On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, California lawmakers became the first in the United States to approve a bill recognizing same-sex marriages. Assembly Bill (AB) 849, "The Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act," authored by California Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) passed 41-35. The California Senate approved it 21-15 last week. The bill, which makes the law defining marriage gender-neutral (gender was not placed into California’s marriage laws until 1977), does not require any church or other religious organization to recognize or perform same-sex marriages.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Matthew T. Sussman
Agreed, by my logic.
I don't think the 14th (?) Amendment outlaws same-sex marriage either. But I don't think it's the green light.
It couldn't be a more difficult decision.
27 - billy
put it this way, the only way practical joe's argument is tenable is if a gay person becomes straight, then they can marry a woman. thats what he said.
EPC = man/woman
so he doesnt want epc, he wants epc, IF, a gay person becomes straight first.
he has no right to do that. it isnt his business. he wants to change another person to fit his religion then give them epc if they do it.
on the contrary, each person has epc regardless of joe's religious view.
very difficult though, indeed
28 - Matthew T. Sussman
I agree it shouldn't be about religion.
But at the same time man I can't follow your last comment.
Why are we still talking about him when we already agree on it?
29 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Matthew T. Sussman wrote, "Or, people are just uncomfortable with the idea."
And that's the heart of the matter, isn't it? Some people are just uncomfortable with the idea for various reasons, but they cannot come up with any sort of reasoning that truly justifies a continued legal ban on the civil recognition of same-sex marriages.
However, throughout its short history, America has maintained a steady trend of always broadening the recognition of civil rights, once they were discovered. Remember, back in the 1950s, a lot of people in the South were extremely uncomfortable with the idea of integration. And can you imagine the discomfort felt by the menfolk when the womenfolk first started demanding our right to vote?
BC has two sidebar div classes lsidebar and rsidebar. I just take the BC defaults, but I do agree that a contrasting background color would be more attractive.
30 - Matthew T. Sussman
Exactly. It's discomfort. And I think it works both ways.
And for me, it's discomfort to be for same-sex marriage. It's also discomfort for me to endorse legislation banning it. But thankfully the legislation came through a state proposition, and I had the power to veto it. (But it was passed anyway.)
When one side slaps a bigotry label -- a very serious accusation -- on a person who has a gut feeling about something, then the labeled argument retreats from discussion because they don't want to be attacked for something they feel off the cuff.
Granted, when one plays the morality card, it just energizes the pro-same-sex marriage crowd to validate themselves through any means necessary.
___
Good stuff to know. I might try a super contrasting one sometime. I'm thinking FFFFFF on 000000 (black on white).
31 - practical joe
If a gay family has equal rights under the law...
What rights does a polygamist family have?
32 - Margaret Romao Toigo
My discomfort is in my knowledge that I am currently enjoying civil rights that are arbitrarily denied to some of my fellow Americans. I feel so very undemocratic because -- other than being born heterosexual -- I did nothing to deserve my special status.
I am also uncomfortable knowing that millions of children of gay and lesbian parents are denied the protections provided to married families because their parents' civil right to marriage is not legally recognized.
Indeed, this is a "hot button" issue. As such, people on both sides of it are going to speak passionately and, sometimes, imprudently.
Yes, the "B" word and the "M" word get thrown around a lot, but that is because they have been applicable in some cases.
Some people can be rather hateful and intolerant in the expression of their views and they must be called out for the sake of "justice for all," which is America's primary moral along with, "all men are created equal."
33 - Matthew T. Sussman
A good note to leave on.
I'm no expert on the subject, but I know what I feel. And I have a vote. That's all America asks of me.
Keep fighting for them, I guess. It's not my battle. I just don't care about the issue that much. I worry more about people whose spouses commit adultery.
34 - RogerMDillion
"Arnold's approval rating is in the sewer because the liberal media has aired dozens of ads just full of lies."
No, it's because he hasn't accomplished much since being elected and the state has the same problems it had when it voted Davis out.
You don't get to use "we" when talking about how California votes when you aren't eligble to vote. And no one believes you have a girlfriend.
35 - Luke
There's nothing unfair about men not being about to marry other men, because straight men aren't allowed to do that either.
36 - Nick
I myself feel that it is unfair for a straight male to be trapped in a straight male body.. but that's just life...
37 - Luke
It's also unfair for people who happen to be sexually attracted to animals, to not be allowed to marry an animal.
38 - Nick
Most men are animals.. at least, the fun ones!
39 - Nick
Mind you, I think we are moving towards the consensus that life ain't fair...
40 - red state
Bigot: def. a conservative winning an argument with a liberal
Now that we got that cleared up let's talk about gay marriage.
The bottomline is that the Majority of Americans don't want gay marriage to be legalized. There have been ballot initiatives in 17 states to amend the state constituion to ban gay marriage. The people voted and all 17 amendments passed. And some were in very liberal states such as Oregon and Hawaii.
But the far left keeps trying to ram thier agenda down the throat of the American people through the courts. That's the only reason gay marriage was legallized in MAssachusetts. The courts wanted it not the people.
However witht the upcoming confirmation of John Roberts and then another conservative justice it will soon get much more difficult for the heathen left to further thier warped, perverted degenarate agenda.
41 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Matthew T. Sussman wrote, "I worry more about people whose spouses commit adultery."
Isn't it ironic how the so-called "protectors and defenders of marriage" fight tooth and nail to prevent the recognition of same-sex marriage while pretty much giving adultery -- a crime that actually violates other peoples' rights -- a wink and a nod?
42 - Silas Kain
The bottomline is that the Majority of Americans don't want gay marriage to be legalized. There have been ballot initiatives in 17 states to amend the state constituion to ban gay marriage. The people voted and all 17 amendments passed. And some were in very liberal states such as Oregon and Hawaii.
The bottom line is that I don't think many Americans would care one way or the other if it weren't for peer pressure. Support gay rights, you're labeled a queer, fag or, God forbid, liberal. The rights of a minority must be protected from the majority.
43 - Margaret Romao Toigo
To be sure, red state appears to be in serious need of a civics lesson or two.
And I always wonder about people who complain about other people trying to ram things down their throats. It is it genuine paranoia, repressed oral fantasies or just another silly cliche?
44 - Silas Kain
I'll take Repressed Oral Fantasies for $200, Ms. Toigo.
45 - red state
Civics lesson? why?
I stated a fact. 17 states have posed bans on gay marriage in the form of constitutional amendments and all have passed.
Therefore it is a logical assumption that most Americans aren't in favor of gay marriage.
If you don't like that this has happened but don't say I need a civics lesson when I state facts and you state opinion
46 - billy
most Americans aren't in favor of gay marriage.
thats the problem with republicans, they think because people are against something in a poll they can interfere with others lives and telll them what to do. that isnt the way america works. republicans want a nanny state but it wont happen that way.
99.99% could be in favor of killing all cats, is it going to happen?
you dont like gay marriage? too bad? dont have one. kick your kids out of the house if you dont like it. do as you wish if you are a bigot.
it simply does not matter one bit what other people think of gay marriage. it has no relevance to the epc. the epc clause of the constitution doesnt rely on a poll.
47 - Matthew T. Sussman
Maragaret, I'm totally with you.
The number one threat to marriage is adultery. And nobody talks about it because it's understood not to do it. But it's rampant and needs to stop.
48 - with karate ill kik ur ass
i agree billy
its not like ppl r forcing them to be married ot the same sex.
49 - red state
Billy once again [edited].
I'm not referring to polls.
I'm referring to initiatives that were actually voted on by Ameircan citizens.
And you seem to liek to refer to the constituion when you make your argument Billy boy. Well the constituion's intent was to have the people express thier will fairly in a democratic form.
This is exactly what happened in the states that banned gay marriage. The people VOTED on it Billy. In the one state where gay marriage is legal it was decided by a handful of people in the courts not the citizens.
Keep on making ignorant remarks though billy. When you can refute an argument you resort to calling the person a bigot. Typical left winger.
Let me ask you a question Billy. You and your left wing pals have been saying the same horseshit for the past 10 years. Where has it got you?
Who won the pres elction in 2000?
Who won the pres election in 2004?
Who has had control of congress the past 12 years?
What party do most governors belong to?
Huh Billy boy? Seems liek your tired left wing tactics of calling all republicans racists and bigots hasn't worked out too well has it?
50 - billy
it isnt a tactic to call you a bigot, you are a bigot as you have proven here and with regard to the black man who criticized bush. facts arent tactics.
similarly, peoples rights arent up for a poll OR a vote. you simply cant vote away gay peoples rights no matter how much you bitch. that is why it was declared unconstitutional in california.
51 - with karate ill kik ur ass
but y R ppl voting aginst gay marriages?
52 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Civics 101
In America, the recognition of civil rights is cannot be finally decided by majority vote. The mob does not rule here.
America is a democratic nation, to be sure. However, our government is not a true democracy, but rather a representative constitutional republic with a three-branch system (executive, legislative and judicial) of checks and balances that keep the tyranny of the mob (a.k.a the majority) in check.
Read the Constitution sometime, red state, it's only 4 hand-written pages long, you know.
53 - RED STATE
Civics 101A
Nowhere in the constituion does it say that gay marriage is a civil right.
Therefore it is up for the American public what constitutes a civil right. Just because you lefties say gay marriage is a civil right does not make it so.
That's what you do. You take an issue you can't win with support of the American people and turn it into a "civil rights" issue.
The Democratic party has become so beholden to far far left special interest groups that the avergae American wants nothing to do with it.
And you left wingers on here are just the vocal village idiots that make up that fringe minority.
Seriously... you guy's repeaet the same tired bullshit over and over and over 'WAR FOR OIL" RIGHT TO CHOOSE WOMENS LIVES AT STAKE" "ALL REPUBS ARE RLIGIOUS, HOMOPHOBE RACIST NUTS" ETC ETC ETC
IT AINT WORKING! REPUBLICAN PRES
REPUBLICAN CONGRESS. MOST GOVS ARE REPUBLICAN. GAY MARRIAGE AMENDMENTS GETTING PASSED LEFT AND RIGHT. SOON TO BE 2 CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES ON THE SUPREME COURT.....
IF THE BEST YOU GUYS CAN DO IS HOWARD DEAN, HILLARY CLINTON, CINDY SHEEHAN, AL SHARPTON AND JOHN KERRY ALL HOPE IS LOST....NOT THAT I MIND, I HOPE YOU GUYS NEVER WAKE UP AND REALIZE IT AINT WORKING AND YOUR REPS ARE THE SCUM OF THE EARTH
54 - Matthew T. Sussman
Wow.
This got ugly fast.
55 - Margaret Romao Toigo
I despise partisanship (the elevation of party over principle to the detriment of both) no matter from which side of the aisle it spews talking points and other forms of tedium.
I am a non-partisan libertarian capitalist who understands that placing arbitrary limits upon civil rights diminishes economic opportunity while the expansion of civil rights creates economic opportunity.
What sort of Republican/conservative promotes anti-business ideas like opposing the civil recognition of same-sex marriages?
Social authoritarianism is anti-capitalism by default, you know.
And people who believe that the majority rules in America need to hit those Civics 101 textbooks.
56 - Matthew T. Sussman
The partisanship is deafening, and if more people presented the argument like you, Margaret, I think it would be taken more seriously.
Make the case a positive one, not prose like "well I'm not a bigot and I stand up for the little guy." Comparisons to African-American rights or women's suffrage fall short. Way short.
Say things like "This is good for the economy." "This promotes growth." And you are, so that's good.
And I don't think marriage laws are relegated to a Republican way of thinking. Are there not a good chunk of Democrats also in favor of it? Because you have to address all of them.
57 - Silas Kain
Wow. This got ugly fast.
Nothing like discussing homosexuality with a right wing male, Matthew. It just brings out the Queen in them.
58 - red state
How is ooposing gay marriage anti-capitalism?
That one needs some explaining Margaret.
And also... I wouldn't be so partisan if the left in this country weren't such ammoral, disgusting heathens.
The left wants to kill babies for profit. Don't give me the bullshit argument that a baby shouldn't be born if the mother isn't ready to have a child argument. The bottom line is it's a life and there are no garentees for security or happiness for any of us before we are born. You either choose to have the baby and give the greatest gift any person can give to another (life) or you don't and you murder it. It's that simple and all the "nuanced spin" you so called pro choicers want to throw at the issue doesn't change it. yes I'm a horrible evil republican because I believe that life begins at conception and we should do what we can to protect the lives of innocent babies as opposed to killing them becuase it may cramp the mother's lifestyle or there are no assurances that the baby's life will be all smiles and sunshine.....oooohhhh horrible me
Also the people in control of the left and democratic party today will do whatever they can to defend the rights of the most vile creatures in society while the victim suffers. Take for example child molesters... the aclu, a leftist group is more often concerned with the civil rights of of a murdering pedophile than they are of the victim when it comes to punishing the pedophile and tracking them upon thier release from prison. Liberals say they did thier time they deserve thier freedom.....only we all know that the repeat offense rate is almost 100% upon release.
Lefties say they are for minorities and then label any minority who dares espouse conservative values or vote republican "a token" or a "race traitor" what could be more racist than saying if an individual belongs to a certain race they must think a certain way about scoial and political issues?
So you see I am partisan out of necessity. The Democratic party of today has been seized by far leftists who are trying to destroy everything that was ever good, moral and traditional about this nation.
If you have a problem with that Maria maybe you had better take a good look at organizations like the aclu and see what they are trying to do to this country.
59 - billy
no need to argue much further. red state proved why the religious right are seen as such nutcases by his own words. my advice, dont like gay marriage. keep your mouth shut about it, because its inevitable.
60 - Matthew T. Sussman
Threads like this make people like me who are divided on the issue stay divided.
61 - billy
and you are on the right? if you dont like that why do you keep associating with a group, as expressed by redstate, that are so out of touch with reality and so filled with hatred toward this country?
62 - practical joe
Margaret pontificates:
"And people who believe that the majority rules in America need to hit those Civics 101 textbooks."
Please tell us which textbooks this quote came from...
If the majority doesn't rule -- who does?
63 - Steve S
Whether gay marriage is inevitable or not, put aside for just a minute and consider this: There are already up to 6 million kids living with gay parents. Gay families are already created, they aren't some future prospect, they are here and now. And every single one of these families is deprived of the protections that so many take for granted.
Should a spouse die, there is no guarantee that the children of that family will receive any federal assistance like social security payments or it's equivalent. Whether it's veterans benefits, qualifying for assistance in some form or just the family recognition for medical purposes, these children have all of it stripped away because some people disapprove of the only families they have ever known.
It is heartwrenching and horrible to know that America would subject it's children to such treatment because a majority would vote that way. America isn't mob rule, one cannot vote away the rights of another, if so, then it isn't America anymore.
The recognition of gay marriage should be inevitable, because the need for recognition is here and now. I hope and pray that America comes around and quits allowing these religious bigots to oppress and ostracize because they like to pick and choose which portions of the bible to construct a society by.
64 - Bob A. Booey
"Social authoritarianism is anti-capitalism by default"
Nope, there are lots of examples to disprove this point throughout the world, China being the biggest today.
Capitalism is not some magic bullet that frees people from state control. Any respectable social scientist who studies democratization could tell you that the Lipset thesis about the development of a capitalist middle-class is only a very impartial explanation at best compared to the historical record.
That is all.
65 - Steve S
In comment 59, red state points out that he has an agenda. And that agenda is to be against anything from the left. So there is no possible rationale, no possible debate, no possible discourse that can achieve any benefit whatsoever, in a discussion with him. His mind is closed, he has said so.
So you see I am partisan out of necessity
He wants to disagree with the Left, not because he believes in the values of the Right, but because he wants to oppose the Left. He wants to disagree with ALL of the Left because he disagrees with most of the Left.
Read comment 59 to see if I am right. He is closed for debate. Period.
66 - Margaret Romao Toigo
The debate over the civil recognition of same-sex marriages is definitely a bi-partisan one.
However, it's not so much a matter of Democrats versus Republicans or right versus left so much as it is libertarianism versus authoritarianism -- and we all know that each side of that ol' aisle is populated by liberal and conservative flavors of libertarians and authoritarians.
Republicans/conservatives are most often perceived as being pro-capitalism, while Democrats/liberals are usually seen as being less so.
Opposing the civil recognition of same-sex marriage is anti-capitalist because all aspects of marriage (engagements, weddings, homes, mortgages, insurance, etc.) create business opportunities for the providers of numerous goods and services that are directly and indirectly associated with marriage and family.
To arbitrarily deny the civil right to marriage to certain segments of the population deprives society of the economic advantages that occur when a larger percentage of the population is composed of married families.
red state wrote, "I wouldn't be so partisan if the left in this country weren't such ammoral, disgusting heathens."
You're kidding, right? Probably not. But one can hope, can't one?
67 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Bob A. Booey wrote, "Capitalism is not some magic bullet that frees people from state control."
Of course it isn't. However, social authoritarianism does diminish capitalism because state control deprives the people of economic opportunity.
68 - Bob A. Booey
Margaret, you're more likely to find quasi-authoritarian regimes with private sector capitalism than state-controlled planned economies now. There are no Stalinist economies other than North Korea these days.
Authoritarian capitalism has become the happy medium in too much of the developing world these days and there's nothing incompatible about the two whatsoever. In fact, authoritarianism and Cold War geopolitics helped make capitalism possible in much of Latin America and Africa. Technology made capitalism a more efficient answer to produce wealthier, ordered societies for Asian regimes.
That is all.
69 - Margaret Romao Toigo
practical joe asked, "If the majority doesn't rule -- who does?"
Ultimately, the Constitution rules here.
America is not a true democracy, it is a representative constitutional republic with a three-branch system of government (executive, legislative and judicial) that provides checks and balances to keep the tyranny of the majority in check.
I would be really interested in learning which Civics textbook says that America is governed by majority rule.
70 - Nola
The fear here is allowing monogamy to be associated with gay people. It is a fear of associated positive words, like monogamy, marriage, and family, with what conservatives feel is immoral conduct.
Notice a conservative used the word
"prostitution" to define the bill.
Beware, these are word-game tactics like the anti-sodomy laws Republicans instituted in the South.
While abstinence, monogamy, and marriage go hand-in-hand, conservatives are trying to PREVENT the spread of these moral concepts during an AIDS and divorce crisis in the United States.
This uncovers conservatives' real intentions of withholding human rights to label homosexuality as a disease not a normal lifestyle. The less human rights conservatives allow gays, the less normal their lifestyles will feel an appear.
71 - Anthony Grande
O.k. all you liberals listen and get this through your heads: The people of California have SPOKEN and they overwhelmingly voted against Gay Marriage. WE DO NOT WANT IT, SO LEAVE US ALONE [Edited]
That little part should be case closed, but you libs are trying to shove down our throats. Why must you do this???
Expecially you libs not from California.
72 - Steve S
The wheels on the bus go round and round....um, Anthony, I believe there were about 10 previous comments that answered that for you.
73 - Steve S
Notice how giving my family equal recognition from the government is written as shoving something down his throat.
74 - Margaret Romao Toigo
What exactly are these "libs" trying to shove down your throat, Mr. Grande?
75 - billy
The people of California have SPOKEN and they overwhelmingly voted against Gay Marriage
here ill answer him again. that vote was a decade ago, and since then it has been shown clearly that you CANNOT VOTE AWAY the rights of a minority you dont like, any more than you could vote to bring back slavery.
It isnt constitutional to vote to make gays second class citizens. the courts invalidated that vote for that very reason. activist right wingers need to stop trying to have votes to harm gays.
that vote is null and void no matter how much you trumpet it.