Prop. 8:Appeals-court hearing adjourns; debate centered on whether gay-marriage

[cal04]

Prop. 8: Appeals-court hearing adjourns; debate centered on whether gay-marriage ban violated Constitution and who had standing to argue case
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/12/prop-8-hearing-centered-on-whether-gay-marriage-ban-violated-constitution.html

(snip)
Charles Cooper, a lawyer who argued in favor of Prop. 8, said marriage exists for society to recognize relationships between men and women that can lead to children.

(snip)
Judge Stephen Reinhart, one of a three-member panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals hearing the case, appeared unconvinced.

"That sounds like a good argument for prohibiting divorce," he said, dryly. "But how does it relate to having two males or two females marry each other and have children as they have in California? I don’t understand how that argument says we ought to prohibit that?"

Judge N. Randy Smith raised another issue: Under California law, same-sex couples have all the rights of marriage except the word "marriage." Given that, he asked, how does Proposition 8 protect marriage?

[bluestateguy]

1. I think we'll win here, but inevitably lose in the USSC

This will be another one of those cases where the court reverts back to its selective states rights dogma.

[Pab Sungenis]

2. Sadly, we lost one of our most effective voices on this issue

when Obama put Elena Kagan in Justice Stevens' seat.

There is no one more dangerous to gay rights than a closeted homosexual in power.