LIBERTY: why the state should withhold the institution of marriage because of a couple’s sexual orientation

Friday, May 16, 2008

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D90MQEEO0&show_article=1

Gay marriage opponents vow to fight Calif. ruling
May 16 11:21 AM US/Eastern
By LISA LEFF Associated Press Writer

***Begin Quote***

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) – Even as same-sex couples across California begin making plans to tie the knot, opponents are redoubling their efforts to make sure wedding bells never ring for gay couples in the nation’s most populous state.

*** and ***

With a stroke of a pen Thursday, the Republican-dominated court swept away decades of tradition and said there was no legally justifiable reason why the state should withhold the institution of marriage because of a couple’s sexual orientation.

The 4-3 opinion written by Chief Justice Ronald George said domestic partnerships that provide many of the rights and benefits of matrimony are not enough.

“In contrast to earlier times, our state now recognizes that an individual’s capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual’s sexual orientation,” George wrote for the majority in ringing language that delighted gay rights activists.

Gay marriage opponents, meanwhile, derided the ruling as an example of judicial overreaching in which the opinions of a few justices trumped the will of Californians.

The last time the state’s voters were asked to express their views on same-sex marriage at the ballot box was in 2000, the year after the Legislature enacted the first of a series of laws awarding spousal rights to domestic partners.

Proposition 22, which strengthened the state’s 1978 one-man, one-woman marriage law with the words “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” passed with 61 percent of the vote.

The Supreme Court’s ruling Thursday struck down both statutes.

***End Quote***

With all due respect to all the passions involved, the State has NO BUSINESS in the regulating of marriage!

# # # # #