Sliding down on a crazy carpet ([info]ladylakira) wrote,
@ 2009-05-26 16:51:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:life

Prop 8 upheld in California
For an interesting and in-depth interpretation of exactly what the California Supreme Court's majority decision means, take a look at this post by [info]jimkeller. The short? Prop 8 sets a precedent where rights can be taken away by a majority vote.

Update: And here, an interesting interpretation that is more optimistic. In short, if this interpretation is true, Prop 8 has been whittled down to mean that it takes away the term marriage but does not take away the right for same-sex couples to enter into a familial relationship which in all ways but name resemble a marriage. Keep in mind that all it says is that Prop 8 does not expressly forbid such marriages-but-not-called-that - it just says that Prop 8 doesn't completely modify the previous decision that banning gay marriages is unconstitutional. Of course, what this marriage-but-not-called-that is isn't discussed.




(Read 4 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]troubleinchina
2009-05-27 05:53 am UTC (link)
The problem with the latter bit (and I own to not having read it - I'm all prop8-ed out today) is that there are certain legal things that come in with the term "marriage" in the U.S. that don't come in with "common law" or "civil unions", including health care coverage - something very very important in the US - and immigration rights.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]ladylakira
2009-05-27 12:55 pm UTC (link)
Oh, absolutely. There is, as yet, no marriage-but-not-called-that. There are only things-inspired-by-marriage.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Read 4 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…