Last I heard, the ruling is not valid until 90 days after the ruling was issued. In that 30 day period, the court could grant a stay of the ruling until the November election to avoid potential problems associated with people getting married in the interim.
So, the writers of this possible amendment not only want to discriminate against homosexuals, they want to make it impossible for transsexuals to marry after reconstructive surgery. And they want to make civil unions pointless as well.
Which makes the writers of this possible amendment bigoted assholes of the first water. I hope to God the voters of CA squash this evil thing.
No, transsexuals can marry, but they are required to have gay marriages. Transmen can marry men, transwomen can marry women.
The trouble with transsexuals for the anti-gay marriage types is that unless they just completely prohibit transexuals from marrying, they’re going to have to allow some marriages that could be interpreted as gay marriages. Let transwomen marry men and transmen marry women? That’s gay marriage in their eyes, since that transwoman is “really” a man–we can’t let them marry another man! Let transwomen marry women and transmen marry men? That’s gay marriage too–two people who look like women marrying each other! Two people who look like men marrying each other!
