California Proposition 8

February 8, 2012 by staff 

California Proposition 8, A Federal Appeals Court ruled Tuesday that the ban on same sex marriages in California is unconstitutional.

Proposition 8 was passed by California voters in 2008. It inserted the one man/one woman provision into the California Constitution.

Tuesday’s 2-1 ruling says, “Prop. 8 serves no purpose other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lsbns.”

In Nevada, the state constitution bans same sex marriage but allows civil unions.

The ACLU of Nevada founded the gay rights movement in the state and thinks the courts could open the door for others to follow

“There might be a domino type of effect,” said Dane Claussen, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada. “But we also know there are a lot of states that anytime in the foreseeable future the possibility of same sex marriage would be brought about only by a U.S. Supreme Court decision along those lines.”

Supporters of Proposition 8 vow to fight to the bitter end.

“It’s a stepping stone to the Supreme Court, where it will be ultimately decided,” said Bill May of Catholics For The Common Good. “Seven million California voters have overwhelmingly supported the only institution that unites kids with their moms and dads.”

In the meantime, today’s ruling has given hope to the LGBT community.

“It’s not only about marriage,” said Kai Regidour. “It’s a validation. It’s the right to love. It’s the right to love the person you want to spend the rest of your life with.”

Today’s ruling does not mean gay marriages will resume in California immediately.

An injunction is in place to allow for an appeal by the sponsors of Prop. 8, an appeal they plan on making.

Meanwhile, a California gay rights group is gathering signatures to put an initiative on the November ballot that would repeal Proposition 8.

Report to Team

Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.


Comments are closed.