repeal prop 8 and then tear it into little tiny pieces and stomp on them

[firecat]

I'm pissed that the court did not vote to repeat Prop 8.

I'm also inclined to hope that this analysis by The Daily Kos is right and the court's decision basically amounts to "OK, you have to call it 'mawwidge' instead of 'marriage' but otherwise it's exacty the same thing." (I don't know enough to understand if that's correct. But if so it's pretty cunning.)

And I do think that by leaving the marriage rights of the 18,000 already-married same sex couples in place, they're pointing out that California is in a completely untenable position with regard to same-sex marriage.

I know full well that this will lead to at least two ballot initiatives in the near future, and I'm dreading having to go down that road again.

But since we have to go down that road again, at least the pro-marriage side appears to be better-organized now than it was during the prop 8 campaign.

If I were legally married to the OH, I would talk to him about getting a divorce in response to the court's decision. But we never did tell the government.

(However, an unmarried opposite-sex couple has more privilege than an unmarried same-sex couple, because people presume we're married unless we explicitly tell them otherwise.)

Incidentally, because it seems important to be out these days: I'm bisexual and polyamorous.

Comments

[aquaeri]

I've only done a little bit of reading about the prop 8 decision, but the impression I'm getting is that the court was handed a nearly untenable situation, and they decided to make it even more untenable, because the underlying situation is fundamentally unstable and needs to be dealt with. Like a game of Nomic that's just about over.

Within that framework, I think they said "everyone should have the same rights to marry" and "the current Californian constitution and ability to modify same is utterly stuffed".