Way to go California!
So today, the California Supreme Court ruled the ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.
Despite the fact that CIVIL marriage between any two people should not be subject to politics, people are going to push for an initiative this November that redefines marriage between a man and a woman.
However, according to Article 1, section 13, clause A of the California Constitution, it is clearly stated that:
The State shall not discriminate against, or grant
preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of
race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of
public employment, public education, or public contracting.
However upsetting it is that it doesn't mention sexual/gender orientation, it sure says the State cannot discriminate against sex. That means, it cannot discriminate against a MAN for wanting to marry a MAN however more common it is for one to marry a WOMAN. CIVIL MARRIAGES ARE A FORM OF PUBLIC CONTRACTING.
Moreover, clause F of the same section of the same article states:
For the purposes of this section, "State" shall include, but
not necessarily be limited to, the State itself, any city, county,
city and county, public university system, including the University
of California, community college district, school district, special
district, or any other political subdivision or governmental
instrumentality of or within the State.
"OR ANY OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OR GOVERNMENTAL INSTRUMENTALITY OF OR WITHIN THE STATE"
Despite the fact that CIVIL marriage between any two people should not be subject to politics, people are going to push for an initiative this November that redefines marriage between a man and a woman.
However, according to Article 1, section 13, clause A of the California Constitution, it is clearly stated that:
The State shall not discriminate against, or grant
preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of
race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of
public employment, public education, or public contracting.
However upsetting it is that it doesn't mention sexual/gender orientation, it sure says the State cannot discriminate against sex. That means, it cannot discriminate against a MAN for wanting to marry a MAN however more common it is for one to marry a WOMAN. CIVIL MARRIAGES ARE A FORM OF PUBLIC CONTRACTING.
Moreover, clause F of the same section of the same article states:
For the purposes of this section, "State" shall include, but
not necessarily be limited to, the State itself, any city, county,
city and county, public university system, including the University
of California, community college district, school district, special
district, or any other political subdivision or governmental
instrumentality of or within the State.
"OR ANY OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OR GOVERNMENTAL INSTRUMENTALITY OF OR WITHIN THE STATE"