Skip to main content

View Diary: Why was Prop. 8 Unconstitutional? - Brainstorm! (88 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No. That was addressed in the opinion. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    <<A statute that limits marriage to a union of persons of opposite sexes, thereby placing marriage outside the reach of couples of the same sex, unquestionably imposes different treatment <br>on the basis of sexual orientation. In our view, it is sophistic to suggest that this conclusion is avoidable by reason of the circumstance that the marriage statutes permit a gay man or a lesbian to marry someone of the opposite sex, because
    making such a choice would require the negation of the person’s sexual orientation.>>

    They completely dismised this argument. They left no stone unturned, because the bigots left no stones unthrown.

    Tonight I'm going to party like it's 1929.

    by Bensdad on Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 07:35:30 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for the quote (0+ / 0-)

      I recall in May being rather surprised at the depth to which the justices elaborated in their ruling.  Rereading it in light of Prop 8, it all makes sense.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (129)
  • Community (60)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (23)
  • Environment (22)
  • Law (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Science (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Labor (18)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (17)
  • Media (17)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (16)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Economy (15)
  • Republicans (14)
  • Ireland (14)
  • Racism (13)
  • Josh Duggar (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site