CA Says My Family Deserves "Equal Dignity and Respect." Them's Fighting Words to Some!

Is this how people felt when horse drawn carriages were being replaced by motorcars? I feel so lucky to be living in this time when so much progress is happening right before my eyes. 

With fairness in their hearts and the law on their side, the majority Republican California Supreme Court ruled that is was against their Constitution to deny same sex couples the same rights and privileges granted their straight brothers and sisters.

"An individual's sexual orientation -- like a person's race or gender -- does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights," Chief Justice George wrote.  "Reserving the historic designation of 'marriage' exclusively for opposite-sex couples poses at least a serious risk of denying the family relationship of same-sex couples . . . equal dignity and respect..."

Unfortunately, my family doesn't live in CA, we're in Maryland, where the justices of our Supreme Court, just this last September, heartbreakingly upheld a 1973 ban on equal marriage rights, even though it was clear they knew it was wrong. Absent clear evidence of discrimination, the court declared (because, God knows, LGBT people aren't discriminated against in housing, jobs, family court, hospital visitation rights, inheritance laws, tax status, insurance matters or anything like that...) "judicial intervention is generally unwarranted no matter how unwisely we may think a political branch has acted."

In other words, if the people in the majority decides to merrily oppress the minority - have at it! Why would the courts - of all institutions - show an interest in Constitutional principles? Why, the whole thing is just silly.

Luckily, the California Supreme Court still thinks it has a responsibility to enforce equal protection under the law. You go, CASC!

Meanwhile, I can't wait to see that the nutters in CA - not to mention the rest of this great, free Nation, have to say about the prospect of people of whom they don't approve enjoying the same basic marriage rights that only they're entitled to abuse through adultery, divorce and domestic violence.

Already, the charmingly named Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council explains

"the real purpose of this [ruling] is not to serve the interests of same-sex couples; it is to actively affirm the practice of homosexuality." Yes, because LGBT people don't want health care or parenting rights...we just want the CA Supremes to love us.

I didn't see anything on Ann Coulter's or Rush Limbaugh's home pages, but I'm sure that's coming soon.

Meanwhile, check out the results of a poll on what bills itself as a Christian website asking what the "response of Christians" should be to the CA Court's ruling:

I love that the option to support the ruling isn't even given - apparently, they don't think any good Christian could want equal rights for those people, who must never be married so that they're free to become priests and prey on little children while the Church turns a blind eye (I'm just sayin'). 

But I actually agree with the majority here - these concerned citizens should keep themselves busy praying for repentance and leave the political stuff to us secularists who buy into all that "separation of Church and State" nonsense.

Amen to that, brother!

Comments

[Nike Shox CL]

Because all things are difficult, we must word hard than before, then success will not long away from us.

[Joyce19Mitchell]

I think that to receive the home loans from creditors you should present a firm reason. However, once I have received a commercial loan, just because I wanted to buy a building.

[New Balance Shoes]

If children let yourself go doing any matter not to go to work, they learn not literature, music, also will not sports, will that guarantee moral peaked etiquette.Do you think so?

[ugg outlet]

The sun goes to cross the Western sea, leaving its last salutation to the East. O(∩_∩)O~

[supra shoes black]

À mon avis, un gouvernement de sauvegarde / sauvetage / plan de financement n'est pas la solution pour résoudre cette crise, et bravo à la Chambre de ne pas autoriser ce plan pour passer. L'idée de fournir des «bien-être social» de ces institutions financières est une blague (peu importe qu'il s'agisse d'un achat réduit qui peut ou ne peut pas financièrement se rembourser plus tard).

Il existe d'autres alternatives pour résoudre cette crise qui ne charge pas gravement la charge du contribuable américain (la façon dont le plan actuel ne). Mais, espérons que ces alternatives seront examinées rapidement avant qu'il ne s'aggrave ... oh, et que les dirigeants nationaux cherchent la sagesse de Dieu dans ce processus ci-dessus toute autre chose.

[Jordan 23]

Where should their loyalty lie and what should be the consequences of their actions ?

[Jordan 23]

It's so lucky for me to find your blog! So shocking and great!

[cheap ed hardy]

I have receive many information from your article ! Thank you for your sharing ! I am looking forward to your update news about it !

[mbt sandals]

It's so lucky for me to find your blog! So shocking and great!

[Tiffany Jewelry]

Great !It is a great article ! Continue for it , it will be a wonderful survey ! Looking forward to your updated article !http://www.tiffanyandcooutlet.net

[Herve leger]

Most people want to transform this world, but few people want to transform themselves.

[Herve leger]

Because all things are difficult, we must word hard than before, then success will not long away from us.

[sell my house]

I wanted to thank you for this excellent read!! I definitely loved every little bit of it.

[tisa snapback hat]

Thank you to let me see your blog, I love you blog style, very cool.