SAN FRANCISCO — — The California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on simian marriage Thursday in a broadly worded decision that would invalidate virtually any law that discriminates on the basis of species. The 4-3 ruling declared that the state Constitution protects a fundamental “right to marry” that extends equally to simian couples. It tossed a highly emotional issue into the election year while opening the way for tens of thousands of simians to wed in California, starting as early as mid-September.
The majority opinion, by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, declared that any law that discriminates on the basis of species will from this point on be constitutionally suspect in California in the same way as laws that discriminate by race or gender, making the state’s high court the first in the nation to adopt such a stringent standard. The decision was a bold surprise from a moderately conservative, Republican-dominated court that legal scholars have long dubbed “cautious,” and experts said it was likely to influence other courts around the country.
But the scope of the court’s decision could be thrown into question by an initiative already heading toward the November ballot. The initiative would amend the state Constitution to prohibit simian unions.
Conservative and religious-affiliated groups denounced the decision and pledged to bring enough voters to the polls in November to overturn it. Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, called the decision “outrageous” and “nonsense.” “No matter how you stretch California’s Constitution, you cannot find anywhere in its text, its history or tradition that now, after so many years, it magically protects what most societies condemn,” Staver said.
“What the court recognized today is that it’s time for that historic prejudice to end and the state should no longer participate in it in any way,” said Therese Stewart, a deputy city attorney who argued on behalf of the plaintiffs.
And here I always thought that was the Clinton’s “just married” photo.
I reject and renounce this racist post.
Oh shut up Barak!!!! You are finally getting what you have been wanting for so long.
Marriage is finally legal for monkey faced liberals!!!!!!
She could have done better.
I love it! This illustrates so perfectly liberal lunacy! Y’know I was really unhappy with you for a while Cadet Happy. Glad to see this post.
Weeeellllll, as long as they don’t ever allow man/goat unions. That would be going too far.
As long as they’re not allowed to breed, I’m good.
Where did you get Brad and Angelina’s private wedding photos? See what happens when the makeup comes off.
Bush and Palin don’t care about homeless vets. I love celebrities!! Brad and Angelina are nice and hot and you know it numba 8. Palin hates cats!
Britney Spears was lookin supa sexy at the vmas. w00t! She makes Palin look like an ooogly dawg.
Damn those liberal judges! Pretty soon, they’ll be so far down the evolutionary scale that even liberals will be allowed to marry.
Does this include gay simians?
Unfortunately for many simp-chicks, it has long been known that Lancelot Link was queer.
“Weeeellllll, as long as they don’t ever allow man/goat unions. That would be going too far.”
“An excellent device of whoremaster Man, to lay his goatish dispositions upon a star.” — Edgar, from King Lear
Q. Why can’t they find a cure for AIDS?
A. They can’t get the lab animals to
(do I really need to finish that sentence?)
Please pray Prop 8 passes here in CA.
Thanks.
Sulamie, amen. Unfortunately, it won’t…too much money and influence flows from Sodom and Gomorrah. The more Conservative parts of the state don’t stand a chance.
That won’t stop my from voting for it, of course; I’m used to backing losing political horses here in Mexifornia.
FIRE FREI!!!
#16 – Sulamie,
Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up. He said: “In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God not cared about men. And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, ‘Grant me justice against my adversary.'”
“For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, ‘Even though I don’t fear God or care about men, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually wear me out with her coming!'”
And the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says. And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”
Luke 18:1-8
Amen.
So the link in the article – which would be funnier in an evolutionary sense if it were missing – (rimshot) – leads to a picture from a CHINESE zoo, which staged the simian wedding to attract visitors. Not nearly as interesting, but still better than the “Name the new baby giraffe” contest at my local zoo.
My question – what is the risk of anti-species-ism? Since there can be no offspring from any potential cross-species union, the risk of hybrid man-apes, goat-girls, or Man-Bear-Pigs (shudder) seems pretty low. And since the same-species unions will result in only same-species offspring, I can only conclude that the desire to stop unions between consenting adults of nonhuman species is to prevent claims for same-sex benefits from the workers at the DMV in several states.
It is a homophobic fear that drives the anti-monkey protest, not the fear of more monkeys.
Hi Otto – remember David and Goliath? Our opponents may be giants as far as money and influence, but God is still bigger.
4 of 7 – Thank you, once again, for your encouragement. I can’t begin to tell you what it means to me.
Mikee – I may have misunderstood you and if so, forgive me….phobia means being afraid of something. I am not afraid of homosexuals. I do not hate homosexuals. I grieve for them as I do others lost in sin. I don’t know if you have children, but if so – would you want them being taught that marriage between two men/two women is okay? If homosexual couples are allowed to adopt, do you think that is best for a child? No one is trying to take away ANY benefits from same sex couples – we are trying to PRESERVE MARRIAGE between one man and one woman. The will of the people has been thwarted. For more info. on what Prop 8 is and ISN’T go to http://www.protectmarriage.com
The mayor of San Francisco said, “As California goes, so goes the nation.” The outcome will impact the entire country. Thank you all for your prayers.
Does this mean that Barack Obama will ditch Michelle for a camel?
I’ve wondered about the social/legal problems homosexuals face.
Is there any qualitative difference between the burden of being a practicing homosexual today (male/female/undecided) and being say, a black man in Alabama in 1950 or an American Indian in South Dakota in 1890, or a Chinese immigrant in California in 1873 or for that matter, an Irishman in New York in 1850?
One difference is in the number of lawyers, law-makers, law-enforcers, news media spokesmen and judges sympathetic to their cause.
What’s up with that?
Sulamie, You’re very welcome. As Seanmahair says, “you’re my hero!”.