Posted on 09/13/2005 2:32:37 AM PDT by Crackingham
The latest struggle over who decides the legality of gay marriage - citizens, lawmakers, or the courts - played out in the nation's most populous state last week. The California legislature was the first to approve a bill legalizing same-sex marriage, although Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vowed to veto it.
The political stand-off raises legal issues specific to California, state and national observers say. The legislature's attempt to broaden the definition of marriage is in direct conflict with a citizens' initiative passed in 2000 defining legal marriage as between a man and woman only. That citizen's initiative itself, Proposition 22, is also being challenged in court.
But the recent move by Sacramento legislators emphasizes what some observers see as a shift in public opinion that appears to be more accepting of gay marriage. Still, others anticipate the bill could add to the backlash against the gay-marriage movement that prompted 11 states to ban same-sex marriage through ballot initiatives last year. Indeed, California conservative groups have heightened efforts to place an initiative before voters that would recognize heterosexual unions only.
National pollsters report more acceptance of gays and lesbians in a variety of other contexts. What happens in California could set the tone for how other states deal with the issue legislatively.
"There will be lurches backward and forward as some states throw up roadblocks to such arrangements and others embrace them," says Elizabeth Garrett, a law professor at University of Southern California who tracks state initiatives. "But overall the support for civil unions is getting stronger and stronger."
A recent statewide poll here shows that voters are evenly split (about 46 percent for, and 46 against) same-sex marriage. Five years ago, 61 percent of voters backed the initiative that defined marriage as between a man and woman. "Moves by the California legislature are part of the national trend toward greater equality for same-sex couples that has been growing coast to coast for the past few years," says Ms. Garrett.
001:024 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
001:025 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
001:026 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
001:027 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
001:028 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
001:029 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
001:030 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
001:031 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
001:032 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
The article is a series of cascading lies, one right after another...
Christian Science? Really? How about human biology?
Which two people would that be?
Has anyone posted articles or information explaining why the legislature believed it could or should defy the expressed will of their own citizens?
Seems to me, once California its will by initiative, the legislature should have bowed out and let the courts decide the legality of the initiative.
What do you expect? It's California for you.
The article is a series of cascading lies, one right after another...
Yes, it is. Look at the third paragraph and it proves it.
You mean like in Maine? Just think if we had homsexual marrige here in Maine, our two congressmen could get married and our two US Senators could get married, oh happy days. </sarcasm
Ahhh...Crackingham... Is that like breaking a pig? or like splitting a pair of ham-hocks?
How does the passage of a bill by a legislature that is completely out of touch with its citizens, and guaranteed to be vetoed, foretell anything about a change in public opinion on an issue?
Ooops. Sorry. Didn't mean to ask the obvious.
IMO the mere politicians amongst us have been "already captured"(to borrow from the enemy Stave Warren of ACTUP -
"Warning to the Homophobes "the Advocate Sept.1987 p.29)
Our government has internalized that divisive "wall of
separation" erected by the Ku Klux Klansman and the transmission belt to Soviet Communist dictatorship (the ACLU ) back in 1947.Our Government has internalized the
TREASON of State Dept. document 7277 Living at Peace in a world without War-and the UNESCO:State Dept. agency actions
tandem to that. As the UN is by design a reflection of the
Soviet Commuist system it is no suprise that the Soviet
dialectic for world domination would be imbedded in the UN
charter and goals. The impression of sexual immorality as a
means to destroy the Church-or to distract the majority while the enemy advances in other criticle areas. is to be
expected. As the post modern Democratic Party no longer represents America but that Soviet Communist system and has
little if any resistance from the RINO I must conclude it must be considered that many other State Legislators will
continue to press Sodomy upon all.short answer to the question--YES.
As I recall, the people of California voted against this 69% to 31%
But hey what do they know
Not bloodly likely, thank God. The legislature in California is unique in having so many left-wingers who feel so completely safe in their seats. Even Massachusetts' legislature wouldn't vote for this--they only go so far as civil unions.
61% to 39%, still a landslide.
"Which two people would that be?"
It's surely a lot more than two. Ten years ago -- even five, there is no way that ANY legislature could have conceivably passed same-sex marriage. It wasn't even seriously considered by the most ardent gay activists. There has clearly been a shift in public opinion. These days nearly half of MA residents think it's a good idea. By the time that the voters get a constitutional amendment in MA, it won't be possible to pass it any more.
I may be wrong but I thought the CA legislature did pass such a law over five years ago. It is my recollection that the constitutional amendment passed five years ago was in response to this law.
Nope. This is the first ever in the nation to be passed by a state legislature. It's being hailed by the media as "historic."
The freak who wrote the article and its editor.
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.