http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/us...rriage.html?hp

Well, I'm sure there will be another ballot initiative, and a long fight ahead, but I'm very happy. My daughter and her partner, who have been together for 15 years, are feeling a little less discriminated against today, and I'm happy for them. Some of the hoops they have had to jump through just to take of their family is ridiculous. They had a baby in December who died. When my daughter's partner called the insurance company to tell them, they said "We can't talk to you about this; please put your girlfriend on the phone." WHAT?! These women are 40 and 45 and just had their week-old baby die. We have a long way to go in treating each other with dignity and respect, but I'm happy for every baby step in that direction.

__________________
Deja Moo: The feeling I've heard this bull before.

And interestingly, the CA Supremes wrote in the first few pages of their opinion that the legal question before them was different than that in other states because CA already offered legal protections to same sex couples that were "equivalent" to married opposite sex couples. The question, accoring the the CA Supremes, was whether it was constitution to have parallel systems in place (calling it "marriage" for straights and "domestic partnerships" for gays). The Court found that even if it's the same benefits and rights, you can't call it different things.

An appeal to the US Supreme Court is expected, but who knows if they'll even choose to hear it.

__________________

Is marriage that gay to begin with?

Maybe same sex is a better term, because it's the same sex with the same person over and over again.

$100 says the Roberts court won't hear the case and it becomes bench law in CA.

__________________
WHYY pays their CEO $750,000 a year. So WHYY should I renew my membership? Seems they have no problems finding money and spending it unwisely.


And this is why you should donate to PACCA, not PETA:

In September, PETA made headlines in Vermont and across the nation for asking Ben & Jerry's ice cream to use human breast milk in their ice cream, instead of cow milk

right to gay marriage? I don't like that label. I prefer the more general and less discriminating term "right to marriage. or gay right to marriage! Either way, this is great news!! How far before we can be like Canada? or other European countries?

I can't see why the Supreme would want to hear it. It should be a state issue.

__________________
Czar of the 26th Ward.

Well you would think that, but the feds seem to have an interest in it anyway. If marriage is a state issue, then what's up with DOMA? Why would the feds decide to recognize some marriages from MA but not others when deciding who gets to file their income taxes as a married couple?

This might not be the case that the US Supremes hear, but they'll end up hearing ones eventually on the legality of DOMA with regard to federal recognition and with regard to one state's recognition of another state's marriages.

__________________

Hmm. Valid point. They may hear just on the IRS basis (commerce clause here we come!)

__________________
Czar of the 26th Ward.

According to SF City Attorney Dennis Herrera (who argued the case), appeal to US Supremes isn't an option because it's strictly a state law issue.

__________________