About
Citizen Voices is a blog about election politics, written by people like you. Six San Diegans give their personal take on the issues, candidates and propositions.
» Listen to their interviews on These Days
Categories
Recent Topics
License To Wed?
While Citizen Voice bloggers Alma, Chuck and I were chatting about the San Diego mayoral and city attorney races on Tom Fudge's radio show, "These Days" yesterday, the tide for same-sex marriage was turning.
By the time the three of us walked back to the KPBS Green Room (which isn't green at all) CNN was announcing that the California Supreme Court had just declared the ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional. Chuck's Blackberry was going crazy, sending him headline news via text, along with a playful proposal from his partner. As soon as I could connect my laptop with the wireless in the building, Chuck was racing around the Internet Superhighway, anxious for more details.
As a divorce attorney he was fascinated with the 172 pages of paperwork associated with the new ruling. As a gay man, he was thrilled with the possibilities. The video below shows Chuck's reaction to the ruling minutes after it was announced.
Whether you have been hoping for such legislative change or praying to prevent it, you know that what happened in the courts yesterday was historic and monumental.
Fundamentalists on the right are scrambling to gather signatures to create a constitutional ammendment that could overturn this ruling on the November ballot, making this decision and debate far from over. What happens in California over the next few months will be very interesting. For more information check out the following links:
- Citizen Voices blogger Trina Boice is an author and mother of four who lives in Carlsbad.
-
6 Comments |
Email this |
-
-
-
|
- Permalink:
Comments
This is the most wonderful of news! Yea!!!! And yeah, Chuck, -are- you gonna get married now?
It almost seems beyond debate on legal grounds - any opinion that denies two humans the right to sanction their love in the eyes of the state is invariably based on religion or perceived morality, not law. Having said that - this decision is still a long way from becoming the settled law of the land. And the timing of the decision has the cynic in me wide eyed and wary.
Watch for a Swift Boat type use of this issue against Obama in the general election - the networks will eat it up, it will become a culture war flash point and it will be used to alienate those hard working “normal” white folks Hillary talks so much about. There’s never a “good” time to fight a righteous fight - but strange how the timing of these things seem to play to the advantage of the Karl Rove type right wing rancor mongers....It is a happy day, but it’s too early to start throwing rice....
I look to Catholic church on issues like this. Whatever their thoughts are, I go 180 degrees. The court did too and made the right decision.
It’s surprising none of the major presidential candidates have really spoken up about the implications of this decision. Has anyone heard McCain, Obama, or Clinton give any opinions either way? I guess it isn’t an official election issue until it shows up on one of their lips, or of course, on the Nov. ballot. Speaking of which, a very recent LA Times poll shows that “a narrow margin” in CA oppose gay marriage. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-poll23-2008may23,0,2084360.story
Maybe Chris is right. Too soon to throw rice. But, on the other hand, if this very conservative court reasoned through the decision to grant marriage rights, then maybe the poll numbers are misleading.
About that “narrow margin.” I haven’t researched it thoroughly yet, but I heard an LA radio talkshow host reveal that the majority of the people questioned for that survey were not even registered voters. So what does that mean to you? What effect would those opinions have on a vote in November if that opposing proposition gets on the ballot?
If that’s true--that unregistered voters are fueling this opposition--I’d say it gives the proponents of gay marriage a reason to investigate whether the Nov. ballot measure is properly brought. If each and every signature for the beach booze ban was counted (and the measure failed to make it to the voters) then it’s only fair to assume the same will be done for this amendment.
Plus, if this measure makes it to the ballots, it would be worth my time and even a small donation (all I can afford) to registering any voter in favor of same sex marriage and for advertising costs to oppose an amendment banning equal marriage rights.
From the sounds of conservative talk radio and print, this issue will fuel the 2008 election. As far as voting goes, it will make me more resolute to see pro-same sex marriage folks vote on the proposed amendment.