freeptop: (Default)
[personal profile] freeptop
'Prop. 8 lead attorney Charles Cooper told the judge in closing arguments in June that marriage between heterosexual couples is "fundamental to the survival of the human race."'

This is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard for banning same-sex marriage.
1) Banning same-sex marriage doesn't magically turn homosexual people into heterosexual people. If that were true, there never would have been a movement to make same-sex marriage legal in the first place.
2) Allowing same-sex marriage doesn't prevent people from having kids. Heterosexual couples (and lesbians who make use of a sperm bank) can still make children! With or without marriage, even!

Another argument I thought was pretty ridiculous:
'Prop. 8 backers said in court papers that a stay of Walker's ruling is "essential to averting the harms that would flow from another purported window of same-sex marriage in California."'

Yes, because there was just so much harm that resulted from the previous window of same-sex marriage in California.

I've never seen a single argument against same-sex marriage that wasn't simply discrimination. I'm glad the judge saw it the same way. Now to hope that the appeals courts see this blatantly obvious fact as well.

(All quotes taken from: )

Date: 2010-08-04 10:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
Here's another nice webpage with a breakdown of the relevant facts the judge found.

I think what happened was that the prop 8 people never expected to be the ones arguing the case. Once it went into law, the lawsuit came up against the state. It was Arnie and California who put up their collective hands and said "no way are we defending this!" that really threw the prop 8 folks into a "huh?" mode.

The defense of the case ended up coming down to the folks who put in the most money to get it passed... and they were all the ones who had all the emotional reactions and no logic. All that emotion worked for the people (somebody just finished a two-year study that showed the biggest sway was those stupid ads that said homosexuality would now be taught in schools and do you want that?), and so they took that same argument to the judge. And the judge sat there and looked at them and went "?" Emotional appeals without any facts don't work on the law!
Edited Date: 2010-08-04 11:00 pm (UTC)

Date: 2010-08-04 11:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
I'd call today a win if people were able to get married at this point (same-sex, obviously) ...but until he lifts the stay, I'd say it's only a shoulder shrug and a wink. Here's to the GLBT community getting one step closer to full-fledged first-class citizenship! ^_^

Date: 2010-08-05 02:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile]
This is my favorite set of quotes from the decision yet. The biggest line in the judge's decision:

Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite- sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.


freeptop: (Default)

July 2011


Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 23rd, 2017 09:03 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios