“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
So begins the 14th amendment of the United States Constitution.
Yet 52% of California’s population denied 48% their basic rights. Proposition 8 stands after the California Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that the voter-approved measure limiting marriage as being between a man and a woman is constitutional.
In a 6-1 vote the lone voice of reason came from Justice Carlos Moreno stating “(a) majority should not be allowed to deprive a minority of fundamental rights”
In the majority opinion of the Supreme Court last year, Justice Ronald George wrote:
“Because of the widespread disparagement that gay individuals historically have faced, it is all the more probable that excluding same-sex couples from the legal institution of marriage is likely to be viewed as reflecting an official view that their committed relationships are of lesser stature than the comparable relationships of opposite-sex couples. Finally, retaining the designation of marriage exclusively for opposite sex couples may well have the effect of perpetuating a more general premise – now emphatically rejected by this state – that gay individuals and same-sex couples are in some respects “second-class citizens”…
Accordingly, we conclude that to the extent the current California statutory provisions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, these statutes are unconstitutional.”
After Tuesdays vote Justice George concluded that the “voters were within their rights to approve a constitutional amendment redefining marriage to include only male-female couples.” One of these things is not like the other. He had it right the first time.
Ironic that Hollywood, CA is known for its multiple marriages (and in turn divorces) and no one cries out “mockery”. Because I’m straight, I can marry (and divorce) and marry again as many times as my little heart desires; as though I’m choosing a new outfit for the day. It’s my constitutional right. Yet discrimination, hiding behind a religious context, allowed the conservative vote to beat down the constitution and equal rights. The powers of bigotry continue to influence not just the political process but the legal ones as well. This is a frightening concept that clearly 52% of California residents aren’t grasping.
In another ironic twist it turns out the Mormons and Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have contributed close to a whopping 40% of the money raised to support Proposition 8. Keep in mind fundamental (not mainline) Mormons not only believe in polygamy but believe it’s a requirement for absolute salvation.
Huh, really? Hypocritical? Incongruous? “Protecting marriage”? Considering polygamy is actually considered a 3rd degree felony in all 50 states it’s an interesting dichotomy.
In what plays out as yet another lack of separation between church and state the ironies and hypocrisy are simply too much. Religious supporters have a right to their opinion but that doesn’t make their opinion right. Nor should that make their opinion law.
Two other dichotomies for you to wrap your head around:
In key portions that remained intact; the court was unanimous in deciding that an estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who married before the November election would continue to have their marriages recognized by the state. Great in theory but a hallow victory as there is no separate but equal. Also in perhaps the greatest irony, according to the California Supreme Court sexual orientation will continue to receive the strongest constitutional protection possible when California courts consider cases of alleged discrimination. AND the California Supreme Court is the only state high court in the nation to have elevated sexual orientation to the status of race and gender in weighing discrimination claims (on a side note this in and of itself is a startling fact).
Head, spinning. Where’s the “strongest constitutional protection” with Prop 8? In an absolute case of discrimination there is no protection from California’s highest court. Ask yourself how secure do you feel in your rights regarding race and gender when clearly this “protection” of rights can change on a whim (or with the religious right’s money)?