Updated: Federal Judge Rules Against Proposition 8

Some who advocate same sex marriage argue that marriage is a fundamental right based on the right to love. If the basis of marriage is solely about love, the problem arises that government should never have had the power to regulate love, but it has regulated marriage. Marriage must be about something else, then. Perhaps it is the union of a man and a woman to exercise responsible procreation, protected by the social and legal institution of marriage in order to raise the next generation of children. Same sex marriage, therefore, cannot be marriage since it cannot fulfill the social and legal responsibilities of procreation.

Completely unsurprising coming from Walker, who has ruled against California's Proposition 8. Now we'll see if the federal Circuit Court will stay the decision in order to protect California's voters and constitution. To be continued, I'm sure....

Update from the Drudge Report:

EXCLUSIVE 1:26 PM PT: CA Prop 8 held to be unconstitutional under due process and equal protection. Will be released at 2 PM PT...
Judge strikes down -- IN 138 PAGE RULING -- 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California'...

JUDGE: PROPOSITION 8 DOES NOT SURVIVE RATIONAL BASIS...

JUDGE: Having considered the trial evidence and the arguments of counsel, the court pursuant to FRCP 52(a) finds that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional and that its enforcement must be enjoined.

'Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians'...

'Stereotypes and misinformation have resulted in social and legal disadvantages for gays and lesbians'...

JUDGE: THE RIGHT TO MARRY PROTECTS AN INDIVIDUAL’S CHOICE OF MARITAL PARTNER REGARDLESS OF GENDER...

DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS DO NOT SATISFY CALIFORNIA’S OBLIGATION TO ALLOW PLAINTIFFS TO MARRY...

From the Los Angeles Times:

U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who presided over a trial earlier this year on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, will release his long-awaited ruling Wednesday on whether the 2008 ballot initiative violates the U.S. Constitution, a court spokeswoman said. [Updated, 5:50 p.m.: His ruling is expected to be released between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m.]

Here's my prediction:
It is obvious that Judge Walker will rule against the traditional institution of marriage in favor of his convoluted ideal of equal protection. He has the ruling of the Judge Joseph Tauro's recent decision that DOMA interferes with states' rights as an added incentive to overthrow millennia of established Western law concerning marriage. Judge Walker has made no pretense of objectivity in this case against marriage.

I also predict that gay rights and same sex marriage activists will then drag the decision out in appeals in order to delay the decision at the Supreme Court level, that is until they can be certain that the Supreme Court justices will rule in their favor and once again overturn well-established marriage law. At the same time, marriage advocates will try to hasten the case into the Supreme Court.

At this point the decision to irrevocably alter the institution of marriage will depend on who arrives at the Supreme Court.

If marriage advocates get there first, we'll see gay activists try to tear apart the Constitution (and to destroy anyone who gets in their way) to get what they want - not equal protection under the law, but protected class status and special privilege.

If gay activists delay the case in getting to the Supreme Court, same sex marriage will be established by judicial fiat (just as abortion was established so many years ago), Judge Tauros' precious states' rights will once again be thrown out the window as state constitutions that bar same sex marriage will be rent, gays will establish themselves as a governmentally protected class, and the institution of marriage will become meaningless to everyone except a handful of practitioners who understand the social value of responsible procreation.

In essence, this will further the cause of class warfare and further degrade the principles of individualism and liberty in favor of preferred social classes and the vague concept of political payback.

Gay and same sex marriage activists, I'm sure, are giddy with the expectation.