Comments about ‘Gay marriage opponents vow to fight California ruling’

The gays have the California Supreme Court on their side. It is highly unlikely the Court is going to listen to pro-traditional family activists. Like the gays they are carrying water for, the Supreme Court is determined to force Californians to accept homosexuality as a "right." Considering their liberal mindset, it would not surprise me if the California Supreme Court ruled that homosexuality was superior to traditional marriage and outlawed traditional marriage. All in the name of "tolerance" and stopping "hate speech." We live in perilous times.

Courts were established to prevent the dictatorship of the majority of voters from trampling on the rights of the minority. What a WONDERFUL concept. This shows our form of government really does work.

HOORAY!

It is about time that someone somewhere did the right thing and brought gay couples into the full blessings of the rights the rest of us have in America. The arguments against gay marriage are so hateful and unfounded that it has surprised me that enlightenment like this decision has taken so long.

I, like Mrs Obama, can now be completly proud to be an American.

These California judges are part of a conspiracy to overthrow the freedom of the US. The real reason they want gay marriage is 2 fold. #1, with less children in the country it is easy to bring their communist buddies armies in hear and defeat us. #2 is that they believe their holy prophet Al Frankenstien Gore and that by having children we are causing global warming and so we are all going to die. So they ACTUALLY believe just opposite of what is true, that a gay union is superior to a heterosexual union. Homosexuality is a perversion, whether born perverted or not, I do not know. But I was born attracted to more than 1 woman (which is also a perversion), does that mean I should have a right to be a polygamist and have dozens and dozens of children. Ohh noo. That would increase global warming and our strength in fighting a war. Heaven forbid. So that clearly explains why the courts are for gay marriage, but not polygamy. You will see the liberal judges fight polygamy tooth and nail. (not that I espouse either).

Okay. If this is going to take an amendment to California's constitution then that is what we will do. I will take my family to Los Angeles to march for traditional marriage. I will march in my hometown. I will talk to my friends and get them to march with me. I am not going to let Bay-area gay activists and a few judges define what constitutes a family. It's an exciting time to be living in California.

California Supreme Court to Voters: Drop Dead.

KUED produced an interesting documentary about Utah in the early 1900s. It mentioned how vocal the LDS church was at the time with regard to marriage. They felt very strongly that the goverment should stay out of marriage. I agree with the LDS church leaders of that era, and I suspect I will agree with future LDS church leaders once they adapt like they have done in the past.

Today I did something I should have done years ago. I mailed in my resignation from the LDS church. After reading the reactions and statements from the church I'm thoroughly disgusted and embarrassed to have ever been a part of such a malicious and controlling organization.


"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -- Mohandas Gandhi

The effort in California to prohibit the legal recognition of sodomite relationships is not over. A California Supreme court ruling on a flawed California Constitution wording is appaling. The California Constitution needs to be amended, obviously. I am hoping the fight will be continued, and another referendum will be on the ballot, or some other remedy pursued that will have the result to block this outrageous decision. It is just another reason to think seriously about who is elected to offices who appoint these wrong headed judges who come up with these decisions. This decision should be appealed to a higher court, and other action taken to block this decision. Everyone knows the definition of marriage....a union between a man and a woman. Any other relationship is deviant behavior, and not worthy in any way to be considered any more than sodomite behavior. These deviant relationships do not rise to the level of legal status, any more than these cults who promote out of wedlock relationships with multiple individuals of either sex. Give me a break. My taxes are not available to these people. They can get their own insurance, and whatever else they are after. San Francisco is crazy.

In a democracy, this kind of ruling isn't right. Instead, we should make sure the majority always rules, regardless of other principles that are at stake. In San Francisco, people want gay marriage, so it should be legal. In Orange County, they don't, so it should be illegal.

Oh, wait, it's "States Rights," not "Trust the Citizens." I forgot.

May I suggest you consider repeating high school?

The Supreme Court Ruled because the previous ban is unconstitutional. You have to take the good with the bad. It is the same constitution that gives people the right to burn the American flag which I think is deplorable, but it is their God given right that is protected by the constitution.

If you don't agree with gay marriage, then don't marry someone of the same sex. but you can't deny someone their GOD given right to choose. Let God be the judge, not you. He is perfect, not the church, the leaders, or it's followers.

Anything out of hate is not of God.

I don't get all the effort to descriminate against a particular group of people who are different. Can you really be a good person / people when putting forth this much effort to descriminate against a particular group of people? Why so angry? Why such hatred? I thought we were all created equal in this country. Sorry- hate to bring that up.

Maherblahblahblah has some pretty crazy ideas. That was some entertaining reading!! Keep it coming, Maherblahblahblah!! There MUST be a conspiracy behind courts giving gays equal rights. It CAN'T be because it is the right thing to do.

Please show me where the CA Supreme Court ruled that "homosexuality was superior to traditional marriage and outlawed traditional marriage"? They did no such thing, go back and read it.

Where is this absurd and bigoted, outrage coming from? People act like gays came into their houses and stole their wedding rings. Let people live like they wish.

It's self-evident that there's no way rationally to assess whether the Court acted correctly if one doesn't bother to find out anything about the California State Constitution and the precedent interpreting and applying it. Anyone who seeks to opine about the propriety of the court's ruling without doing that basic work is simply expressing an opinion about whether they like the outcome as a policy matter, i.e., is being guided by the defining attribute of so-called "judicial activism" (ignoring relevant law in favor of outcome preferences).

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

UtahValleyResident - yes, you pay taxes - as do the majority of U.S. Citizens. In denying the same rights that you enjoy to all other U.S. Citizens you are creating second-class citizens that are not allowed to take advantage of the unalienable Rights set forth in the Declaration of Independence. BTW - the majority of those "wrong headed" Supreme Court Justices in California are Republicans - not Democrats.

Critically, the Court emphasized at the outset that its ruling had nothing to do with the political views of the judges with regard to gay marriage, but rather, was based solely on its legal analysis of past precedent interpreting the relevant provisions of the state Constitution.

Conservatives are well-known for their judgemental, moralyzing and self-centered ways.

Nothing new here folks.

Again I find myself perplexed by posts from people who would undoubted label themselves "conservative", but then decry a actual conservative ruling from a court. The court's positions was that the government has no legal standing to prevent one group of citizens from exercising a right enjoyed by other citizens. Even if the voters pass a law to that effect.

In effect, the court said that the government has no business in the bedrooms of American citizens. Homosexuality may be a perversion; it's practioners may well be immoral, but the government (says the court in this ruling) doesn't have the power to deny rights based upon the consensual sexual activities of adults.

That is a proper conservative ruling. It may be contrary to your personal beliefs and morality, but that's why they're called "personal" beliefs and morality.