These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous please click "Report" or email us. Terms and Conditions · Privacy Policy
Government considers watered down same-sex marriage bill to minimise Tory rebellion
133
London: Gay couple threatened with death in violent late night homophobic assault
110
Tory MP Nadine Dorries: 'The gay marriage bill is taking the sex out of marriage'
90
Philip Hammond: 'No great demand for gay marriage and it's upsetting vast numbers of people'
70
Government to consider abolishing civil partnerships or opening up to straight couples
68
Bret Easton Ellis slams GLAAD and says gay basketball player Jason Collins treated like a 'baby panda'
65
US Radio host: Gay news websites are covered with porn that is turning teens gay
62
Lib Dem MP Sarah Teather tells Catholic newspaper 'I never went into politics to tackle equal marriage'
59
Tory MP David Burrowes: 'I'm not anti-gay; I'm just pro-marriage'
57
Tory MP David Burrowes: I only want a referendum on same-sex marriage so I can defeat the government's bill
54
Robert in S. Kensington 857
Eddy 384
Rehan 249
bobbleobble 240
Jock S. Trap 236
D.McCabe 230
rapture 194
Midnighter 174
SteveC 172
Iris 170
Good.
whats with the quotes around the word trial?
pretty lady… if i weren’t gay…
They should resume. The whole ban thing stinks. Maybe a ban on religion would be more effective.
Luke in the UK “trial” tends to be used by non-lawyers and the media to refer to a criminal trial only, whereas this is a civil case.
Incidentally, my understanding is that the California Supreme Court will not be ruling on the validity of the ban (as the first paragraph of the article says). It will be ruling solely on whether the applicants to have Prop 8 upheld have standing to pursue the case. The federal court will then rule on the validity of the ban.
Thanks for the clarification.
The broader issue, of course, is that minority rights should not be decided by popular vote.
Good news. Iet’s hope same sex couples will be getting married once again in California before too much longer.
Actually, the California Supreme Court is going to answer the question whether protectmarriage.com would have standing in California courts to defend Prop 8. Then the 9th Circuit will use that answer to help them decide if protectmarriage.com have standing in federal court. It is not a ruling by the California Supreme Court on standing or on the validity of Prop 8.
If Equal marriage has worked in South America and the like without the end of the world as the religious extremist bang on about then I don’t see why all these excuses to stop the rest of the world following suit!
Is everyone as confused about this as I am?
You want to prevent the appeal against the lifting of the ban that stops the law that supports gay marriage?
I’ve never seen so many double negatives in my life. What the fcuk are these people going on about?
Proposition 8 to make gey marriage illegal was on the ballot paper and was passed. (The ban )
Then the supreme court deemed it unconstitutional and a judge ruled that it be reinstituted immediately..( The Constitutional law)
then he had to put a stay on that because the fundies appealed or are trying to.
the Attorney General is attempting to rule the appeal invalid.
Does thyat make it any clearer. Hope so cause thats the gist and i dont think theres a simpler explaination…..
sorry about all the typos*********gey…Gay obv.
* reinstituted….reinstated *
thyat…..that*
explaination….explanation *
I think the writer used the term “trial” because he couldn’t remember the word tribunal. which is what it was even though it was chaired by a judge………