Gay marriage ruling

Matthew Hoy
By Matthew Hoy on May 16, 2008

Yesterday, the California Supreme Legislature Court decided that gays and lesbians -- but not bigamists, polygamists, first-cousins, brothers and sisters -- can marry.

This may not last, as an initiative to overturn the decision is likely to make it on the November ballot. There's extensive, thoughtful coverage of the issue over at National Review's "Bench Memos" blog.

However, I wanted to highlight just one line in the increasingly centrist San Diego Union-Tribune's editorial on the subject.

Our view remains that current law allowing homosexuals to enter into civil unions is preferable to same-sex marriage. But that did not stop us from opposing Proposition 22 in 2000 as divisive and dubious....

Prop. 22 simply wrote into law (not the state constitution) the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

If Prop. 22 was divisive, what the heck was yesterday's court ruling.

And, in light of yesterday's ruling, it doesn't seem so dubious anymore.

Tags

@ZebraFactCheck @PolitiFactBias The majority of posts I saw talking about the 1% were noting the accurate 40% stat. It's telling PolitiFact went searching for the claim they could swat down as "false," rather than fact-checking the accurate claim as "true." Reminds me of this exchange https://twitter.com/fact_meta/status/1431378857798488068

MetaFactGroup@fact_meta

@kentorianu @ZebraFactCheck @PolitiFact Since there's concern about bad faith arguments, I'll make it simple.

Vaccinated people can spread variants. True or False?

Load More...

Calendar

May 2008
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Archives

Categories

pencil linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram