Doors Floors and More

Cited: Divorce Mag

The next battle in California’s ongoing war over legalizing same-sex marriages will be decided in a California federal appeals court. Early in August a federal court ruling declared that the states “Proposition 8″ was unconstitutional. The proposition is a voter-led ban on same-sex marriages.

Since then, lawyers on both sides of the divisive issue have scrambled to get their arguments before the 9th Circuit appeals court, which is scheduled on August 18 to render a decision on whether to block or enforce Proposition 8.

However, even before the court has rendered their decision, both sides are aware that this is not the end. Proposition 8 lawyers have declared that if the same-sex ban is not re-enforced, they’ll take their appeal up to the US Supreme Court — guaranteeing months of legal battles to come before the smoke finally clears on this incredibly contentious issue.

As reported on August 16, earlier this month critics of California’s famous (or infamous) Proposition 8 celebrated a dramatic victory when a San Francisco judge declared the 2008 voter-led ban on gay marriage as unconstitutional. The ruling seemed to pave the way for the state to resume certifying gay marriage, barring an 11th hour effort by Proposition 8 prosecutors to the appeal the move — and, shockingly to some, the move has paid off; at least for now.

That’s because yesterday, the 3-judge panel on the 9th Circuit appeals court reversed the August 4th ruling. Instead, the panel will review briefs throughout the fall and resume hearing the appeal in the week of December 6th.

While this by no means put the matter to rest for either side in the debate — since the ruling still has to happen, eventually — it’s nevertheless being hailed as a major legal victory by those supporting Proposition 8.

“California voters spoke clearly on Prop. 8, and we’re glad to see their votes will remain valid while the legal challenges work their way up through the courts,” said Andy Pugno, general counsel for ProtectMarriage, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times. “Invalidating the people’s vote based on just one judge’s opinion would not have been appropriate and would have shaken the people’s confidence in our elections and the right to vote itself.”

“The concern is that rushing things to the Supreme Court could lead to an adverse result [for supporters of gay marriage.],” said Loyola law professor Rick Hasen. “If this case takes another year to get to the U.S. Supreme Court, there could be more states that adopt same-sex marriage and more judicial opinions that reach that conclusion.”

It appears that some experts suggest that celebrating a victory too soon, legally speaking, may be premature. In fact, in the long run, it could be there for supporters of gay marriage.

————————————————————————

My Take: I do not see the problem with allowing gay marriages, at least, not from a legal standpoint. This is one of those cases where religion and government are being mixed. Again, from a legal standpoint it is discrimination against same-sex couples. The guys say this because, we are saying by law they are not good enough to marry. That is simple discrimination.

From my point of view, an Austin TX divorce attorney or a Nashville TN divorce lawyer would be able to explain, on paper, a marriage is between two adults. For example, if you have two people named Jamie Jones and Jaime Jones, how can you tell which is female and which is male? I do not believe you can! Both first names can be pronounced in the same way. Besides, what goes on behind closed doors is nobody’s business. Of course, the only time this rule does not hold up is when a crime is being committed such as physical abuse or murder.

From a religious standpoint, people should not be trying to force their beliefs on other people. If people think that same-sex couples will influence their children, to keep them away from the couple. Here again, what happens between a couple behind closed doors is their business and between them and God, nobody else!

Like heterosexual couples, same-sex couples probably being eating either a collaborative lawyer, an Austin family law attorney or even Nashville bankruptcy attorneys sometime in the future. That seems to make them just like every other couple in America. This tells me that banning same-sex marriages is not only discrimination, is trying to force religious beliefs on other people. The latter is why this country was even created in the first place. To stop others from forcing religious beliefs on citizens!

————————————————————————-

Other Resources

Wall Decals

A wall decals company has a lot of wall letters or words and decal designs to choose from. But if you have seen vinyl lettering or decals somewhere else and they don’t have something similar, email them with the link and we can custom design something just for you AND match or beat the price!