Hands washed before the multitude

[..] The legal issue presented in these appeals is straightforward:  Did the trial court err when it concluded Family Code statutes defining civil marriage as the union between a man and a woman are unconstitutional?  […] We conclude California’s historical definition of marriage does not deprive individuals of a vested fundamental right or discriminate against a suspect class, and thus we analyze the marriage statutes to determine whether the opposite-sex requirement is rationally related to a legitimate government interest.  According the Legislature the extreme deference that rational basis review requires, we conclude the marriage statutes are constitutional. The time may come when California chooses to expand the definition of marriage to encompass same-sex unions. That change must come from democratic processes, however, not by judicial fiat. […]

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, In re MARRIAGE CASES [Six consolidated appeals. (A110449, A110450, A110451, A110463, A110651, A110652] (JCCP No. 4365) (.DOC; .PDF)

[…] In March 2005, Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer declared the state’s
marriage laws unconstitutional, finding “no rational purpose” to
“limit” marriage to the union of one man and one woman.  ADF attorneys
had filed the lawsuit to protect California voters who, in a
significant majority in 2000, passed Proposition 22, the state’s
Defense of Marriage Act.

“No matter how many times activists
try to redefine it, marriage means one man and one woman.  Everything
else is counterfeit,” Lavy said. […]

ADF: Victory for marriage in California: Today's decision by Calif. Court of Appeal reverses lower court's ruling that would have redefined marriage in the Golden State

Schmucks. Love is love is love.

In a series of community events across California today, Marriage
Equality USA will come together to express disappointment in today’s
appellate court decision, but is optimistic that the California Supreme
Court will right this legal wrong.

"Though we are disappointed, we always knew this issue was going to be
decided by the California Supreme Court,” said Molly McKay, Media
Director of Marriage Equality USA. “It is our generation’s
responsibility to see justice done for our families in our state and
country. We believe that the California Supreme Court will enforce the
Constitutional guarantee of equality under the law and strike down the
discriminatory barriers denying same-sex couples access to civil
marriage.” […]

Marriage Equality USA to Hold Community Events Across State to Express
Determination and Commitment to Securing Equality for Same-Sex Couples


They did

Wedding, pt. 1
Wedding, pt. 2
Wedding, pt. 3
Wedding, pt. 4
Wedding, pt. 5
Jason's post reminded me that I had video of Nancy and Cynthia's wedding lying around.