California can stay.

[azurelunatic]

Dailykos advises us to read page 36.

Proposition 8 reasonably must be interpreted in a limited fashion as eliminating only the right of same-sex couples to equal access to the designation of marriage, and as not otherwise affecting the constitutional right of those couples to establish an officially recognized family relationship.

If that's not a "fuck you, h8ers" from California's Supreme Court...

It's more slyly dismissive than "here's one in the eye", and will be crushing to the people who want it to be legally called "marriage". But from a human rights standpoint, oh yes baby. Oh yes.

Comments

[leora.livejournal.com]

I really don't like viewing it that way. I'd much rather the government handle the legal contract, which does not need to be called marriage and probably should not be. And leave marriage to the people. The people, not the churches. Let each individual choose what they do and do not call a marriage and whether they are in a marriage.

Then those individuals who want to give their marriage to their church and let their church say whether or not they are married are free to do so. And the rest of us are free to decide our marriages for ourselves.

When people talk about handing it over to the churches, it makes me feel like it's being granted religious significance only, which is unfair. It has a fair bit of secular significance, and that is to the people. This is a power that should be hands of the people for nobody can make a marriage real other than the people in that marriage.

[azurelunatic]

Ah. Yes. Thank you.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Wow. You don't know me, but I need to tell you that I hadn't thought of it that way, and you are so right.