Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Viking Kitty/ZOT ping list!. . . don't be shy.
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/
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.
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.
No..., it's not that I don't believe some of the technical details, but my questions were related to who the guy was who was putting this up, what was his background, where he's coming from, who are his supporters, what is he trying to accomplish, and is this a "for real" thing (i.e., someone is actually trying to get such an iniative passed, or it's a "ploy" of some kind).
You'll note that you can have an iniative "put forth" and yet it can still be a "ploy". So, since it was suspicious in the first place, that's why all the questions came up in my mind.
And since the original poster never came back, and never supplied any of the data and background information or even bothered responding to a single post -- at the very least, that made the original poster "highly suspect" if nothing else. And also, it's apparent that this was enough for the Admin Moderator too, who ZOTTED him... :-)
There's obviously something highly suspicious about this thing, so I still would like to know all the connecting information, who is behind it, who are the supporters, and also -- why is the website owner posting links to "Gay Rights" websites?? That's extremely odd for someone who is for defending marriage...
All in all, this does sound like a ploy of some kind -- until someone supplies some good information to the contrary. But, I suspect no one will... and this will die and go away... :-)
Its already like that but the guy has to pay divorce fee.
Met a girl, got married, one child in a couple years she says I want a divorce.
She got house a car and I was told my divorce fee was a base cost of $225,000 (plus tax) over 15 years. I actually paid her lawyer to sue me.
She has a job of her own, a child, a significant tax free pension and now she can marry again and shoot for more money. Woohoo! Good deal huh?
I on the other hand was financially ruined. Wiped out. I lost, was reset, twenty years. Although I had worked up to a lot of money, once again I was making(netting) a starting salary.
My decision to get married was devastating so I quit my job, quit everything and joined the Army. WTH? No regrets for that.
humbly bowing and backing away.... sometimes I am so broke I can’t even pay attention
does that mean that if I move to CA I need to bring my EX-wife with me?
I utterly agree with you.
Interesting points! Yes, there have been many changes over the years. And in many cases for the worse.
I agree with you. Marriage sucks.
"rape" has been expanded to mean the girl says "no" while giggling, doesn't refuse any advances and thoroughly enjoys the intercourse.
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Viking Kitty/ZOT ping list!. . . don't be shy.
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.