Posted on 09/09/2009 12:10:40 PM PDT by kopite82
http://ag.ca.gov/initiatives/activeindex.php?active=A 09-0026
Submitted for Title and Summary on September 01, 2009. "2010 California Marriage Protection Act."
PDF link here: http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i823_initiative_09-0026.pdf
SECTION 1. Title. This act shall be known as the "2010 California Marriage Protection Act."
SECTION 2. Section 7.6 is added to Article I of the California Constitution to read: "No party to any marriage shall be restored to the state of an unmarried person during the lifetime of the other party unless the marriage is void or voidable, as set forth in Part 2 of Division 6 of the Family Code.
Relevant section of the Family Code: http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/code/getcode.html?file=./fam/02001-03000/2210-2212
Website: http://rescuemarriage.org/
I wonder what constitutes “voidable”. In CA I might not have been able to divorce my abusive wife, because I didn’t have that much proof, and anyway, in many of the more liberal judges’ minds men can’t be abused by women.
I don’t know what the motivation for this was, but many people would probably agree that divorce is too easy.
(ready for flames)
Sounds like a great way to further reduce the number of marriages.
What a stupid idea.
Some things just go too far.
More control brought to you by Government.
Well the one woman - one man marriage idea would make divorce illegal. It isn’t one man or one woman at a time. It is one man-one woman marriage.
The poster signed up to FR today. The site linked is actually a pro same sex marriage site.
The “anti-divorce” bill is obviously a sort of an attempt at satire. Their point would seem to be “Heterosexuals sometimes get divorced, therefore we should allow men to marry men and women to marry women.”
the state is bankrupt and productive people are bailing out but the legislature continues it’s experiments in social and environmental engineering
The following is what I found...
RescueMarriage.org is the brain-child of concerned Christian and political activist John Marcotte, who felt strongly that Prop 8 did not go far enough in protecting traditional marriage. With the help of attorney’s and friends, Marcotte is attempting to ban divorce in the State of California.
Good..Elimination of screwy marriages and divorces such as Brittney Spears and her generation for one....
Great idea and a perfect way to protect marriage.
The poster signed up to FR today. The site linked is actually a pro same sex marriage site.
Can you give some information regarding what you're saying with this site being linked to a "same sex marriage site"? I'm trying to run down information on this and find out where the person is coming from and what's going on and so on and so forth... :-)
Good..Elimination of screwy marriages and divorces such as Brittney Spears and her generation for one....
Well..., before I comment too much on that initiative, I would like to know more about who is involved, what their motivation is, where they come from, who they are politically associated with and a bunch of other stuff. This sounds pretty fishy to me... so I would like to find out. :-)
Follow the link the poster provided:
It has links to several pro gay marriage sites. The “articles” on the surface appear to be anti-gay marriage, but if you read them, they are clearly satirical, mocking those who oppose same sex marriage.
And getting married isn't easy?
Here's a simple question, are there more marriages per capita today than there were 50, 20 or even 10 year ago?
Why are there fewer men getting married? Because, unless the intent is to raise a family, the legal ramifications do not justify the risk. The Gov't has interfered in this to the point that marriage simply isn't as attractive as it used to be.
Consider, I get married and immediately lose 50% of my income, my possessions and assume a life-long responsibility for any debts she brings in. If she cheats and has a child, I get responsibility for not only raising the child, but also paying for college (of the child's choice). If I divorce her for any number of reasons, the court may decide that she gets a percentage of my income for the rest of my life.
So, now we have pre-nuptual agreements becoming more and more popular. But consider this - if we live together without the benefit of being married, we can have kids, we can have a home and if we split up - we each go our own way.
That is why, IMHO, marriages are becoming more rare. Men gain NOTHING from the arrangement. Thanks to lawyers and the Gov't getting involved in areas they do not belong.
Although I support the concept in principle, I don’t believe this is a serious push by a conservative group or Christian organization. It seems to me that this is more likely a stunt by bitter leftwing homosexuals...an answer of sorts to Prop. 8. These people think they can show that the real motivation behind Prop. 8 wasn’t the protection of marriage but rather the hatred of gays. At least that seems to be their theory of operation on this...
and anyway, in many of the more liberal judges’ minds men can’t be abused by women.”
In the eyes of many MEN inside the total justice system- women are responsible for their own rapes.
“What were you wearing, dearie?”
“What did you say to piss him off, dearie?”
“Why did you wear that outfit if you didn’t want a man to pay attention to you, dearie?”
“Why did you decide to go to that bar to use the cigarette machine, dearie?”
“Are you sure you were to meet other girl friends at that bar, dearie?”
“Are you sure you weren’t looking to make a connection with a man, dearie?”
“Are you sure he didn’t just like you a little too much, dearie?”
Are you sure that you weren’t leading him on, dearie?”
“Are you sure you said ‘NO’. dearie?”
“Are you sure that you meant ‘NO’, dearie?”
“Did you enjoy the experience even a little, dearie?”
” Did you experience an orgasm, dearie?”
“If so, then is it really a rape, dearie?”
I could go on and on.
What do rapes like the one you describe have to do with abusive women or divorce?
Just looked at the filing at the Secretary of State’s office. This is NOT on the ballot, it was just submitted for processing so that signature gathering could begin. Lots of initiatives are filed, very few ever get on the ballot.
FANTASTIC!!! Accurate, well written - thank you!!!
This is one of the dumbest things anyone could do.
It gives the state waaaay tooo much say and authority over peoples private lives. Bad enough that one needs to have a state approval of their mariage. This even if it makes the ballot will NEVER pass
Source please.
It has links to several pro gay marriage sites. The “articles” on the surface appear to be anti-gay marriage, but if you read them, they are clearly satirical, mocking those who oppose same sex marriage.
Here is an example of one article/posting (or whatever you call it). It doesn't seem to be satirical to me. Can you provide some satirical ones? Perhaps you're taking this to be satirical... I don't know. The guy may have a different style of writing. But, I'm still trying to find out about this outfit, so all the information anyone can provide would be nice...
Coalition of sodomites gathers to oppose God’s will
By John MarcottePublished: September 4, 2009
Posted in: Gay MarriageSome homosexuals are working hard to overturn Prop 8 in 2010 — instead of waiting for 2012, when Sarah Palin will be president and/or the world will come to a fiery end.
Marriage equality advocates from across the state hoping to repeal Proposition 8 in 2010 met last weekend in San Francisco to adopt a structure for a statewide signature gathering campaign and elect an interim leadership team to develop a political action committee.
Here is an idea for CA. Put a really huge fee/tax on granting a divorce. That should close the budget gap in a hurry.
$5 marriage license and a $100,000 divorce fee . . . start with a loss leader.
That doesn’t sound like satire to you?
It gives the state waaaay tooo much say and authority over peoples private lives. Bad enough that one needs to have a state approval of their mariage. This even if it makes the ballot will NEVER pass
Do you know if this is an actual iniative or not? You're responding like it is and I'm not really sure, at this point. If you have information in regards to this iniative, outside of this one source given on this thread, I would like to see it.
Do you already know that this is an iniative that exists?
Sounds good to me, at least on the surface. Divorce does far more damage to our society than homosexuality.
Marriage belongs to God, not to men, or “Government.”
Check your Bible. If you want easy “divorce”, use a Pagan ceremony to ritualize the “joining”, and don’t call it “marriage”.
However, it goes without saying that no real man would rape a woman no matter what she is wearing, because a real man controls his desires.
IBTZ?
That doesn’t sound like satire to you?
It's questionable, but I've known some people that have a weird way of writing, too... and this guy could be like that.
SO..., I am looking for some solid confirmation as to the status of this stated iniative, some background into the guy and who backs this -- to get that information.
ALSO..., I did note that one of the links showed it going to a "GAY Rights website" -- as you said, so that's questionable, right there -- being on this webpage that supports this so-called initiative.
Still, I want some further information on this... :-)
I need to know so that I can use my vote and modest contributions to ensure they never achieve power...either directly, or through proxy.
Thanks.
If so, and this poster is putting this up for his first post on his first day and sitting back watching everyone stumble all over themselves -- then he should be banned -- forthwith
I'm waiting to see what he says in response -- or whatever the Admin Moderator and the "kitties" judge... :-)
IBTZ!
Quick... put down “IBTZ” before the Admin Moderator gets to him ... LOL...
Notice I wrote “even if this makes the ballot”
Papaers have been filed to start the process of gathering signatures.
It is just too dumb and is red meat for the hut roots left
Who are these whack-jobs? I need to know so that I can use my vote and modest contributions to ensure they never achieve power...either directly, or through proxy.
Ummm..., it might be one of those "infiltrators" to Free Republic, just waiting to see what kind of furor they can cause on our forum... just for laughs...
I've been trying to find out if it's legitimate and it appears not to be, unless someone can provide me with something that shows that it is. This appears to be totally made up to me -- and something that people like to put on Free Republic so that they can say, " ".... LOL...
So, we may need to ZOT the guy! :-)
Nothing like a newb/troll to start my afternoon.
Typical liberal - twisting the words of both God and men to ridicule people of faith.
Notice I wrote “even if this makes the ballot” Papaers have been filed to start the process of gathering signatures. It is just too dumb and is red meat for the hut roots left
Well..., putting something like this on the ballot, may be a way for some leftists and gay-rights advocates to call attention to their cause in a perverse and round-about way.
I'll be able to tell more about it, if I can get some background on this, but it appears to me that this may be what it is, since I can't find out any other information on it.
And since the original poster has not come here to give that information, that original poster may be in need of a big-time ZOT! LOL...
A 'void' marriage is one that can never be valid. A man "marries" his brother, for instance. (Yeah, I know, it will be civil rights issue, if I live that long.)
A voidable marriage is one that is not automatically illegal, but may be set aside. You marry a supermodel, in Las Vegas, while she is spectacularly drunk. If, on sobering up, she leaves you, and does not come back, she is entitled to have the marriage voided on the grounds that she was intoxicated, and did not voluntarily enter into it.
In Texas anyway.
And assuming that you are a guy.
Just looked at the filing at the Secretary of State’s office. This is NOT on the ballot, it was just submitted for processing so that signature gathering could begin. Lots of initiatives are filed, very few ever get on the ballot.
Until we find out more about this, who is behind it and who this person is on this website -- it may all be a ploy by Sodomites to direct attention to their cause, rather than what this says...
In other words, they're actually working to overthrow marriage, instead of protecting it...
Anyway, this could all be a very twisted ploy by some weird and strange people... i.e., "Sodomites"... LOL...
Nothing like a newb/troll to start my afternoon.
Typical liberal - twisting the words of both God and men to ridicule people of faith.
It's starting to appear that way, in that they are directing people over to another website (on the website promoting this iniative) -- a website that promotes Gay Rights...
Yeah..., like someone would direct someone over to a Gay Rights website and promote this iniative, too... :-)
Paging the Viking Kitties
http://rescuemarriage.org/
this is the web site that the original poster referred to.
Now if you don’t believe that web site that’s fine but it is there and references what has been submitted to the california sec state office for iniiation of the process.
All you had to do was go to the web site posted. Just because you haven’t heard of something or it is posted by a newbie doesn’t make it wrong.
If you look at that website closely, it will become clear that it is not really a pro-traditional marriage site, but a satire of one, meant to promote sodomite marriage.
All the articles I looked at were satires (though not very well done satire) and the site has links to sites that openly advocate same sex marriage.
fair enough. I admit to not bothering to read the articles because I wasn’t that interested. So we can all go back to whatever now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.