Judge Says Calif. Can't Ban Gay Marriage

Same Sex Marriage Forum

Judge Says Calif. Can't Ban Gay Marriage

By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO - A judge ruled Monday that California's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, saying the state could no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman.


In the eagerly awaited opinion likely to be appealed to the state's highest court, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.


"It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Kramer wrote.


The judge wrote that the state's historical definition of marriage, by itself, cannot justify the denial of equal protection for gays and lesbians.


"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional," Kramer wrote.


Kramer ruled in lawsuits brought by the city of San Francisco and a dozen same-sex couples last March. The suits were brought after the California Supreme Court halted a four-week marriage spree that Mayor Gavin Newsom had initiated in February 2004 when he directed city officials to issue marriage licenses to gays and lesbians in defiance of state law.


The plaintiffs said withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians trespasses on the civil rights all citizens are guaranteed under the California Constitution.


Two legal groups representing religious conservatives joined with California Attorney General Bill Lockyer in defending the existing laws and had vowed to appeal if Kramer did not rule in their favor.


Lockyer's office has said it expects the matter eventually will have to be settled by the California Supreme Court.


A pair of bills pending before the California Legislature would put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. If California voters approve such an amendment, as those in 13 other states did last year, that would put the issue out of the control of lawmakers and the courts.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...us/gay_marriage

Court Rules Against California Ban on Gay Marriage


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A California Superior Court judge ruled on Monday that the state's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional.


The ruling stemmed from litigation over San Francisco's decision last year to allow gay marriage. Those weddings were ruled invalid by the California Supreme Court, but the top court asked a lower court to consider the broader issue.


"We're gratified by today's ruling," said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera. He added it was an important step toward establishing equal rights for gays in California.


The San Francisco same-sex marriages sparked a heated national debate. Voters in 11 states have backed measures against gay marriage and 21 states are considering changes to their constitutions to ban it.


California voters have in the past defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The issue is expected to move eventually to the California Supreme Court.


San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom challenged the state's ban on gay marriage a year ago by issuing more than 4,000 gay marriage licenses.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...california_dc_3

It has been so obvious to me (as I stated in posts over a year ago) that banning gay marriages is unconstitutional. First of all if anybody raises in the argument the word "Bible" that argument is out the window(as far as I and many constitutional scholars believe). Marriage in our society today is really nothing more than a legal document stating relationships and privileges based on those relationships. Why should any relationship(between two people non-related, I say this to offset the silly argument that if we allow gay marriages then we must allow polygamy, bestiality, incest or in O'Reilly's case,his obvious desire to marry a set of beautiful twins (I forget their names).

anyway it looks like Mayor Newsome has finally been vindicated.



by the way for the umpteenth time, No I am not gay (in fact I am pretty darn sad some days )but I find Gay rights to be right up there with every other civil rights issue.

I hope this is the first of many many states making similar rulings. The bible has nothing to do with modern marriage. It may have been in years past, but not anymore. I look forward to the day when other states wake up and award equality to all their citizens.

I agree. The Bible shouldn't have a say in people's constitutional rights and equality. People are slowly realizing this and have made a lot of progress but still many people are ridgid on this topic. I'm proud to say that Oregon came mighty close to allowing gay marriage. If we voted on this five years from now instead of now I'm sure most of the new voters would be in favor of gay marriage.

Well, it's not happened yet... and trust me, the moment is does, we gays and lesbians here in California, will be celebrating equality in a giant way.

Party in California

Oh yeah... Pippin... come on down! Beers on me!!!

I'm on my way. I'll do anything for a free beer... even fly half way around the world

PS. Wise Judge. common sense finally prevailing.

Hey Grant.... for you, little brother, I will purchase an entire keg, of your favourite ale. ALL FOR YOU!!! Name it, and I will have it ready, and tapped, just for you!!!

Yes, that was a very wise judge... it's about time. Let's hope that it actually goes through.

yup, here's hoping.

*runs off to find the name of the most expensive beer around*

It doesn't matter WHAT it is (though, remember that I'm NOT a relative of Donald Trumps)