11 Responses to “It’s Probably Officially Over”

1. Renee Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 10:26 am

   After an Obama victory this is truly bitter sweet. The whole idea that it was necessary to vote for equality and then see that same equality rejected is ridiculous. It is myn hope that somehow a court challenge can be raised and equality can yet again come to the state of California.

   This comment was written by Renee.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
2. Mandolin Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 10:49 am

   I’m sure it will someday. But it’s abhorrent that the rights have been taken away, even impermanently.

   This comment was written by Mandolin.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
3. DaisyDeadhead Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 10:54 am

   This is just horrifying. As Renee said, so bittersweet. :(

   This comment was written by DaisyDeadhead.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
4. Radfem Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 11:00 am

   Quite a few people I know were spontaneously deciding to get married when the poll numbers started getting scary, so there’s quite a few folks with marriages begun during the last six months.

   When does the amendment go into effect? Today or early next year? And if it’s early next year, who wants to put money in that the “winners” try to prevent more weddings? I remember they tried the injunction deal last year when the court decision came down.

   It’s sad and it’s totally embarrassing to be a Californian.

   This comment was written by Radfem.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
5. VJBinCT Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 11:27 am

   Since almost anything now is self-declared, such as race vis a vis the census, why not have gender be as well. One of the couple could declare him/herself whatever works to let the marriage proceed. I won’t tell.

   This comment was written by VJBinCT.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
6. PG Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 11:50 am

   Radfem,

   No one can prevent a wedding, but the amendment does pretty clearly say that only opposite-sex marriages are recognized as marriage by the state of California. Same-sex couples henceforward are not married. The only legal question remaining is whether those who thought they were getting married will now have those marriages automatically converted to domestic partnerships or if they have no status at all.

   All of the talk from Prop. 8’s supporters about how this is a victory for the democratic majority’s preferences as of today, even if our grandchildren shake their heads at how stupid the majority was, reminds me of something William F. Buckley said in defense of segregation and white supremacy even where whites are the racial minority:

   If the majority wills what is socially atavistic, then to thwart the majority may be, though undemocratic, enlightened. It is more important for any community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority. Sometimes it becomes impossible to assert the will of a minority, in which case it must give way, and the society will regress; sometimes the numerical minority cannot prevail except by violence: then it must determine whether the prevalence of its will is worth the terrible price of violence.

   However, I doubt that Buckley’s followers would consider it appropriate for these concerns about what is undemocratic yet “enlightened” and “civilized” to be applied to same-sex marriage.

   This comment was written by PG.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
7. PG Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 11:56 am

   VJBinCT,

   I had your idea in reference to a Russian mail order “groom,” but I believe that sex is marked on most U.S. identification documents (birth certificates, driver’s licenses, passports, etc.), whereas race is not, though race is ticked on other government records, such as speeding tickets. Therefore putting down the “wrong” sex would constitute fraud. I got married in New York recently and we had to bring some of those ID documents with us to get a license, so just asserting that I was a sex different from that on my IDs wouldn’t fly.

   This comment was written by PG.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
8. Sailorman Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 3:41 pm

   Stupid question but what happens to the people who are already married? Do they get “unmarried” by the new law? Do they get grandfathered in?

   This comment was written by Sailorman.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
9. Mandolin Writes:
   November 5th, 2008 at 3:44 pm

   It’s not stupid, and I’ve seen people who I’d consider to be knowledgeable suggest both possibilities today. I’d like to know, too.

   This comment was written by Mandolin.
   Report this comment to the moderators
   
10. Ampersand Writes:
    November 5th, 2008 at 3:44 pm

    Eugene Volokh has a good post on that question, outlining the possibilities. He thinks that the most likely outcome is that their marriages will be legally converted to domestic partnerships.

    Edited to add: While I’m add it, Volokh — who voted against proposition 8 — has written another post, suggesting that the attempt to claim that prop 8 is unconstitutional, because it revises rather than merely amending the California constitution, probably won’t succeed.

    This comment was written by Ampersand.
    Report this comment to the moderators
    
11. PG Writes:
    November 5th, 2008 at 4:02 pm

    Volokh’s answer re: conversion of CA marriages to DPs seems to me the obvious one, but he neglects a point of interest to New Yorkers: Gov. Paterson says NY, though it does not have same-sex marriage itself, will recognize out-of-state SSMs as marriages. If someone got married in CA in the last 6 months and moves to NY next year, has that marriage been wholly revoked by the state such that NY also does not recognize it as a marriage, or is it only the intra-CA recognition of it as a marriage that has been revoked?

    This comment was written by PG.
    Report this comment to the moderators
    

Leave a Reply

If you have questions about the moderation policies here, please read this post. Short version: treat other posters with respect.

If your submitted comment fails to appear, without even an error or "waiting for moderation" message, then our spam-blocking software may have blocked your comment. Please contact the moderators immediately so we can rescue your comment. If this happens repeatedly, you might visit Akismet's comment form to tell them they're falsely identifying you as a spammer.