Wrong Form May Invalidate Calif Same-Sex Marriages

Reuters ^ | 2.18.04 | Spencer Swartz

[mhking]

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California will not accept the marriage licenses granted to thousands of same-sex couples in San Francisco because the city created its own form to remove such terms as "bride" and "groom," a state official said on Wednesday.

"There is a statewide form that every county has to use for marriage applications. If we receive application forms that are different from the single form used throughout the state, we will not accept them," said Nicole Kasabian Evans, a spokeswoman for the Health and Human Services Agency.

Meanwhile, President Bush joined a chorus of those opposing San Francisco's nearly week-long experiment in allowing gay marriages, a practice condemned on Tuesday night by California's Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Evans said her agency, which processes all state marriage license applications that become state records, would return the forms if the city sent them in -- but she admitted that the issue will really be decided in the courts because the weddings violate a state law defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Nancy Lafaro, director of the San Francisco County Clerk's office, said the marriage license applications gay and lesbian couples in San Francisco have filled out since last Thursday were changed. "For example, instead of saying bride or groom, the form in San Francisco says applicant one and applicant two," she said.

Lafaro added the same-sex marriage application form also uses the terms "unmarried individuals" rather than "unmarried man" or "unmarried woman.

EQUAL PROTECTION STANCE

About 2,600 gay and lesbian couples have been married since Mayor Gavin Newsom allowed same-sex marriages on grounds that homosexuals have the right to wed under the state's equal protection clause.

Same-sex marriages, however, defy Proposition 22, a law approved in 2000 by California voters, that restricts marriage to heterosexual couples. The measure passed with support from about 60 percent of those who voted on the initiative.

President Bush on Wednesday told reporters in Washington he was "troubled" by San Francisco's same-sex marriages.

"I have consistently stated that I'll support (a) law to protect marriage between a man and a woman. And, obviously, these events are influencing my decision," Bush said in his first public comments on the city's same-sex marriages.

On Tuesday night, Schwarzenegger said he supported California's domestic partnership laws but called on San Francisco to obey Prop. 22.

"Californians spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage when they overwhelmingly approved California's law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. I support that law and encourage San Francisco officials to obey that law. The courts should act quickly to resolve this matter," he said.

Gay and lesbian couples continued to roll into San Francisco city hall on Wednesday to exchange wedding vows a day after two California state judges refused to issue temporary restraining orders to halt the practice California Superior Court Judge James Warren asked San Francisco to "cease and desist" from issuing more marriage licenses but agreed to let city lawyers argue on March 29 why it should be allowed to wed gay and lesbian couples.

A second California judge, Robert Evans Quidachay, on Tuesday delayed a hearing until Friday on another lawsuit challenging the decision to allow same-sex marriages. (Additional reporting by Adam Entous)

[mhking]

Just damn.

If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...

[DoughtyOne]

Form be damned, the state of California does not recognize same sex marriages. This is sortof like a newspaper columnist writing a note on the evils of murder, due to the perp using the wrong ammo to carry out the act.

Yes I recognize the gravity of the two subjects is different, but the underlying principle is the same. Illegal is illegal, despite our nation's not being able to understand the term any longer.

[DoughtyOne]

nation's "leaders..."

[Colonel_Flagg]

"There is a statewide form that every county has to use for marriage applications. If we receive application forms that are different from the single form used throughout the state, we will not accept them," said Nicole Kasabian Evans, a spokeswoman for the Health and Human Services Agency.

The irony here is absolutely amazing.

[GeronL]

The entire city government is issuing invalid forms to unqualified couples.

Sounds like someone should go to jail for FRAUD!! =o)

[mrs tiggywinkle]

**California will not accept the marriage licenses granted to thousands of same-sex couples in San Francisco because the city created its own form to remove such terms as "bride" and "groom," a state official said on Wednesday. **

Marriage between same sex people is illegal in California. No piece of paper will *make* it legal. The majority of Californian's voted to keep marriage between a man and a woman. The law needs to be enforced!

[GeronL]

So the city is guilty of running a fraudulant pyramid scheme??

[11th_VA]

If we receive application forms that are different from the single form used throughout the state, we will not accept them," said Nicole Kasabian Evans, a spokeswoman for the Health and Human Services Agency.

I hope she works for Arnold, and I hope he enforces the LAW ...

[squarebarb]

It would take a lot of chuzpah, but conservatives should take two 12-year-old and fifteen-year-old sisters and insist on being 'married'. An old man of 70 and a young boy of 16 and insist on being 'married'. A 14-year-old girl and a woman of 50 and insist on being 'married'. Stand in the line. it would be like the scene from Blazing Saddles where wierdos from everywhere lined up for mayhem. Get the attention of the media. (or not?) Leftists were always good at this game.

[The Mayor]

we will not accept them

Oh how cool : )

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

I love technicalities, don't you?!

[skr]

So they found a technicality. Apparently the violation of the law regarding California's legal definition of marriage wasn't enough.

[claudiustg]

This is what you get when there is no leadership coming from the governor's office.

[tet68]

If they took fees for these forms, possibly.

Wouldn't that be a hoot!

[patriciaruth]

At something like $104 a pop for those "licenses," San Francisco made a tidy bundle from the 2300 or so "marriages."

Makes you wonder what the real motivation was behind the event.

[mhking]

Form be damned, the state of California does not recognize same sex marriages.

Agreed. The "licenses" aren't worth the price of the paper they're printed on.

[Imal]

"Enter the bureaucrats..."

[dalebert]

What form could be right? Marriages are between men and women. Who can help it if they can't find the right form(or name) for their union.

[GeronL]

Oh those people were paying for those invaid documents all right.... fraud! false advertising!