10,000 marrages at risk, make that 11,000. A common queston addressed.

[johno]

Regarding last night's post by me and many others.

A common response is to ask is "where does the 10K count come from?"

I did some digging today, the base is a study from:

The Williams Institute
UCLA School of Law

http://www.law.ucla.edu/WilliamsInstitute/publications/CASSMarriageCounts.pdf



Also, some folks have asked, in comments to my post and to other posts...

But the prop doesn't say anything about annulling the existing marriages.

True, the prop only changes a definition, but changing the definition changes the basis of the marriage. It is expected (souce unconfirmed) that the "Yes on 8" support groups would follow with a push for laws and/or lawsuits to invalidate the existing marriages.


"Are not domestic partnerships the same?"

I collected several ideas, but I think I'll just stick was a basic simple one:

"Seperate but Equal" is not was equal rights for all means.

Comments

[elf]

I'm hoping that'll get challenged as gender discrimination--all states recognize marriages from other states that couldn't be performed in theirs due to consanguinity or age of one member of the couple; not recognizing some based on the gender of one member seems like it'd clash with the US Constitution.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

I'm sure it does clash, but the Court doesn't want to take a stand on it and continues to leave the lower court rulings stand.

An interesting possibility would be if the Court changed just a little bit -- maybe as little as one justice -- it might take one of those cases and rule that any of the "only my kind of marriage" laws (like Prop 8) violate the US Constitution, which trumps the state constitutions. It seems unlikely at this time, but the yes-on-8 types, if they get their way to start with, might be actually starting the ball rolling down a hill that runs right over them.