Can't say I'm surprised.....

[patgund]

Saddened, yes. Sickened, yes. But not surprise.

Calif. Court Voids S.F. Same-Sex Marriages

*sigh*

Would be so nice if my friends in same-sex relationships had the exact same right to marry that *I* have.

Hopefully, once people realize that Mass. legalization of same-sex marriages wasn't the end of the world, it will start a trend that allows them in this state as well.

My heart goes out to those that were just told that their marriage was "invalid" though.

Comments

[catmcroy.livejournal.com]

Agreed. Though several Canadian provinces do allow gay marriage now (BC, Ontario and Quebec) :D Another reason I'm proud to be Canadian *hums a bit of the Worms*

[tepintzin.livejournal.com]

I'm actually angrier at the City of San Francisco for issuing these marriage licenses than at the government of California for declaring them void.

If you recall, a few years ago, a California bill to declare marriage between a man and a woman. The chimps won this round, sadly, and the fact is that the law of California says marriages are for hets only. Yes, I know it's a bad and offensive law, but law it is. I cannot believe that San Francisco knew they didn't have the legal right to issue these marriage licenses, but did it anyway not out of an interest in egalitarianism but because they had dollar signs in their eyes. I'm just cynical that way.

Those marriage licenses never *were* valid, and if I were a California gay I wouldn't even have bothered. I'd take my honey and get married twice, once in Massachussetts and once in Toronto. Those actually are legal, though not recognized here.

A friend of mine back in Montreal asked what my level of activism is for same-sex marriage here. My answer: none. There's no point. When the parties involved can't be bothered fighting the fight where it should be fought, Sacramento, why should I care?

(Mood: bitter about being moved from Montreal, where I was very happy, to HERE.)

[tepintzin.livejournal.com]

Edit: I cannot believe that San Francisco DIDN'T KNOW they didn't have the right, etc.

[mareklamo.livejournal.com]

Think of it as an act of civil disobedience.

[tepintzin.livejournal.com]

But I can't think of it that way. All I can think about is those happy couples, paying $85 each for a license that many I'm sure believed were valid, when in fact the city was just taking advantage of them for their money. And SF made a FORTUNE on this.

[firedrake-mor.livejournal.com]

It's interesting, one gay acquaintance of mine noted in his LJ: "If some judge is going to refuse my right to marry my husband, I shall refuse to recognize his right to take that decision away from me." He and his husband were at a news conference today in Orange County about the issue.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The government has no business in determining gender or -number- of partners in a marriage. Both of those items are matters of conscience and frequently, religion, and thus any legislation regarding those issue violates the principle of separation of church and state.

This, too, shall pass -- rather like a kidney stone, but it SHALL pass.