on it, one way or another you will meet Jesus Christ. Will you embrace Jesus as your savior? Or will you continue to embrace your homosexuality and at any moment, since you do not know the date and time of your death, find yourself in hell being tormented forever and ever? Are you willing to risk a temporary life of pleasurable sin on earth for eternal torment in hell?
hnrast:
It must be wonderful to have a monologue when everyone else is having a dialog. Here’s my favorite quote from your Bible that I think sums you up quite well. “Professing themselves to be wise they became fools.” (Romans 1:22 KJV). Plus I am still waiting on your reply to my assertion that everyone can judge God as the passage I cited above demonstrates.
Finally, I cannot prove you guilty of sin as you are so quick to do to others. I can only prove you guilty of religious delusion, bigotry, and a tenuous grasp on reality. Your words, cherry picked from your magic book, are proof of that.
mespo727272,
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.
Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.”
But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.
Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to God the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well.
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.
Salvation is found in no one else, Jesus Christ is the only name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.
The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment: “For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
puzzling,
Words like intolerant, hateful, judgmental, closeted homosexual are part of the arsenal used by mainstream homosexuals in order to intimidate and control those who dare to oppose them. But let me tell you that I know your modus operandi and all your insults and baseless accusations are nothing more than a diversionary smoke screen.
Here is part of the Homosexual Agenda, and just like its proponents are based on falsehoods and deceptions.
“How has one to two percent of the homosexual population achieved so much success in transforming American culture and restricting religious freedom?
Part of the answer to the question is found in two publications (1987 and 1989) by homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen.
Their strategy to change America’s perception of homosexual behavior included the following six points:
1. Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and often as possible. (Through sheer perseverance the opposition will be worn down)
2. Portray gays as victims, not aggressive challengers.
3. Give homosexual protectors a “just” cause.
4. Make gays look good. (Notice that the media always makes the “gay” character the hero)
5. Make the righteous look bad.
6. Solicit funds from corporate America and major foundations to financially support the
homosexual cause.
hnrast:
When are you going to quit hiding behind that 1st Century book and give us reasons for your beliefs, instead of the usual I believe in the Bible because it tells me too. Kids argue by rote, adults are supposed to extrapolate information and draw conclusions. What facts makes you believe that you are saved and that most of the world of Hindus, and Muslims, Taoist etc are damned? I am guessing Christian arrogance but that’s just a guess. Why don’t you prove it to me?
Jill,
The reason why people are condemned to hell is because of the original sin committed by Adam in the Garden of Eden. Adam by his disobedience transmitted to us sin, physical and spiritual death, consequently we are all born sinners condemned to hell, capable of doing unimaginable atrocities, just watch the evening news, that is why we are all under the wrath of God. The bible says, ”all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags. There is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”
Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobedience of the one man, Adam, the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man, Jesus Christ, the many will be made righteous.
The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
hnrast,
I would prefer to engage in real debate, but that seems unlikely based on your responses.
Your original post on this thread appears to have found its way to many stops in the blogosphere word for word. The time and energy you have put into condemning homosexuality is staggering, both on this case and in frequent posts going back several years.
The outraged responses to your writings are not surprising, since you are very open about your hate. Your full name (which you freely use elsewhere) even appears on a nationalist, white supremacist petition on affirmative action by Crosstar on nationalist.org
While I first thought I was dealing with a run of the mill fundamentalist Christian, I admit that I was wrong. I deplore your views, and ask you to renounce them.
Jill:
“Jill, no man or woman has the power or authority to pass judgment on God.”
****************
Cue lightening and roaring thunder off stage. By the way, maybe hnrast can tell us why that is so since the authors of the Old Testament had no trouble making judgments about God and putting them into His holy book with His approval. Here’s one of my favorites value judgments from Nahum:
The LORD is a jealous God, filled with vengeance and wrath. He takes revenge on all who oppose him and furiously destroys his enemies! The LORD is slow to get angry, but his power is great, and he never lets the guilty go unpunished. He displays his power in the whirlwind and the storm. The billowing clouds are the dust beneath his feet. At his command the oceans and rivers dry up, the lush pastures of Bashan and Carmel fade, and the green forests of Lebanon wilt. In his presence the mountains quake, and the hills melt away; the earth trembles, and its people are destroyed. Who can stand before his fierce anger? Who can survive his burning fury? His rage blazes forth like fire, and the mountains crumble to dust in his presence. The LORD is good. When trouble comes, he is a strong refuge. And he knows everyone who trusts in him. But he sweeps away his enemies in an overwhelming flood. He pursues his foes into the darkness of night. (Nahum 1:2-8 NLT)
hnrast,
I’m not certain what you mean by passing judgment on God. I am wondering why people who are deceived, be they gay or straight will be condemned to hell by a loving, all-powerful God. God created and controls everything. He lets loose the deceiving spirits, then blames a person for being deceived by them. This does not sound like any type of god that anyone should worship. There is enough cruelty in the world without adding a spiteful God to the mix.
My comments are mainly directed to those confused souls searching for truth, they are not directed to those who are following deceiving spirits and things taught by demons, such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose both their minds and consciences are corrupted and have been seared as with a hot iron, the disciples of hell, those in your face, hardened homosexuals who are already condemned and on their way to hell, weather they believe it or not.
Jill, no man or woman has the power or authority to pass judgment on God.
hnrast:
“Now humble yourself to God and choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him, for the LORD is your life. Choose life, not death.”
******************
Funny you tell me to humble myself before god, but when I look up it’s only you that I see. You must be remarkable indeed to personally get the message from the almighty. Tell me when you talk to him, does he talk back?
_______________________
Jill (aka sinful, weak and frail–and he got all that from a couple of comments–a swami indeed):
Valiant attempt to get an answer but guys like this have turned over their entire intellect to a group delusion and simply mouth the words of some First Century text or more maddening, some ridiculous interpretation they heard in Sunday school or just as likely made up. Why not ask this saved soul if he has ever read the Bible that he so righteously spouts forth to us?
hnrast,
You’re make assumptions that everyone here is homosexual. So again, I am not asking an opinion from a homosexual. I am asking an opinion from you. So, is AIDS a disease in heterosexuals and a punishment in homosexuals, or is it a punishment in both cases? Should God kill everyone who has AIDS? What group should I be hoping that God will kill? Sould I hope he goes after everyone? God is love so who should he kill to best show His love?