Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Schwarzenegger says he respects court's marriage ruling
SJ Mercury News ^ | 05/15/2008 11:31:20 AM PDT | AP

Posted on 05/15/2008 1:01:31 PM PDT by ROP_RIP

SACRAMENTO—Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is vowing to uphold the California Supreme Court's ruling striking down a state ban on gay marriage.

The Republican governor issued a brief statement shortly after the court announced its decision Thursday.

The governor said, "I respect the court's decision and as governor, I will uphold its ruling."

He also reiterated his previously stated opposition to an anti-gay marriage initiative proposed for the November ballot. That initiative would write a ban on same-sex unions into California's constitution.

Last month, Schwarzenegger told a gathering of gay Republicans that he would fight the initiative.

The governor has twice vetoed legislation that sought to legalize gay marriage, saying the issue should be decided by voters or the courts.

(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...


TOPICS: US: California
KEYWORDS: caglbt; homosexualagenda; samesexmarriage; schwarzenegger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
The governor has twice vetoed legislation.. saying the issue should be decided by voters or the courts.

Then he picked B.

Must think CA voters are idiots.

21 posted on 05/15/2008 1:14:46 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP

No surprise, he’s a pu**ywhipped Kennedy clone.


22 posted on 05/15/2008 1:15:45 PM PDT by JZelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP
</"Profiles in Courage">
23 posted on 05/15/2008 1:15:48 PM PDT by Redbob (WWJBD - "What Would Jack Bauer Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP
...anti-gay marriage initiative proposed for the November ballot.

Passing this initiative just took on new importance!

24 posted on 05/15/2008 1:16:23 PM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP

So much for the will of the people. Not the first time CA judges have screwed the voters. Coming soon to the Supreme Court.


25 posted on 05/15/2008 1:16:26 PM PDT by Righter-than-Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Public education....


26 posted on 05/15/2008 1:17:57 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP
The governor has twice vetoed legislation that sought to legalize gay marriage, saying the issue should be decided by voters or the courts.

Toss the turkey OUT.

The Courts have no place is establishing law. And if a ban is added to the state constitution, it is NOT an unconstitutional act. Duh.

There is dissent and no closure on the issue because all of the advances on the homosexual agenda come through the courts, not the legislature or popular vote. The people don't approve of it. It is forced upon them by activist judges.

27 posted on 05/15/2008 1:18:39 PM PDT by weegee (Vote NO on Marxism in 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Disturbin
The homosexuals can yell all they want about the law being specfically against them, but it would be against anything that is not a marriage.

Which is the point. They don't want "marriage". They want to destroy marriage, and this is a perfect way to do it. If marriage can mean anything, then it means nothing.

The polygamists in this country are also cheering; because if there is nothing special about marriage being between one man and one woman; then, what is so damn special about the number two?

28 posted on 05/15/2008 1:18:54 PM PDT by LibertarianLiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP

Adding all these dependents to worker’s benefits is certain to help their budget crisis not to mention encourage more businesses to move into the state, NOT.


29 posted on 05/15/2008 1:19:22 PM PDT by the_devils_advocate_666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP

RNC- RINO’s coming home to roost.

Is he conservative in any way whatsoever.


30 posted on 05/15/2008 1:26:42 PM PDT by stockpirate (Purge the RNC and GOP of ALL SOCIALISTS . Starting with Juan McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

is there ANY Republican out there? I don’t recognize any.


31 posted on 05/15/2008 1:27:54 PM PDT by Blue Turtle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianLiz
The polygamists in this country are also cheering; because if there is nothing special about marriage being between one man and one woman; then, what is so damn special about the number two?

Not to mention pedophile and bestial lovers. If marriage changed definitions from "Two people of the opposite sex of consenting age..." to "Two people of consenting age...", then "Two", "consenting age", and "people" are all up for grabs.

32 posted on 05/15/2008 1:28:26 PM PDT by dan1123 (If you want to find a person's true religion, ask them what makes them a "good person".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Blue Turtle
is there ANY Republican out there? I don’t recognize any.

You know, Huckabee is actually pretty good on this issue...

/ducks

33 posted on 05/15/2008 1:29:52 PM PDT by dan1123 (If you want to find a person's true religion, ask them what makes them a "good person".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP

People, we can’t give up on this issue. Far too many have paid the ultimate price for our freedom. We cannot let these liberal, God-hating, socialists to continue to destroy this nation. We defeated Hitler. We defeated Communism. We put a man on the moon. We can defeat this filthy evil too.


34 posted on 05/15/2008 1:31:14 PM PDT by NoKoolAidforMe (One Nation-Under God. There, I said it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tatsinfla

You stated what I’ve thought all along. Wonder if Duncan Hunter could be drafted to run against the Gropinator?


35 posted on 05/15/2008 1:31:47 PM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Expect no effort from the Gub or the AG for delay or contest this decision.

He can't contest it; there is no higher court in the state than the state Supreme Court. Maybe there is some way he could appeal to a Federal court, but I doubt it; I just don't see how a Federal court would have standing on such a matter..

As far as I see, the only recourse is a state constitutional amendment. He could, of course, lobby and campaign for the amendment, and it's a big shame on him that he refuses. Nevertheless, I don't think that will be necessary for the amendment to pass.

The good news is that this throws gay marraige right back into the national spotlight, and that can only be bad news for the Democrats and good news for us.

36 posted on 05/15/2008 1:34:34 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Blue Turtle

“is there ANY Republican out there? I donÂ’t recognize any”

There are plenty Republocrats but few Republicans.


37 posted on 05/15/2008 1:35:55 PM PDT by stockpirate (Purge the RNC and GOP of ALL SOCIALISTS . Starting with Juan McCain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP

Damn if this isn’t Gray Davis incarnate.

He sure lives down to his reputation.


38 posted on 05/15/2008 1:36:19 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (If you continue to hold your nose and vote, and always win, your nation will be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROP_RIP

39 posted on 05/15/2008 1:37:16 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dan1123

Not to get in the way of your hysteria, but I’m not aware of a any uptick in the number of man/dog or man/child marriages in the wake of the Loving v. Virginia decision, in which an activist Supreme Court said state bans on blacks and whites marrying one another violated the constitution.

If suddenly white men being able to marry women of any color didn’t also mean they were allowed to marry, let’s say, ducks, I don’t know why saying they’re allowed to marry other men would have the same effect.


40 posted on 05/15/2008 1:46:25 PM PDT by kenboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson