Justice Carlos Moreno wrote the dissenting opinion disagreeing that the proposition did not change the constitution's equal protection clause. He said the law denying same-sex couples the right to wed "strikes at the core of the promise of equality that underlies our California Constitution." He said it represents a "drastic and far-reaching change."

"Promising equal treatment to some is fundamentally different from promising equal treatment for all," said Moreno, who had been mentioned as a possible contender for the U.S. Supreme Court. "Promising treatment that is almost equal is fundamentally different from ensuring truly equal treatment."

Gays and lesbians aren't demanding anything special, just the same rights as every other American:
the right to get a job, buy a house, get married and raise a family.
I'm convinced that people will more and more come to believe discriminating against gays in any way is simply wrong, It's just a matter of time.

That's it... when I become Emperor I'm incinerating California.

Don't worry; the majority opinion doesn't rule in America anymore. You're right...it's only a matter of time.

We have the Boy Scouts. It is for boys. We have the Girl Scouts. It is for girls. We have marriage. It is for heterosexuals.

Why don't the homosexuals start a new institution and leave us poor heterosexuals alone? Laws could so easily be made to give you the same rights. Why continue to claw at an institution that has been around since Adam and Eve and try to crash it? Are you trying to get approval for your live style from the general public by legitimizing it in marriage?

Well in this case jafla, you are wrong. The majority of the people in California voted for the measure and it won. The Court just re-affirmed that. But things are changing in the electorate and the next time a Prop 8 type election will probably loose, proving that the majority is still deciding things.

BTW, there is such a thing as protecting the rights of minorities from the abuse of the majority.

I'm a minority. Where do I go?

Anyway, marriage is going out of style...it's so old-fashioned, supported by homophobe Christians and is only for the purpose of suppressing women and inhabiting mans natural inclination to cruise & surf. Just all ya'll live together like most everyone else now-a-days. Everybody is "ok".

Well no, considering all the people that want to get married and get married. In fact this is about allowing more people to marry, so in a sense it will expand it and protect it.

Now divorce and adultery, that really kills marriage.

So what they're saying in California is that same sex couples can not get married. But Hetro couples can continue to cheat on each other get re-married as often as they want divorce as often as they want because it's the Christian thing to do . Hooray for F*'ing Christianity!

I believe deep down that most American's are fair and tolerant people.and that is why the anti-gay movement is losing steam; because freedom means freedom for everyone.
Every attempt at lasting discrimination in this country has eventually failed--because--bottom line--when confronted with the basic choice of equality or inequality, the vast majority of Americans will choose equality.

This has nothing to do with "equality". (sorry debby. we part company here) Christian thing??? Oh please....it's basic human instinct regardless of what some may proclaim. I'm outta here. Said my peace & won't change anyone's mind nor they mine.

I think you would have to ask yourself what is the purpose of marriage in our society. Is it for procreation? If so, then childless couples should not be allowed to marry.
My opinion is that it is a commitment between two people that without love becomes a relationship of benefits and obligations.
Love makes the difference Jatfla.

Oh, please. Frankly, I could give a shit what they call it- civil union, marriage- whatever! AS LONG AS it carries the same benefits. I say, if you want to get married, do it in a church or under whatever religious belief you want to. It's marriage under LAW, that I object to. No-one should be "married", if we believe in the separation of church and state. Civil Unions all 'round! Booyah! (But if hets get it, I deserve it too!) And really- I'm glad for the Cali queers that get to "stay married", but I wish I understood how the SC can say that gay marriage is okay if it happened between these dates, but not any more. That cracks me up!

@deb
Childless couples is what the world desperately needs ( to combat the over population)
@tanyamm
Great comment.

Oh, please. Frankly, I could give a shit what they call it- civil
union, marriage- whatever! AS LONG AS it carries the same benefits

We are in agreement there T.