Posted on 09/09/2007 2:24:37 PM PDT by kellynla
The California Senate has approved a plan to replace "man and woman" in state references to marriage with "two persons," establishing a same-sex marriage procedure in the state that just seven years ago voted to limit marriage to one man and one woman.
The 22-15 vote came on homosexual Assemblyman Mark Leno's proposal to open marriage to any pair in the state, not just those couples made up of a man and a woman. All Republicans opposed AB43, while all but three Democratic senators supported it.
The bill now goes to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for his signature or veto. He has given ambiguous signals about his support for the latest proposal, but earlier vetoed a similar proposal.
However, in Schwarzenegger's answers to questions from the state Supreme Court he suggested the "use of the words 'marry' and 'marriage' is not required by the California Constitution. Thus, the name of the legal relationship now known as 'marriage' could be changed."
As WND has reported, Schwarzenegger has expressed the opinion that legally, the term "marriage" can be terminated, because registered "domestic partners" already have all of the same legal rights, benefits, duties and obligations as married couples.
The governor continued, "Except for the ability to choose and declare one's life partner in a reciprocal commitment of mutual support, any of the statutory rights and obligations that are afforded to married couples in California could be abrogated or eliminated by the Legislature or the electorate for any rational legislative purpose."
That court solicited comments from Schwarzenegger because it is considering a case that challenges the state's 2000 Proposition 22 vote in which voters expressed the desire to limit marriage to a man and a woman.
The answers contained in Attorney General Jerry Brown's brief were nearly a duplicate of Schwarzenegger's.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
You are so right!
There’s a lot of people here whose pets and farm animals apparently can enter into contracts. LOL!
You're right. Limiting marriage to two is discrimination against polyamorous bisexual people! How insensitive!
No it would not: XX, XY or other.
Didn’t the people in CA already vote to forbid homosexual marriage?
Silly "voter," laws are for judges, not for the proletariat!
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.