OK, 'Splain thees one to me, Lucy

[markbark]

RE: California Supremes OK'ing Prop 8

I've always wondered why no one has thought to introduce a bill that says, in effect, "You can stand up in your special building with all the pretty windows making all manner of promises to your invisible sky wizard, but nobody's 'married' unless the STATE says "You're married"" i.e. make ALL marriages "civil unions" and just as much PITA/hassle for the straights. I mean, when you get right down to it, "marriage" is all about property rights, so why not just cut to the chase and call it a contract that you have to lawyer up for like anyone else?

The sky wizard crowd then couldn't complain that performing wedding ceremonies for same sex couples was "against their religion" since the ceremonies themselves would become irrelevant. The equal protection clause of the US Constitution states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
This seems pretty much a no brainer here, but then again, IANAL.

Thoughts?

--MAB

[liberalmuse]

1. It's a no-brainer only if sane people are in charge.

We clearly know that they are not.

[customerserviceguy]

2. It's not just about property rights

Civil union and domestic partnership statutes have addressed that, and the California Supreme Court noted in it's decision that the previous existing DP statute covered same-gender relationships.

It's about Federal recognition of those relationships, not only for tax, immigration, and entitlement purposes, but when those relationships travel across state lines.