The California Supreme Court will hear three hours of legal arguments this morning over a constitutional challenge to the state's ban on same-sex marriage.
In a long-awaited showdown, the seven justices of the state's high court will review a divided 2006 state appeals court ruling that upheld California laws restricting marriage to a union between a man and a woman.
During today's hearing in San Francisco, the Supreme Court will hear from civil rights lawyers for gay couples who argue that the same-sex marriage ban violates their equal protection rights because they do not get the same treatment as heterosexual couples. The San Francisco city attorney's office, led by chief deputy city attorney Therese Stewart, will also argue in favor of gay marriage.
Deputy Attorney General Christopher Krueger will lead the state's defense of the current law, arguing that gay couples already essentially enjoy equal treatment because of California's strong domestic partners law.
In addition, conservative organizations opposed to same-sex marriage will argue that traditional marriage would be undermined if California permits gay couples to wed. Lawyers for those groups, led by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, insist that marriage is meant to foster procreation and therefore must be limited to heterosexual couples.
The justices have 90 days from today's arguments to rule in the case, and they typically take most or all of that time when addressing hot-button issues.
Same-Sex Marriage Debate Shifts to California
The national gay marriage debate shifts to California on Tuesday, as the state's highest court hears arguments on the constitutionality of a law banning same sex marriage that was used to end a wedding spree of thousands of gay and lesbian couples in San Francisco, a city famed for its progressive attitudes.
Four years after gay rights advocates sued to overturn the ban, the California Supreme Court is set to hear three hours of oral arguments in six separate cases being heard jointly.
''I don't think it's any secret that people look to California as being a beacon, whatever the issue, and having a tremendous influence in shaping the terms of the debate across the country. That is particularly important with the issue of marriage equality,'' said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who is representing the city in a lawsuit supporting gay marriage.
The cases were filed after the court stopped the same-sex wedding spree that developed here in the winter of 2004 at the direction of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. More than 4,000 couples exchanged vows at City Hall months before gay marriage became legal in Massachusetts, although the high court ultimately voided the unions.
In a long-awaited showdown, the seven justices of the state's high court will review a divided 2006 state appeals court ruling that upheld California laws restricting marriage to a union between a man and a woman.
During today's hearing in San Francisco, the Supreme Court will hear from civil rights lawyers for gay couples who argue that the same-sex marriage ban violates their equal protection rights because they do not get the same treatment as heterosexual couples. The San Francisco city attorney's office, led by chief deputy city attorney Therese Stewart, will also argue in favor of gay marriage.
Deputy Attorney General Christopher Krueger will lead the state's defense of the current law, arguing that gay couples already essentially enjoy equal treatment because of California's strong domestic partners law.
In addition, conservative organizations opposed to same-sex marriage will argue that traditional marriage would be undermined if California permits gay couples to wed. Lawyers for those groups, led by the Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, insist that marriage is meant to foster procreation and therefore must be limited to heterosexual couples.
The justices have 90 days from today's arguments to rule in the case, and they typically take most or all of that time when addressing hot-button issues.
Same-Sex Marriage Debate Shifts to California
The national gay marriage debate shifts to California on Tuesday, as the state's highest court hears arguments on the constitutionality of a law banning same sex marriage that was used to end a wedding spree of thousands of gay and lesbian couples in San Francisco, a city famed for its progressive attitudes.
Four years after gay rights advocates sued to overturn the ban, the California Supreme Court is set to hear three hours of oral arguments in six separate cases being heard jointly.
''I don't think it's any secret that people look to California as being a beacon, whatever the issue, and having a tremendous influence in shaping the terms of the debate across the country. That is particularly important with the issue of marriage equality,'' said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who is representing the city in a lawsuit supporting gay marriage.
The cases were filed after the court stopped the same-sex wedding spree that developed here in the winter of 2004 at the direction of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. More than 4,000 couples exchanged vows at City Hall months before gay marriage became legal in Massachusetts, although the high court ultimately voided the unions.
1 comment:
The Christians need Fred Phelps Instead of Mat Staver's Promotion of Separation of Church and State
By Glynis Bethel
Thank GOD for Fred Phelps and Sally Kern of Oklahoma City and the reports that she had the courage to speak the truth of GOD'S word about the sodomites or "HOMOSEXUAL'S" wicked lifestyle.
On the contrary, I watched the California Supreme Court arguments featuring Mat Staver and I was appalled. I could not believe that someone, who has Mat Staver's background, would go out of his way to LEAVE GOD OUT of his arguments which made his foundation obsolete.
Mat Staver looked and sounded like a FOOL! In the Bible, GOD told Jeremiah to speak ALL that He told him to speak or GOD would confound him. Thank GOD Jeremiah obeyed GOD. Unfortunately Mat Staver DID NOT.
Speaking of lukewarm, Mat Staver stayed in his comfort zone and refused to be hot like Judge Roy Moore..."MOORE OF GOD."
I have emailed Mat Staver about his double-mindedness in refusing to do his legal arguments using the Holy Bible as his foundation.
The Apostle Paul stated that his words were NOT of man's wisdom, but based on the power of GOD to paraphrase.
The HOLY BIBLE states that marriage is honorable in all, but wh0remongers and adulterers, GOD will judge. Also, GOD ordained that a man would leave his father and mother in order to be joined with his wife and the male and the female were naked and not ashamed. For starters, Mat Staver could have argued I Corinthians Chapter 7 which states that to avoid fornication that every man should have his own WIFE and that every woman should have her own HUSBAND.
Most importantly, the summation is gay marriages are wrong because GOD states that it is wrong in the HOLY BIBLE. If those sodomites could quote Shakespeare within their arguments, why didn't Mat Staver quote GOD?
This is what the Bible is speaking of when it warns us that if we deny CHRIST before man that CHRIST would deny us before his FATHER. What are you afraid of Mat...being debarred?
It is ironic that Mat Staver promotes that there is no separation of church and state, but by his own actions, he promotes constant separation of church and state.
Mat Staver, in closing, please make up your mind and choose this day WHO you will serve and if you will one day decide to answer the great commission to go into all of the world and PREACH THE GOSPEL TO EVERY CREATURE which does not exempt plaintiffs, judges, magistrates, bailiffs, media, sodomites, etc.
Prophetess Glynis Bethel
REPENT or BURN in HELL Ministries
12724-D Highway 90
Loxley, Alabama 36551
251-964-9955
Post a Comment