Posted on 01/16/2002 8:48:00 AM PST by gohabsgo
Pro-family activists scored a major — if temporary — victory on Monday after a bill essentially legalizing homosexual marriage in California was tabled. But the battle could resume as early as next month, according to the bill's sponsor, who has pledged to continue the fight.
The decision to pull the bill from consideration came after pro-family citizens inside and outside California pressured state lawmakers and California Gov. Gray Davis, urging them to oppose Assembly Bill 1338. That bill would have created "civil unions" — the legal equivalent of marriage — for homosexual couples throughout the state.
But even as Assemblyman Paul Koretz, of West Hollywood, announced he was shelving the bill, he said he is planning to reintroduce the bill in the future. Scott Svonkin, Koretz's chief of staff, said the Assembly member was "holding the bill in order to reintroduce it as a different bill in February, or will introduce the same legislation in December of this year, for the next two-year session."
"It appears that there are still . . . some in the public that don't understand the difference between civil union and marriage," Svonkin said. Karen Holgate, policy director for the Capitol Resource Institute in Sacramento, said the truth is many Californians are discovering the truth about the bill, and do understand the difference — that AB 1338 would essentially grant homosexuals the right to marry. She added that while she is pleased the bill has been pulled, the war against the homosexual attempt to destroy marriage is continuing unabated.
"We cannot let up; we have to remain vigilant," Holgate said. "This is not a dead issue. . . . What we don't want to happen is for people to say, 'We won,' walk away and forget it and then ('civil unions' supporters) bring up the bill later this year." Focus on the Family President James C. Dobson, Ph.D., also warned the fight must continue.
"The battle is not over," Dobson said. "We have won a major skirmish, but the war is yet to be won." Holgate did credit pro-family activity for what is at least a temporary reprieve. The bill garnered a tremendous amount of attention —in the form of calls and letters to lawmakers — especially after Dobson called on his national radio audience on Monday to bring pressure against the bill. Holgate wants those calls to continue.
"(We still need) people's telephone calls to their own legislators — not just today, but next week, next month — to continually let them know, 'Do not vote on this bill, do not bring up same-sex marriage laws. ' "
In March 2000, 61 percent of Californians voted to pass Proposition 22, which defines marriage as exclusively between one man and one woman. "We thank God for this tremendous victory," said Randy Thomasson, executive director of Campaign for California Families.
But Thomasson warned that not only is AB 1338 coming back in another form, but other pro-homosexual marriage bills are likely waiting in the wings. The decision to pull the bill came as Capitol Resource Institute, Focus on the Family and Family Research Council held news conferences in California about the issue in key legislative districts.
The issue is galvanizing Californians as they find out about it, according to James Oviedo, who heads outreach and development efforts to the U.S. Hispanic/Latino community for Focus on the Family. Oviedo, who has appeared at several news conferences, said the Hispanic community of California is especially concerned.
For example, more than 150 people — an overwhelming majority of them Hispanic — showed up at a press conference in Bakersfield, Calif., on Saturday to send a message to Democratic Assemblyman Dean Florez. Many of the audience had traveled up to four hours to attend the gathering, Oviedo said.
"I told the Assembly member, 'Look out there. These are all Hispanic faces. What would you tell them — Does their vote count or is California going to try to ignore them?' " Oviedo said in response, Florez gave a ringing endorsement of traditional marriage.
TAKE ACTION. If you live in California, call your Assembly member today and urge him or her to oppose legalizing "civil unions." You can obtain contact information by checking the front of your local phone book, or by visiting our Legislative Action Center.
Also, call Governor Gray Davis at (916) 445-2841 with the same message. You can also write to the governor at: State Capitol, Sacramento, CA 95814, or fax him at (916) 445-4633.
If you live outside California, contact Gov. Davis' office at (916) 445-2841 (Sacramento) or (202) 624-5270 (Washington, D.C.)and urge him to oppose legalizing "civil unions."
For more information, see the Focus on the Family resource, "Keep Fighting Gay Marriage"
Isn't that how ALL of CA's unpopular laws eventually get passed?
Sexual intercourse was intended for the primary purpose of procreation and stregthening the pair bond. Its subversion for purely hedonistic functions has, in part, created the massive social disfunctions we currently view in our society.
We have the mainstream media, the entertainment industry and the college campuses and professors to blame for a good part of this problem.
However, the anti heterosexual gay agenda pushers never rest. They, their fellow maggots in the legislature, Davis and the major newspapers are now working on how to sneak this through while we are not watching!
If Davis starts to look like he might lose, these vile anti heterosexual gay agenda pushers will go into overdrive to get their main agenda passed and signed by Davis before he leaves! They would try to pass this after Christmas and have Davis sign it before he leaves us if he loses! They need Davis to sign any such anti heterosexual gay agenda hate bill!
SODOMITES 0
Does that mean that infertile couples should also not be allowed to marry, since they can't procreate?
Sorry, what was I thinking, it's not something the left wants, so it won't happen.
..and a heartfelt Thank-you to James Dobson for his unrelenting determination to protect families!!
(I know you meant to type legislation.)
Yes, you're right about divorce destroying families. But making divorce difficult has been tried many times in the past in many western societies with discouraging results. Abandonment, adultery, domestic violence and other regrettable effects have only been amplified by restrictions on divorce. Moral suasion will have to do.
I do. The bill didn't even make it to the floor for a vote. That's how little support it had.
Good point, and we're all paying for those corporate benefits since those costs are structured into pricing, like everything else. But in my view, there are two things the homosexual lobby would accomplish by establishing "civil union" -- 1) a source of benefits that does not rely so heavily on continued employment with a company or on the continued viability of that company (the government is much more durable), and 2) official recognition of the "legitimacy" of homosexual pairings, not merely a patchwork of acceptance in the state's private sector.
They can try, can't they? One might just as well ask whether married couples with "one child sterility" must have their marriages annuled. Infertility has been known to reverse itself, often unexpectedly and inexplicably, and more often than you might think. Then, of course, there is adoption. The whole point of marriage, to my mind, is the formation of a family unit on a solid moral foundation, which homosexuality does not provide.
The way that generally works, is that one local or state group will force an employer to add it in, then to deal with the implications of having different benefit arrangements in different states, the employer just makes it a blanket policy.
But they are simply tools and useful fools!
See the following links for education regarding the attack on American institutions, especially the family!
Who is Antonio Gramsci? You Better Learn!!!
http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3a4c610569be.htm
Original Sin
http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3b80051c3e46.htm
There is no basis for them getting the legal benefits... This gets overlooked because infertility between heterosexuals is generally a questionable thing, and so it slides by. Between homosexuals, it is obvious and needs no deeper intrusion to determine.
If there is no procreation, then those with the benefits are simply gaming the system so as to illegitimately transfer benefit rights in an essentially arbitrary manner - with the exception of family members.
Well, PFC, yes, divorce is another horror that threatens the family, but that does not mean that we should focus on it alone and ignore other threats to society such as what the pro-perversion crowd wants to bring upon us. What homosexuals do in private is between them and God, and I will not intrude. But, when they insist upon involving the rest of us, we must fight back.
To all of your Californians who stood up for the family, kudos.
Homosexuality is a behaviour, not a state of being. The term "bigotry" is misused and doesn't apply.
Next.
Why? I didn't abuse the language so as to mislead.
Why? I didn't abuse the language so as to mislead.
Sorry. That was unneccessarily harsh on my part.
Why? I didn't abuse the language.
O.K. See post #40.
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.