Now on ScienceBlogs: Oh, no! School wi-fi is making our kids sick! (2012 edition)

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Thoughts from Kansas

You will notice that it lacks definiteness; that it lacks purpose; that it lacks coherence; that it lacks a subject to talk about; that it is loose and wabbly; that it wanders around; that it loses itself early and does not find itself any more. --Mark Twain

Search

Profile

Josh at work Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at the National Center for Science Education. He is formerly a doctoral candidate at the University of Kansas, in the department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. When not battling creationists or modeling species ranges, he writes about developments in progressive politics and the sciences.

The opinions expressed here are his own, do not reflect the official position of the NCSE. Indeed, older posts may no longer reflect his own official position.

Sb/DonorsChoose Drive


Thanks!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Subscribe to TfK:

Accolades

Best of Kansas City

Good posts from history

The Birth of Intelligent Falling

A failure of Intelligent Design

Why it's called Intelligent Design Creationism

Write a letter to the editor

My photo albums.

Support TfK

Buy me things from my Amazon.com wishlist.

Buy yourself things!

Search Now:
Search Amazon.com
Add yourself to the Frappr map!
Check out our Frappr or add yourself to it!

    follow me on Twitter

    « Safety first | Main | Kansas politics in brief »

    Marriage equality in California

    Category: Policy and Politics
    Posted on: May 15, 2008 6:50 PM, by Josh Rosenau

    California is set to join Massachusetts as a hotbed for equality:

    Same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

    The court’s 4-to-3 decision striking down state laws that had limited marriages to unions between a man and a woman makes California only the second state, after Massachusetts, to allow same-sex marriages. The decision, which becomes effective in 30 days, is certain to play a role in the presidential campaign.

    “In view of the substance and significance of the fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship,” Chief Justice Ronald M. George wrote of marriage for the majority, “the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples.”

    As Marty Lederman points out, the most legally consequential holding here is that discrimination on the basis of sexuality ought to be treated by the same legal standards as sexual or racial discrimination. The relevant passage:
    Because sexual orientation, like gender, race, or religion, is a characteristic that frequently has been the basis for biased and improperly stereotypical treatment and that generally bears no relation to an individual’s ability to perform or contribute to society, it is appropriate for courts to evaluate with great care and with considerable skepticism any statute that embodies such a classification.
    It will be interesting to see how this plays out. There's an attempt under way to put an initiative on the November ballot which would embed discrimination in the state Constitution; the Governator opposes it. He has also vetoed legislation passed several times which would have sanctioned marriage equality, so he's no saint.

    Share on Facebook
    Share on StumbleUpon
    Share on Facebook
    Find more posts in: Politics

    TrackBacks

    TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/72023

    Comments

    1

    Be on the alert! With that decision, Rick Santorum may screw a goat any moment now!

    Posted by: mark | May 15, 2008 8:00 PM

    2

    Victory! Only 48 to go! The Iowa Supreme Court should be hearing a similar case soon.

    Posted by: Joel | May 16, 2008 9:00 AM

    3

    Things are definitely heating up here - and I am not talking our triple digit temperatures!

    Posted by: Mary | May 16, 2008 3:49 PM

    4

    Joel, don't forget New Jersey. Like several other states, New Jersey's civil unions law explicitly grants all the rights of marriage (a solution open to California as well, under this ruling).

    Posted by: Josh Rosenau | May 16, 2008 6:56 PM

    5

    I didn't know that Josh, thanks!

    Posted by: Joel | May 16, 2008 8:27 PM

    6

    Until they meet the creator of the law when they die.

    Homosexuality is an abomination - Leviticus 18

    Just look up Sodom and Gomorrah on the Ebla Tablets.

    Posted by: Sons of Thunder | May 19, 2008 4:28 AM

    7

    Jeez, you give one group equal rights, pretty soon everyone wants equal rights! Where does it end? /snark off.

    Posted by: Cappy | May 20, 2008 5:33 PM

    Post a Comment

    (Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





    ScienceBlogs

    Search ScienceBlogs:

    Go to:

    Advertisement
    Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

    © 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.