By now, you may have heard that the CA Supreme Court voted 6 -1 to uphold Proposition 8, which bans same sex marriage. The caveat is that those who got married under the law are still legally married. You can click HERE to read more about it. Below is a video of a number of reactions to the CA Supreme Court decision:



Wow. So Ellen and Portia are still A-okay, it seems, along with 18,000 other people. And how about the rest of the people there?

This is disconcerting, to be sure, though not unexpected, I have to say. I wish it was different, but it isn’t.

What I do find incredibly curious is that NO ONE talks about Amendment 2 in Florida, which is equally as bad, if not worse. Why is that? It passed during the 2008 election, too, yet it is completely ignored. This was the concern in FL (and note the state that also has a ban mentioned in the following):

But opponents say the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment isn’t a gay issue, but rather a measure that could negatively affect many heterosexual couples as well.

They point to particular wording in the amendment that they say could lead to unmarried couples — gay and straight — losing hospital visitation rights, the ability to make emergency medical decisions, and domestic partner health benefits provided by employers.

The proof, they say, is what has happened in other states where similar amendments have passed.

Since Michigan voters approved a ”marriage protection” amendment in 2004, the state Supreme Court has struck down domestic partner benefits, including health insurance and pensions. A battle is also under way in Kentucky to eliminate domestic partner benefits for employees of state universities because of similar legislation.

”This amendment says that because marriage is between a man and a woman, nothing else counts,” said Derek Newton, campaign manager for Florida Red & Blue, the bipartisan organization running the SayNo2 campaign to defeat the amendment. “It could take away existing rights and benefits of Floridians.”

Wow – Michigan, too. And Virgina. South Carolina. A total of forty-one (41) states have defined marriage between a man and a woman.

I know we are supposed to be all excited that a whopping FIVE states consider LGBT people to be equal, but it seems with every step forward, there’s at least one step back. I guess all we can do is keep fighting for equal rights for all people. One day at a time, I reckon…

  • rockrooky

    I am sad to see such ignorance on gays having civil and human rights on noquarter.

    • we are not ignorent,sufferd many years with ativist gays in that comunity,all ways wanting more and more and more. thats the point we know to much about the gay agenda.

  • Pingback: “We’re Becoming A Puritanical Society” : NO QUARTER()

  • i lived in a town in the past in arkanasa that had a large gay population and they were never satisfied .you give them one right and they demanded 3 more.it will never end they dont want equality they want superiority.

  • “most folks who oppose gay marriage are genuinely concerned that the next group to demand equality will be polygamists …”

    Not most. I think they’re worried about the institution of marriage falling apart. (I’m talking about the heartland voters, not the scumbag leaders like Rick Santorum.) To them, gay marriage is just the final straw that unravels the institution of marriage.

    Why they think gay marriage contributes to the collapse of marriage is a mystery. Since they think gays control the media, Hollywood, TV, pop music, everything — why not give gays a stake in the institution of marriage?

    But I hope we learn our lesson that the courts are not the answer. Courts did not abolish slavery. Courts did not grant suffrage. ‘We The People’ did that. Courts play only a minor role in freedom movements.

    Americans in the heartland are no more bigoted than anyone else. They are just behind the curve. We have to man up and come out of the damn closet–everywhere. Our rights have always been in direct proportion to our outness. The heartland will come around.

  • Meredith Randall

    At the risk of being lambasted electronically, I think most folks who oppose gay marriage are genuinely concerned that the next group to demand equality will be polygamists, child molesters, and for that matter, why not marry the dog. Where does one draw the line? Under ‘let people live their lives” we can have no moral guidelines. I think that is called uncivilized. We might as well abolish marriage completely. It is pretty much a sham nowadays.

    • totaly agree with the slipery slope senerio.give them a inch and they will take 500 miles

  • elise

    I was sad to hear of this outcome, but this isn’t the end of the discussion. By what tortured logic can the court decide to allow those who have already been legally married to stay married, yet deny this right to others?

    The federal courts will be compelled to hear this challenge and perhaps there will be a different decision.

  • JustMe~~

    Yes have to agree here..

    it’s absolutely insane that in the United States people can have a vote to take away other people’s rights. You shouldn’t be able to have that kind of vote.

    Why can people just not live and let live and allow others live the way they choose?

    • socalannie

      Exactly. What’s next for these voters? Are they going to vote to banish religions they don’t like? In their high-minded zeal to “protect marriage”, they don’t realize they’re opening the door to take away rights and freedoms that they themselves cherish. I don’t think this will be allowed to stand in the long term, but if it does, Heaven help us all.

  • Patience

    This is one of the problems with a plebiscite displacing the job of legislators. Not that elected officials always craft legislative language perfectly, but at least the legislative process allows for much more deliberation, more give and take, before the final bill is voted upon.

    I find the increasing numbers of referenda to be troubling. I prefer representative government — it’s more accountable and less subject to fickleness and whimsy. Who’s held accountable when referenda become law but end up causing more problems than they solve? And now, with states suffering so much from the bad economy and looking for ways to trim their budgets, eliminating benefits to partners is probably attractive, even welcome.

    I complain as much as anyone about politicians. Yet as loathsome as they can be, I prefer them to mob rule.

  • TeakWoodKite

    Rev Amy, take heart. California will not stay this way.

    It is helpful to understand that the legal question was about how the California Constitution may be amended, not LGBT unions.

    The fact that the court let stand the 18,000 unions, indicates that in no uncertian terms this is a untenable leglal remedy. It is not constitutional in that it violates “equal protection under the law”, as other people do not have the civil rights that others have and are judged to be unequal.

    This will come up from the lower courts but when I see Buois and Olsen team up on something that is a lot of juice.

    It is what can be expected when the issue pushed be it is legally mature.

    • socalannie

      Spot on, Teak. I had the same thoughts on this matter.

  • It’s good to hear that the lawyers who fought Gore Vs. Bush in 2000 have teamed up together to try to overturn Prop 8. I just heard about that tonight.

    To me it’s absolutely insane that in the United States people can have a vote to take away other people’s rights. You shouldn’t be able to have that kind of vote.

    Think about a scenario where there’s a vote about whether black people and white people can marry? Would that fly with anyone? Not now… But who knows maybe in some really backwards state such a vote would be close! But would they have the right to even have such a vote? I don’t think so. I hope the Supreme Court overturns the whole thing and says that you can’t even have that kind of vote in the first place.

  • Cindy

    Rev. Amy—-There was supposed to be a protest of Obama tonight in San Francisco……He was going to S.F. for a DNC Fundraiser…..Lt. Dan Choi, who is being fired from the military because he’s gay, is supposed to be there, too, protesting!
    Any news about it?