Replies

Its becoming clearer every day; we have elected people who are not interested in the Rule of Law unless it benefits their particular group of campaign contributors. The mayor of San Francisco was helped into office by the gay crowd and their money. This is just "pay off" time in the City. To the RATs, the law is merely a nuisance in their drive to create a Marxist paradise in which the Vermin rule and the Law is whatever THEY say it is at any given moment.

The Governator is "silent" on the issue; so is the state AG. The latter because he is part of the problem - he's another liberal commie/socialist, as is the majority of the Cal Legislature. They would vote FOR a gay marriage bill if they thought they could get away with it; this way, they do not have to go "on record" with this very "messy" issue. They will just "let the courts do it." In this they are no different than the national candidates in this election year. They do not want to talk about these "messy issues". The dominant press will not bring any of this up, either, except in the context that we all need to be "tolerant" and we all need to be treated "equally". Neither argument will hold up, but I expect the courts to render this a moot point. Certainly the Cal SC and the infamous 9th Circuit will rule that it is perfectly O.K. to endorse gay marriage. What can we do? The solution may not be at the ballot box.

What can we do? The solution may not be at the ballot box.

A small group of conservatives, one a lawyer, needs to take action.

First, a group of say five, needs to go in and demand a license for their "marriage".

Next, a guy needs to go in and demand a license to "marry" his dog.

Third, another conservative needs to enter and demand a license to "marry" his car.

Then the lawyer needs to file a twelve gazillion dollar suit against the city clerk and the mayor if the licenses are not granted, or hold a press conference with his clients if they are. If homosexuals have the right to redefine the thousands of years old institution of marriage, there is absolutely no reason why it should stop at "two" or at "persons".

The homosexuals pushing this need to be shown up for the lunatics that they are.