CA Supreme Court to rule on Gay Marriage today (5/15) at 10:00am

[innerSpaceman]

No of course that's hogwash, Kevy. And blatant LDS propaganda.


Government officials will have to mary queers, churches will not.



By the way, I will be coming out of wedding officiant retirement to perform gay weddings if Prop 8 fails. But I can't be sued for not performing straight weddings.

[Morrigoon]

Hmm... I wonder if enough people will make the mistake in our favor in the voting booth?

Better make sure everyone on the "no" side knows to vote no though!

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

I have been meaning to look this up, but I just don't have the time.

I was listening to some people who say that if Prop 8 passes, that their church can be sued if they refuse to marry homosexuals. On the surface, this sounds like hogwash, but I can see some potential (legal) validity to this.

Anybody got any info on this?

But now that I think about it, tell them that they're right. That if prop 8 passes, their church will be overun by the gay and they will all go to jail if all members of the congregation don't immediately begin having gay sex.

No on 8!

[innerSpaceman]

What was it only altar boys that got to have sex with Catholic priests? I've always wanted to do that, in the confessional booth.

Hmmm, so if Prop 8 fails, maybe I'll be able to sue for my chance!

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Um, I assume you mean if Prop 8 doesn't pass.

DOH! Yes, you are correct.

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

No of course that's hogwash, Kevy. And blatant LDS propaganda.

I figured as much, but I wanted wanted to make sure I wasn't losing my mind (okay, that DID happen a long time ago). And I know that one of the two callers I heard did specifically say they were LDS.

[Alex]

I can see a slim argument if church weddings are considered a public accommodation.

But churches are currently allowed to refuse to perform plenty of otherwise legal marriages (a Catholic Church is free to refuse to marry people who are previously divorced) so I don't think anyone is likely to make the argument.

[JWBear]

I read one legal opinion (I'll try and find it again later, when I have more time) that no such lawsuit would stand. However, if there is a church that routinely rents out their facilities to non-church members, it is a public accommodation, and has to allow gays (or anyone, for that matter) to rent the facilities for weddings.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

I have been meaning to look this up, but I just don't have the time.

I was listening to some people who say that if Prop 8 passes, that their church can be sued if they refuse to marry homosexuals. On the surface, this sounds like hogwash, but I can see some potential (legal) validity to this.

Anybody got any info on this?

-

There is an important difference between religious marriage and civil marriage. Religious groups and clergy members have a constitutionally protected right to recognize or refuse to recognize religious marriages based on the tenets of their particular faith. That has not changed and will not change (if Prop 8 is voted down). But the government can't treat same-sex couples differently when issuing civil marriage licenses or solemnizing civil marriages.

[katiesue]

I don't think they could force churches to perform the ceremonies. If you're not an LDS Church member you can't even attend a wedding in the Temple in Salt Lake. If you're not Catholic you can't be married in a Catholic Church or be married without going through their counseling. I don't see how performing or not performing a gay marriage would be any different than the restrictions on a hetro one.

[Pirate Bill]

Originally Posted by katiesue

If you're not an LDS Church member you can't even attend a wedding in the Temple in Salt Lake.

LDS bishops do, on occasion, perform marriages outside the temple. These marriages (as well as any other legally recognized marriage between one man and one woman) are currently recognized by the church.