Holistic Wisdom Corporation

Gay Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

A California judge is making the state follow Massachusetts in allowing same-sex couples to tie the knot. The debate is predicted to have vigorous court fight before California can implement it. San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer ruled that while withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians has been the status quo, it constitutes discrimination the state can no longer justify.

"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional,'' Kramer wrote. "Simply put, same-sex marriage cannot be prohibited solely because California has always done so before.'' Ushering out a social norm long considered sacred won't happen right away, however. Kramer's decision is stayed automatically for 60 days to allow time for appeals, and conservative groups that oppose same-sex marriages vowed to uphold California's one woman-one man marriage laws.

Supporters of same-sex marriage said they are prepared for a lengthy appeal process, but described Kramer's ruling as an unqualified victory. They compared it to the 1948 state Supreme Court decision that made California the first state to legalize interracial marriage. "Today's ruling is an important step toward a more fair and just California that rejects discrimination and affirms family values for all California families,'' San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said. Jeanne Rizzo, 58, and Pali Cooper, 49, one of the first couples to be denied the chance to marry after the Supreme Court ruling last year, said they were "basking'' in the decision.

Assemblyman Ray Haynes, a Republican, predicted the judge's ruling would spur efforts to amend the state Constitution to ban gay nuptials, as was done in 13 other states last year. Haynes has introduced a bill to place such a constitutional amendment on the November ballot, but if the Democrat-controlled Legislature defeats it, he said gay marriage opponents would accomplish the task themselves by petition. "This ruling demonstrates absolutely what we have to do, which is to amend the Constitution so that we can take the question out of the hands of any judge anywhere at any time,'' he said.

So basically he wants to amend the constitution to discriminate.
Read why gay marriage is a civil right.