California gay weddings face veto

BBC ^

[America First Libertarian]

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has confirmed he will veto a bill endorsing gay marriages.

State legislators voted on Tuesday to allow same-sex marriage in California, but the governor said the decision flew in the face of public opinion.

Five years ago Californians backed a proposition opposing the recognition of gay marriages in other states.

"We cannot have a system where the people vote and the legislature derails that vote," said the governor's office.

"Out of respect for the will of the people, the governor will veto," said Mr Schwarzenegger's press secretary, Margita Thompson.

'Sold out'

Proposition 22, approved in a public vote in 2000, stated that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognised in California".

The bill approved by the California Assembly states that marriage is a civil contract between "two persons".

Gay rights activists accused the governor of playing to his Republican supporters, not the broad range of people who elected him to office.

"Clearly he's pandering to an extreme right wing, which was not how he got elected," said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, one of the bill's sponsors.

"He sold us out."

Court battle

More than 3,400 gay couples got married in California after the city's new mayor decided to defy state law and allow gay weddings in 2004.

But later in the year the state's Supreme Court ruled the mayor had exceeded his authority and nullified the unions.

In March this year a judge ruled that Californian state law had breached a constitutional right to equal treatment of all citizens, irrespective of sexuality.

The issue is now expected to go back to the Supreme Court.

Mr Schwarzenegger says he supports full legal protection for gay couples - but that the issue of gay marriage is best decided by the people or in the courts.

[America First Libertarian]

I have been crying at the very thought. And I have been angry at the contradiction, Mr republican wants "THE COURTS to decide", wheas around the nation "THE COURTS aare tyrannical and should not decide."

I guess tonight I must pray extra hard for conservatism to return to its true nature of liberty. If Schwarzenegger does veto, he will be rejected by me forever.

LONG LIVE OBJECTIVE LIBERTY (regardless if I approve)

[goldstategop]

No. Its the Democrats who sold out this state's voters by pandering to an extremist homosexual minority.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[edcoil]

You cannot be sold out when you know going in you are breaking the law and the will of the people.

It is the legislature the sold out the California people.

[atomicpossum]

How does the legislature try to overturn a solid referendum by the people? Arnie is right to veto.

[Baynative]

Did the democrats consult with the illegal alien lobby? They might not be so warm to the idea of this gay marriage stuff if they think they have to marry some guy in order to stay here.

[Revolting cat!]

C'mon Larry, we gotta hurry while it's still legal!

[Hendrix]

The people have already voted on this issue. Why should the legislature overturn the vote of the public? I trust the people more than the legislature. How is the vote of the majority the "right wing", especially in CA?

[Rummyfan]

Compare this:

Five years ago Californians backed a proposition opposing the recognition of gay marriages in other states.

"We cannot have a system where the people vote and the legislature derails that vote," said the governor's office.

"Out of respect for the will of the people, the governor will veto," said Mr Schwarzenegger's press secretary, Margita Thompson.

With this:

'Sold out'

Gay rights activists accused the governor of playing to his Republican supporters, not the broad range of people who elected him to office.

"Clearly he's pandering to an extreme right wing, which was not how he got elected," said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, one of the bill's sponsors.

I believe it was approved with over 60% of the vote.

[Old Seadog]

At least Arnold vetoed it. Now we will have to wait and see what the courts do with it.

[L98Fiero]

"Clearly he's pandering to an extreme right wing, which was not how he got elected,"

Yes, the 60-some-odd percent of California voters who shot down "gay marriage" are extreme right wing. Now I know that if one favors traditional marrige, one is "extreme right wing".

[John Lenin]

If Schwarzenegger does veto, he will be rejected by me forever.

I don't think Arnie will cry any tears over the loss.

[Andy from Beaverton]

Arnold, where are you? Time for a makeover!

[TheBigB]

If Schwarzenegger does veto, he will be rejected by me forever.

I'm sure he's losing sleep over the very thought of that.

[michaelbfree]

You are simply dead wrong on this one - the California legislature is one step short of criminality in even passing this law since the people of California so soundly rejected anything of this sort years ago - this couldn't even stand on its own merit, was added to another bill that wasn't or couldn't even be considered in the same universe....go Arnie!!

[NeoCaveman]

Ah another Libertarian for a new government program, aka gay marraige.

[GSWarrior]

he's pandering to an extreme right wing, which was not how he got elected,

The biggest lie being peddled by the homosexual lobby is that if you are against gay marriage you are a homophobe.

[Always Right]

If Schwarzenegger does veto, he will be rejected by me forever.

I don't suspect Arnold was going to make a pass at you anyways.

[SPOTTEDOWL]

I think that the people of the liberal State of California have spoken and even they understand that marriage is not intended for same sex couples. I realize that you cannot legislate morality, but this idea is just a sham to gain insurance benefits like normal married couples. I am rather sick of the 'gay'/lesbo crowd pushing their agenda in the faces of straight people. It's your mouths and I could care less what you elect to put in them, but I am glad to see Arnold do his duty for the people who passed the proposition by 61%. I keep forgetting when the minority was allowed to run the Country and can still remember when the majority was in charge!

[nyconse]

Say what? It should be vetoed and their should be a amendment banning gay marriage forever...opposite sexes marry-no to destroying marriage as we know it.

[judgeandjury]

"Clearly he's pandering to an extreme right wing, which was not how he got elected," said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, one of the bill's sponsors.

Clearly, Geoff Kors is rather dense if he truly believes what he said.

[xsmommy]

and the libertarian screams WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH.

[vpintheak]

Um, you do know that the people of Kalifornia have ina majority decided they do not want homosexuals marrying? Once again an elitist left-wing group of congress-critters try to impose their will upon the masses.

[DoraC]

I guess tonight I must pray extra hard for conservatism to return to its true nature of liberty.

I agree. I would love to see the day when no one is discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, and I am sure that day will come.

If Schwarzenegger does veto, he will be rejected by me forever.

This law would violate Prop. 22, so it is a good thing he did veto it. Not that it matters. The law would have been declared null by courts anyway.

[DoraC]

Yet again you're proving why some liber(al)tarians aren't any different then the Democrats.

So Barry Goldwater is a Demonrat? There are lots of other issues on which libertarians disagree with the Demonrats, including, but not limited to: defense, spending, taxes, etc. To say libertarians are Demonrats is just utter bullsh*t.

The difference is that liberarians say: "the government needs to get out of our lives" and the so-called conservatives say: "the government needs to get out of our lives, except in cases in which I don't agree with what people are doing." And yet I still prefer conservatives to Demonrats.

[Mulch]

"I guess tonight I must pray extra hard for conservatism to return to its true nature of liberty."

Whats your definition? Tyrannical rule by an unelected court system and an out of control radical legislature?

[Savage Beast]

Television ads in California have been skewering the Governor over one thing after another for a long time. We can expect the skewering to reach conflagration proportions after this.

[LexBaird]

I thought for a moment that said "California gay weddings face video". If anything would end gay weddings, it would be the prospect of having to see the video footage over and over...

[Mulch]

You must have a death wish for freedom in America. If you watch the radical homosexuals execute their strategy, you'll see they are the least tolerant and most discriminatory element in our society.

[DoraC]

You must have a death wish for freedom in America.

No, I want freedom to flourish in America, like it has always done. Please tell me why freedom would die if same-sex marriage gets legalised. Would you be forced to marry another man (assuming that you are a man)? Would your church be forced to marry two persons of the same sex? No, they are not even forced to marry a white to a black person, if they don't want to. So no, it is not exactly the end of the world.

If you watch the radical homosexuals execute their strategy, you'll see they are the least tolerant and most discriminatory element in our society.

Really? Then tell me.

[Mulch]

Here are a few examples for you:

Ex #1: In Canada, a priest or minister is banned from citing passages in the Bible that denounce homosexuality. If they do, they are prosecuted for hate speech crimes. The American homosexual groups are working diligently to make this happen in the US.

Ex#2: The Boy Scouts of America has had to defend themselves in lawsuits by homosexual groups for not allowing openly homosexual men as scout leaders. The BSOA has lost federal grants and other support because of their stance of protecting kids from the radical homosexuals. Recently, more lawsuits were filed by homosexual groups against the BSOA to prevent theme from use of any publicly funded land.

Need more evidence? Ok. Lets continue.

Ex#3: Many American corporations are making mandatory diversity training to indoctrinate employees on accepting homosexuality. If people refuse to attend these classes, even if it violates their closely held religious beliefs, they can be disciplined up to and including termination of employment.

Ex#4: Public schools are teaching youngsters, even as young as 5 years old, about homosexuality. These schools do not inform the parents of these children of these programs. A recent incident in Massachusetts, I believe, occurred when a father of one of these kids saw a book that was being used to teach his child about homosexuality, visited the school to protest. He was arrested, handcuffed and hauled off to jail.

Convinced yet? Lets go on.

Ex#5. A lesbian used the office-wide email system within the offices of a government services department to announce homosexual related activities and events that she invited others to attend. When another employee emailed her to tell her he did not want to receive these emails, he was fired.

Ex#6: A manager at Allstate Insurance Co, expressed the Christian view that homosexuality was a sin, in a non-work related forum. He was terminated on the spot.

More?

Ex#8: A Christian group was arrested at a gay pride parade in Philadelphia for displaying posters that expressed their view that homosexuality was a sin. They were arrested and faced charges that could have led to up to 15 years in prison.

Ex#7: Homosexual groups have recently announced that they have setup a website that will list the name of any person that has signed a petition to prevent homosexual marriage. They threaten to publish the addresses of these individuals so that other homosexuals can go to their residence and harass them further.


These are ones that I can think of off the top of my head. If you need further proof, I can certainly spend time and do more diligent research for you.

[SeaLion]

the liberal State of California

Yes, but the good news is the 61%--let's not give up on California jsut yet, please!

...The people, I mean. Don't ask me to explain the legislature! I'm with you on this one, Spottedowl: C'mon Arnie, time to terminate!