

Same-sex marriages conducted before California's November vote on a marriage ban would remain intact even if the ballot initiative were passed, state attorney general Jerry Brown said Monday, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
The language on Proposition 8 would amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage, in an attempt to overrule the state supreme court's May 15 decision that denying same-sex couples the right to marry was unconstitutional. The ballot initiative does not specify whether the November election would affect marriages performed prior to the November 4 election.
Proposition 8 supporters said in their ballot arguments that an affirmative vote would nullify all marriages "regardless of when or where performed," which could also be interpreted for future same-sex marriages, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. As attorney general, Brown would represent the state in lawsuits over the validity and meaning of the measure if it were to pass.
"I believe that marriages that have been entered into subsequent to the supreme court opinion will be recognized by the California supreme court," Brown said in the article. "I would think the court, in looking at the underlying equities, would most probably conclude that upholding the marriages performed in that interval would be a just result."
The ballot wording of Proposition 8 has been the center of a number of legal battles. An updated description of Proposition 8, which Brown wrote, says the measure "eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry." The original wording simply defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Proponents of the measure argue that the new language is biased and prefer that the proposition be titled "Limit on Marriage," wording that was used for signature-gathering campaigns to qualify the measure for the November ballot. (The Advocate)
These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.
Be the first to comment on this story.
If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.
All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.
See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.
Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.