Oh, I think they can handle that well enough. At least the ones I know. (/phony cynicism)
Just keep walking, preacher-man.
River ,'Jaynestown'
Natter 58: Let's call Venezuela!
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
erikaj - May 15, 2008 11:13:45 am PDT #7055 of 10001
Always Anti-fascist!
bon bon - May 15, 2008 11:14:24 am PDT #7056 of 10001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
California is now treating sexual orientation as a "suspect classification", which means you better have a damn good reason for discriminating based upon it (which equates it to gender, race, etc.)
I believe that was already the case under the California constitution, and was thus the linchpin of the decision (which I have only seen summarized by other lawyers). As Fred noted, once the court decides a classification requires strict scrutiny, you can almost never win.
Wolfram - May 15, 2008 11:17:16 am PDT #7057 of 10001
Visilurking
From the opinion:
...we conclude that strict scrutiny nonetheless is applicable here because (1) the statutes in question properly must be understood as classifying or discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, a characteristic that we conclude represents — like gender, race, and religion —a constitutionally suspect basis upon which to impose differential treatment, and (2) the differential treatment at issue impinges upon a same-sex couple’s fundamental interest in having their family relationship accorded the same respect and dignity enjoyed by an opposite-sex couple.
Is this the first time sexual orientation has been to Strict Scrutiny Land?
hippocampus - May 15, 2008 11:18:45 am PDT #7058 of 10001
not your mom's socks.
happy birthday Megan!
happy zmAnniversary JZ & David!
lisah - May 15, 2008 11:21:54 am PDT #7059 of 10001
Punishingly Intricate
My afternoon sweet carb is a chocolate cupcake w/ toasted almond buttercream from Cake Love. I love this part of "training."
Fred Pete - May 15, 2008 11:24:48 am PDT #7060 of 10001
Ann, that's a ferret.
The first I know of, Wolfram. And I'll add that the Federal courts only subject gender to an intermediate level of scrutiny -- so CA seems to go further there, too.
Theodosia - May 15, 2008 11:26:27 am PDT #7061 of 10001
'we all walk this earth feeling we are frauds. The trick is to be grateful and hope the caper doesn't end any time soon"
Hurray, CA!
Lee - May 15, 2008 11:28:17 am PDT #7062 of 10001
The feeling you get when your brain finally lets your heart get in its pants.
Sadly, I think the chances of it being overturned by constitutional amendment are not small.
sarameg - May 15, 2008 11:30:31 am PDT #7063 of 10001
I just inserted a surprise silly extra slide into the ppt for tomorrow's status meeting (which I am not running, mind you.)
It is possible I am punchy.
bon bon - May 15, 2008 11:32:12 am PDT #7064 of 10001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
You're right, Wolfram, I just got to that part of the opinion now and it was not based on a prior finding that sexual orientation is a suspect classification. I was wrong up above.