万花筒 2009-05-30&05-31 加州通过同性恋禁令（在线收听）

The state Supreme Court upholding, Proposition 8, but still allowing those 18,000 same sex marriages to remain valid. Joining us on the phone right now is Jessica Garrison, a Los Angeles Times reporter. Jessica, if some of our viewers are just joining us right now, can you run down the actual announcement that we heard from the court today?

Absolutely, well what the court did by a vote of 6 to 1 is upheld Proposition 8, which was the amendment to State constitution, re-banning  same sex marriage. And then by a vote of 7 to 0, it said that the estimated 18,000 couples who married in California between June and November were still legally married.

What's some of the reaction you guys at the Times are getting in right now? As you know, California, as I know, growing up there, California is a very divided state with some areas like Orange County being very conservative, next to Los Angeles county being quite liberal.

Well, I'm actually in South Los Angeles at the Lucy Corin's cafe where a bunch of gay activists and religious leaders are gathered. And there, there was about a 30 seconds of, just kind of, sadness among them when the decision came out, and then they immediately began talking about the next campaign. So, pretty much they’re vowing to go right back to the ballot, as soon as November of 2010, to try to re-amend the constitution to re-allow same sex marriage.

So basically another proposition they are talking about?

Well, I mean I think whatever the form of it is still to be decided, but yeah, they are planning to go back to the ballot. And you know, people are using words like apartheid to describe the state that they feel that gay couples are in right now, and they were saying that this, I think, the head of Equality California used the word, miscarriage of justice.

And why, Jessica, are they saying this is a, in their words, a miscarriage of justice. Are they more hinging on the visceral reaction or they are talking about the actual ballot initiative of being quite confusing in, of its wording, and also the fact that this some opponents are saying this shouldn't have been a proposition in the first place, this should have been a constitutional convention.

Well, I think that when they’re saying miscarriage of justice they are describing the visceral reaction. I, you know, I think the ballot measure, according to the court, certainly followed the law, which is why they are upset... But people are certainly deciding to go back. I mean, people are... The focus now is on organizing the politics to go back to the ballot in 2010.