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

[jenk]

(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.)

Indeed. I was skydancer's driver during outpatient oral surgery. The staff saw us holding hands and kissing in the waiting room and simply addressed me as "Mrs Hislastname". I didn't correct them.

OTOH, with jw1776's shoulder surgery the hospital staff did ask if I had power of attorney for him or was legal spouse - but only after he asked that I sign the paperwork for him. (It was his dominant arm that was broken!)

[ckd]

There's a blatant neon "HEY! TEST CASE! OVER HERE!" sign in one of the footnotes. (Noting that they don't address the issue of an out-of-state marriage that was formed before Prop 8, but not specifically recognized in California before that date.)

[men-in-full.livejournal.com]

I don't know enough about the law to know whether the CA Supreme's decision was good or bad. All I know is how sick I feel about it, especially now that they have two tiers, with "legally married" gay people and "civil union" gay people. If CA is supposed to have state equality; if the CA Supremes *already ruled* that "separate but equal" is wrong for their state - how can this situation be allowed to stand? Maybe I'm naive, and since I'm not a Californian I don't have enough info, but it seems to me that CA has a substantial constitutional crisis on its hands right now.

[peachychrista.livejournal.com]

Thank you for your statements! I agree.

The current decision contradicts itself and our federal law. It has to be dealt with either way.

Small but numerous steps FTW!

I'm excited that both Bush v. Gore lawyers have signed on our side, and one of them has had over 55 cases in front of the Supreme Court.

Social psychology prevails in this case and history will repeat itself.