The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in the same-sex marriage case before it today.
Since this ruling was based on the state constitution, it’s likely a final ruling as the US Supreme Court apparently doesn’t have jurisdiction.
Note that New York is poised to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. There’s gonna be a LOT more weekend traffic than usual on the Tappan Zee the next couple of months, I think.
It’s not that I’m against the ruling, but why do rulings like this always have to come out just before the election?
I doubt it will have any effect. Conn. will go Democrat no matter what. And since it’s the third state to make it legal, it’s not breaking any new barriers.
Besides, everyone is so scared of going broke they just don’t care as much right now.
Every time a state approves same-sex marriage, a gay/lesbian angel gets wings!
I’m more worried about Republicans in other states saying, “See what the Conn. court just did? Vote for McCain or else Obama will put justices on the Supreme Court who will do the same thing”
I really don’t see this issue having anything like the motivating influence it did in 20054.
Do we have same-sex marriage yet 18046 years in the future?
Hopefully someone will run a few of those ‘Look how much money we’re making through the wedding industry!’ pieces in the national media.
If the Democrats gain control of the NYS Senate it’s very likely that same-sex marriage will become fully legal in New York next year. That would be a new barrior broken since it would make New York the first state to legalize SSM be legislative act as opposed to a court ruling.
From the mists of antiquity, a single line of ancient American English has survived in the 199th Century: “It’s taking longer than we thought.”
Are you kidding? People were marrying their own clones by 17500.
Does that count as masturbation? Did we have that thread already?
THAT would be outstandingly good.
If we reach a little, CA can claim to be first. The legislature voted for it, Arnold vetoed it, but he only vetoed supposedly because he thought it was against the constitution (per prop 22 from the 2000 election) and wanted the SCOCA to decide. Anyway, I was hoping we’d be the first. Still, if Prop 8 gets killed, I believe that will be the first time a state voted not to prohibit SSM when it was on a ballot initiative. Is that right? (I know it’s currently polling “yes”, but I’m pretty sure it won’t pass.)
second time. Arizona passed on a DOMA amendment a couple years ago.
Yes. CA was the first state legislature to pass a SSM bill. 
The only reason that didn’t pass was because benefits for people in other domestic partnerships would have been sunk along with it – as it was, it was 51% against, 49% for. They’re taking another shot at it this year, pretty much solely aimed at defining marriage as being between a man and a woman, and I’ve no doubt it’ll pass. :mad:
And we have to do it again this year. The pubbies probably thought with McCain running for president, it would pass this year. I’ve already voted no.
But, the Mormon church is dumping a ton of money into this year. Unfortunately, it will pass. I’ve seen at least 100 of their ads and only one NO ad.
We’ve got one in CA, too. Proposition 8 reverses a CA Supreme Court Ruling allowing gay marriage. The owner of the San Diego Reader, interestingly, tends to bring this issue up every chance he gets - he initially funded the initiative. So far, those in favor of rolling back gay marriage are outspending us 2 to 1 in advertising, and have an advantage in the polls. I got married in June after being domestic partners for 3 years. I’m so sick of this shit.
So this would be an amendment? I’m no lawyer, but generally the legislature cannot nullify a court ruling. (I’m assuming this was a judgment based on the state constitution.)