Gay marriage prop
Home / identity relationships / Gay marriage prop
If it didn't matter it wouldn't still be there. Californian voters received robocalls from former president Bill Clinton asking them to vote no on the measure, while actors from the television show “Ugly Betty” argued in Spanish-language TV spots that voting no “is not about being gay or straight,” but “about being American.”
The Protect Marriage campaign supporting Proposition 8 constantly invoked the “far-reaching consequences” of legal gay marriage, particularly the implication that school curriculums would be required to teach that gay marriage is “the same as traditional marriage.” Pollster David Fleischer, in his analysis of the election results, found that the greatest shift toward “Yes” among undecided voters was “among parents with children under 18 living at home—many of them white Democrats,” who feared the effects of legal gay marriage on their children’s public education.
We are free to tell the full truth, to hold power to account without fear or favor, and to follow facts wherever they lead. Hodges, has a strong legal argument that would be difficult to overturn under Thomas’ current logic.
Adam Echelman covers higher education for CalMatters, focusing on California’s 116 community colleges and how they influence the state’s future.
8 language from the state constitution.
Although Prop. 8 and ultimately led to a 2013 Supreme Court ruling that reinstated gay marriage in California.
The fact that they were able to make it through the legal fight to restore the right of same-sex couples to marry in California, and marry each other in Los Angeles in 2013, they credit, in large part, to the Reiners.
“ We would not be married without Rob and Michele Reiner”
It started with writing the first check to fund the organization that took on Prop.
The ads claim that Prop. In 2008, the California Supreme Court overturned the 2000 law, so Laroche and Laudon got married a third time.
“We’ve always known that at some point we need to get this discriminatory provision out of the California constitution.”
state Sen. Scott Wiener
Later that year, California voters passed Proposition 8, amending the state constitution to define marriage as a union “between a man and a woman.” Larchoche’s 2008 marriage was still legal, but the state would no longer authorize new marriages.
Perry, which challenged the constitutionality of Prop. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Prop. All Rights Reserved.
LA couple on Rob and Michele Reiner’s hands-on defense of gay marriage
LA couple on Rob and Michele Reiner’s hands-on defense of gay marriage
Challenging Prop 8, California’s 2008 ban on same-sex marriage, brought the Reiners into the lives of Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo.
Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo describe themselves as accidental activists who found an “immediate family” in Michele and Rob Reiner.
When same-sex marriage was banned in California with the 2008 passage of Proposition 8, Katami and Zarrillo began speaking out about what marriage equality meant to them.
They caught the attention of some “changemakers,” including Rob and Michele Reiner, and became plaintiffs in Hollingsworth v.
“They wanted to make sure everyone felt seen, everyone felt heard, and respected and loved.”
You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that provided the right to an abortion, that “we saw that marriage equality was at risk.”
Supporters have poured nearly $4 million into the campaign for Prop.
That opposition is part of why Randy Laroche and his partner David Laudon have gotten married three separate times. Our newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. 3 ensures that LGBTQ+ couples can continue to marry even if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns landmark cases.
Lea esta historia en Español
California voters passed Proposition 3 on Tuesday, amending the state’s constitution to affirm the right to same-sex marriage.
Same-sex marriage is already legal in California, so the amendment won’t change anything, at least in the foreseeable future.
And if it didn't matter we wouldn't have to fight to have it removed," says Stephisha Ycoy-Walton.
Being legally married allowed them to have both their names on their son's birth certificate, which helped put him at ease when he was being picked on at school.
"Somebody told me I was adopted because I had two moms," said Karter Ycoy-Walton, who felt confused by other kids teasing.
Seeing his birth certificate with both his mothers' names on it was comforting and reassuring.
But that formality is the difference between somebody's happy ending or their disappointment and rejection," says Viveca.
The couple is active in campaigning for Proposition 3 to ensure the right to marriage for everyone is enshrined in the state constitution.
"Formalities matter. 3. “A fundamental right to marriage is different from an absolute one,” she said.
“Fundamental means very stringently protected.