Comments on: CA Supreme Court Decision on Prop 8 Imminent http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/ca-supreme-court-decision-on-prop-8-imminent/ Where Friends Are Family Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:10:09 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: hahnathome http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/ca-supreme-court-decision-on-prop-8-imminent/#comment-210 hahnathome Wed, 27 May 2009 19:02:35 +0000 http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/?p=393#comment-210 Keep telling yourself that. But, don't look to me or any of the 48% of voters who were in favor of gay marriage to listen to you anymore. I think we can swing at least 4%, don't you? Keep telling yourself that. But, don’t look to me or any of the 48% of voters who were in favor of gay marriage to listen to you anymore. I think we can swing at least 4%, don’t you?

]]> By: Mr. Mister http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/ca-supreme-court-decision-on-prop-8-imminent/#comment-209 Mr. Mister Wed, 27 May 2009 18:56:57 +0000 http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/?p=393#comment-209 Nobodys civil rights have been voted away. California's current domestic partnership legislation affords same-sex couples "all of the core substantive rights" of marriage, retaining the term "marriage" for the union between a man and a woman "does not violate the fundamental constitutional right to marry embodied in the California Constitution." Homosexual marriage is not a civil rights issue. The civil rights movement used the equal-protection clause in the U.S. Constitution to justly claim already established rights, such as equal treatment in public accommodations and equal access to public schools. However, there is no right in state law or in the state Constitution to term same-sex unions "marriage," nor in federal law. No one has been deprived of the law's equal protection, or of the right to marry, only of the right to term a same-sex union "marriage." Nobodys civil rights have been voted away. California’s current domestic partnership legislation affords same-sex couples “all of the core substantive rights” of marriage, retaining the term “marriage” for the union between a man and a woman “does not violate the fundamental constitutional right to marry embodied in the California Constitution.”

Homosexual marriage is not a civil rights issue. The civil rights movement used the equal-protection clause in the U.S. Constitution to justly claim already established rights, such as equal treatment in public accommodations and equal access to public schools. However, there is no right in state law or in the state Constitution to term same-sex unions “marriage,” nor in federal law. No one has been deprived of the law’s equal protection, or of the right to marry, only of the right to term a same-sex union “marriage.”

]]> By: hahnathome http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/ca-supreme-court-decision-on-prop-8-imminent/#comment-207 hahnathome Tue, 26 May 2009 02:18:00 +0000 http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/?p=393#comment-207 Too bad you won't be here to dance on my front lawn if we win - and protest at the capital if we lose. Too bad you won’t be here to dance on my front lawn if we win – and protest at the capital if we lose.

]]> By: johnbisceglia http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/ca-supreme-court-decision-on-prop-8-imminent/#comment-206 johnbisceglia Mon, 25 May 2009 17:47:22 +0000 http://natomaslgbtq.wordpress.com/?p=393#comment-206 Our response will send a message to America - Will we be Rioting or Dancing in the Streets? http://gaytaxprotest.blogspot.com/2009/05/rioting-or-dancing-in-streets.html Our response will send a message to America – Will we be Rioting or Dancing in the Streets?

http://gaytaxprotest.blogspot.com/2009/05/rioting-or-dancing-in-streets.html

]]>