Petition to Arrest Mayor Newsom

Petition to Gov. Schwarzenegger to Arrest Mayor Newsom of San Francisco ^ | 2/19/2004 | Nick Bradley

[Remember_Salamis]

To: Califonia Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco has violated California law by Marrying Same-sex couples in San Francisco. It is patently unlawful to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples. Section 308.5 of the California Family Code plainly defines a valid marriage as being limited to one man and one woman. Furthermore, California Penal Code section 115 prohibits the knowing procurement of any false or forged instrument to be filed or recorded in any public office, making such an act a felony punishable by up to three (3) years in prison.

The Mayor of San Francisco is giving the middle finger to the State of California and the United States as a Whole. To make it worse, Mayor Newsom and the City of San Francisco has stated that it is suing the state of California, challenging its ban on same-sex marriages on constitutional grounds. By doing so, Mayor Newsom is proposing that every law that was not a constitutional amendment is un-enforceable. If he is not arrested, there is no basis for drug laws, the carrying of concealed weapons, prostitution, and every other law that is not written into the constitution of the state of California.

Please arrest this man.

[freebacon]

^

[abraxas_sandiego]

While you may disagree with Newsom's actions, the legal theory behind your argument is simplistic and ineffective. Newsom has rather strong arguments as to the constitutionality of the denial of marriages based on sex and consequently sexual orientation. In the end, it will take a constitutional amendment to ensure that gays cant get married...that's not the case as of now.

[Travis McGee]

I'd like to see a mayor and police chief in some rural Kali town declare that they've read the 2nd amd, understand it, and will hand out Kali concealed pistol permits to any non-felon US Citizen for the asking.

That mayor would be on much stronger Constitutional ground, but you can bet the ATF would come in with MP-5's blazing in the first hour.

Some constituencies are more equal than others.....

[Travis McGee]

What arguements would then be? And how would the same arguements NOT hold for polygamous marriages, or father/daughter or father/son or brother/brother marriages? Please explain how 3% of the population can demand that 5,000 years of civilization may be overturned to fit THEIR preferred perversion, but not the other?

Please give a detaile, logical answer FOR homo "marriage," but AGAINST the other cases?

What homohubris to declare "MY perversion is normal and worthy of marriage, but YOUR perversion is NOT!"

[abraxas_sandiego]

the argument is that it's unconstitutional to deny someone a LEGAL right based on their race, sex, etc...if 2 hetero people can get married, then in all probability, it's unconstitutional to say that two gays can't. your argument about father/son marriages has zero bearing or applicability...it's not a LEGAL option for ANYONE.

[bootless]

I wasn't at all surprised to hear that Da Mayor would to that. Hey, it completes his trifecta: orchestrating Chad-gate (with the famous Chicago Fraud Rod), illegally destroying Chicago's downtown airport, Meigs Field, in the middle of the night, and now this.

So, does that mean that we can turn San Francisco into a concealed carry city and county, even if it doesn't comply with their laws? I mean, I don't agree with that, so it's OK, right?

(sound of crickets chirping.)

[EUPHORIC]

"It's a politician with no respect for his office pandering to the gay community. It's a sad human being that felt unimportant, and unnoticed when The Terminator was being elected, and wants some of the spotlight. It's the systematic destruction of American culture, and human tradition. By a radical Left, Which has been their agenda since Vietnam to Affirmative Action. To divide the citizenry of the nation and create a new proletariat for them to preach to."

AMEN. 100% AMEN.

[EUPHORIC]

"Wait I just thought of something. I am in love with a beauty of an AK-47 in Virginia..."

Man are YOU going to have to get some MAJOR surgical alterations to consummate THAT marriage...

Bring grease...

[EUPHORIC]

"While you may disagree with Newsom's actions..."

Poppycock.

[EUPHORIC]

"if 2 hetero people can get married, then in all probability, it's unconstitutional to say that two gays can't. your argument about father/son marriages has zero bearing or applicability..."

Twist and spin. Nothing but BS 100%.

[abraxas_sandiego]

wow...what an insightful, intelligent response. well done.

[HitmanLV]

I dunno about that. He is already a hero to millions, and if we do nothing it will encourage more 'heroes' like Mayor Daley to do the same.

The state AG should investigate and go to court to issue am injunction to stop these marriages going on in SF. Then, take the process to the courts, where it will be decided fairly.

A state court could find Prop 22 illegal under the California State Charter. If that's the case, Cali should take steps to amend it's Constitution defining marriage, just like we did here in Nevada.

If the state court finds that the law is valid, then SF can't issue the licenses. My guess is that even then, they won't stop. The recourse then is to arrest the folks who are giving these licenses, or fine the city of SF (amd the elected officials personally) for every invalid license it wilfully issued, or some combination of those remedies.

I agree we shouldn't be ras, but clearly SF can't be allowed to continue breaking the law. What course of action would you prefer?

[E.G.C.]

BTT!!!!!

[highlander_UW]

We don't want to make a martyr of Newsom, which would make him the hero to millions. We have to be very careful what course of action we take.

I agree. Everyone in S.F. with a parking ticket should return it and say they don't believe the city has the authority to charge parking to the very citizens that own the public land, and since Newsom can ignore laws then laws don't apply to parking tickets as well.

[mewzilla]

A marriage license isn't a right, it's a privilege. If it was a right then incest, polygamy, and polyandry wouldn't be illegal, too.

[highlander_UW]

the argument is that it's unconstitutional to deny someone a LEGAL right based on their race, sex, etc...if 2 hetero people can get married, then in all probability, it's unconstitutional to say that two gays can't. your argument about father/son marriages has zero bearing or applicability...it's not a LEGAL option for ANYONE.

False logic here. Heterosexual and homosexual people have an EQUAL right to marry someone of the opposite sex. There is no discrimination. The efforts are to change the meaning of marriage...and if it can be changed to fit one perversion, why not others?

[expatguy]

Obviously they are.

It does not matter what the law is. Its what you think the law is.

[.30Carbine]

...but your state is next.

Actually, my state, Vermont, was, sadly, first.