Burnt Orange ReportNews, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas |
![]() |
February 12, 2004SF Gives Marriage License to Lesbian CoupleBy Byron LaMastersAs the Massachusetts conventions drags on through day two after two compromise amendments failed yesterday, the city of San Francisco has decided to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples in a challenge to California law:
It's funny how Gavin Newsome was attacked by liberals and Greens as a conservative in San Francisco's recent mayoral election where Newsome narrowly defeated Green Matt Gonzalez. It's amazing how quickly the gay marriage is exploding into the public debate. You bet it'll be an election issue and Democrats will have an interesting balancing act to do. Update: The picture seen on Daily Kos is in my next post, here. Posted by Byron LaMasters at February 12, 2004 02:32 PM | TrackBackComments
Wow. Very much a pushing of the envelope. Even supporters of gay marriage should realize that the marriage is void/voidable because it is not recognized by statute. However, who will have standing to challenge the marriage? Likely it will be when "something happens," e.g. one dies and the family wants to inherit over the spouse, etc. In any event, it will stir things up in Cali and beyond. Posted by: WhoMe? at February 12, 2004 07:35 PMI caught your post at Kos and nearly had a heart attack for excitement. I credited you over at my own blog (see url) when I reported it. Thanks for getting to it so quickly. Posted by: Incertus at February 13, 2004 03:38 AMOw brother, well we have all at one time or another made fun of the word "marriage" but this is the ultimate. I had CNN on today and after Mr.Bush made his short and to the point valid speach, we were introduced to two middle aged queers, (sorry I call it the way it is because of the ideals of this type of behaviour is queer(unusual, or abnormal) smooching on TV. Well I just about tossed more than my salad. Hell, since we are degrading the idea of marriage, what is next? I can see it, in 2010 allowances for marrying our favorite pets. We are on the way, since both fall under the title "abomination" and the link above describes the actual meaning of this word, as homosexuality. To be blunt when I hear this word, I think of "Aids", which is the only contribution of this sickly act altogether. The sad thing is some of these "queer" people are quite nice, and polite, but I don't understand why they do not carry this behavior on, to the bedroom. Sorry folks, but man and woman have two different parts that make things happen.. "babies". The other way is like trying to put the square block into a triangle mould. Suggestion? ... a lot of consuling for these sad cases, because they need help not pity, or publicity. Good day all! Posted by: Ken at February 24, 2004 07:10 PMA straight woman said recently that "the only threat to heterosexual marriage are heterosexuals, who get married to a total stranger on television for money, who make lifetime vows of committment and divorce more than half the time". I have to agree. This kind of behavior among straights just makes a complete joke out of something we claim to hold sacred. But more than that, there is a simple matter of this country's constitution and bill of rights, which proclaim equality under the law FOR ALL, PERIOD. For the laws of any society to be valid they must be logically consistant in the way they're applied. We cannot arbitrarily grant rights to some people and withhold it from others, all the while saying we are about personl rights and freedoms without being a nation of hypocrits. And beleive me, the rest of the world does notice this. Remember, what makes this country great is not that we all think,feel,believe the same. It's that we can be very different and yet still live in the knowledge that the same laws and rights are applied to all of us without distinction. That is the whole point, the reason for AMERICA. What goes on in each of our own minds is just that. But the civil laws of the country MUST be above all that. And blind to any personal attribute that we imperfect mortals take such pleasure in condemming in each other. of course I could be wrong. Posted by: Darren at August 1, 2004 02:34 PMOh, one last thing. If the only reason for marriage is 'making babies', than all heterosexual unions that have not produced a child within a specified period of time should be rendered null and void for failure to meet any of the goals for which the union was created. Guess my infertal sister in law is no longer my brothers wife. Guess my step father, step mother, and step grandmother and, concequently, all their reletives are no longer part of my family then. Well, it was good to know them. Posted by: Darren at August 1, 2004 02:53 PMPost a comment
|
|