(CNN) -- The Los Angeles County Registrar's Office stopped issuing same-sex marriage licenses after the apparent passage of a ballot measure to eliminate the right of gay couples to marry, the agency said Wednesday.
Voters in California, Arizona and Florida weighed in on constitutional bans on same-sex marriage.
As of 11:30 p.m. ET, 52 percent of voters had approved California's Proposition 8, with 99 percent of precincts reporting.
"This is a great day for marriage," Ron Prentice, chairman of ProtectMarriage.com, said in a statement. "The people of California stood up for traditional marriage and reclaimed this great institution."
The amendment to the state constitution overrides a state Supreme Court ruling in May that legalized same-sex marriage.
The decision to suspend the marriage licenses was based on the Secretary of State's semi-official canvass results from Election Night and a California State Constitutional provision that says a proposed amendment "shall be submitted to the electors and if approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election," Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk Dean Logan said in a news release.
The agency said it would act accordingly if it is directed to reverse course or take further action in the future.
Thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of Los Angeles Wednesday to vent their disappointment at the apparent passage of a ballot initiative to ban gay and lesbian marriages.
The demonstrators peacefully rallied in West Hollywood, holding placards and waving gay pride flags. Elsewhere, hundreds of protesters staged a half-hour sit-in outside CNN's Los Angeles bureau on Sunset Boulevard. The demonstrators chanted slogans and banged on the building's glass doors but then dispersed without incident.
By Emanuella GrinbergExcerpted from CNN.com.
I find the decision on prop 8 terribly sad. I am sure that very soon California will pass some law guaranteeing civil unions for gay couples, but that seems like a cold conciliation, a cheap ass second prize. For some time I had thought that civil unions would be sufficient. After all, it might be the only way to reach any type of compromise on this issue. But the more I have thought about it and the more I have talked to gay and lesbian friends, it's not enough. It's not fair. It's not just. How is it that one group's interpretation of the definition of marriage gets to trump the ability of a group of people to enjoy the same legally recognized expression of their devotion to one another.
I am not (necessarily) a proponent of marriage generally, and in all honesty I don't think the state should issue marriage licenses at all--everyone should be granted civil unions from the state, and only religious groups should conduct marriages. But that is separate discussion. The issue is that when the state chooses to recognize legally (and socially) the rights of one couple's union and not another it is unquestionably a discriminatory practice. We could not at this point imagine the state not recognizing interracial marriages, or it disallowing persons of a specific ethnic or religious group from marrying. So why disallow gays?
In listening to the answers given by people as to why they reject legal marriages for gays, it seems to me that one line of reasoning underlies the belief as to why such discrimination is justified. Of course lots of people are just homophobic; lots of people cite religious reasons and argue that God himself defined marriage as heterosexual union. Fine, they can believe whatever they like. But that is still not a basis for legal discrimination. I may not want Evangelical Christians to be able to vote, but I don't think my belief justifies their discrimination. What really seems to be the logic underlying the ban on gay marriage is the persistent belief that sexual orientation is a choice. I have noticed that many people seem to validate their pro-discrimination stance by arguing that unlike race, people choose their sexual "preferences." So, to them where race is immutable and therefore should not be the basis of discrimination, gay is a choice, and by making that choice those people suffer discriminatory consequences. I guess gay is kind of like smoking. Sure, we can't make people not smoke, but we can make them stand outside to do it or charge them more for insurance because they made the choice. I guess we can discriminate against gays because they made a choice a start being gay...and now they are addicted. They should just quit and then they wouldn't face discrimination. Maybe there is a patch for it...or anti-gay gum. I am sure Evangelical scientists are working round the clock on the cure.
