Same-sex marriage: Undermining the rule of law

San Diego Union Tribune ^ | February 27, 2004 | Joseph Perkins

[South40]

I am profoundly troubled by the gay marriages in San Francisco.

Not because I am a "homophobe," a label unfairly applied to anyone who does not embrace the gay agenda. Not because I am some sort of religious nut, who thinks that homosexuals ought to be burned at the stake. Not because I am a bigot, who prefers not to associate with gays.

But because city officials in San Francisco have brazenly flouted both state and federal law. It is part of a recent disturbing pattern in California in which ideologically motivated elected officials, as well as activist judges, have taken it upon themselves to suspend the rule of law.

The gay marriage outrage was touched off a fortnight ago when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom unilaterally decided to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Since then, more than 3,300 gay couples from all over have flocked to the city by the bay to get unlawfully married. And many of the ceremonies actually have been performed by a state assemblyman, Mark Leno, a gay Democrat from San Francisco.

Newsom insists that he is acting within the law. He maintains that he is merely upholding the equal protection rights guaranteed by the California Constitution.

But San Francisco's recently elected mayor conveniently ignores a 1977 statute that is part of California's Family Code, which defines marriage as that between a man and a woman.

He also dismisses a 2000 state ballot measure, Proposition 22, overwhelmingly approved by voters, which affirmed that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized" in the state; which declared that California need not recognize same-sex marriages that might be performed elsewhere.

California higher education officials are almost as brazen as San Francisco's lawbreaking mayor.

In recent years, they have tricked up the admission process for the academically elite nine-campus UC system to get around Proposition 209, which forbids racial preferences in public education.

The law has survived challenges before both the California Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. Yet, UC officials continue to bestow preferences upon "underrepresented minorities" – Latinos and blacks – at the expense of whites and Asians.

Indeed, 65 percent of students admitted to UC Berkeley and UCLA with below average SAT scores in 2002 were Latinos and blacks; 58 percent at UCSD and 49 percent at UC Riverside.

The long and short of it is that low-scoring "underrepresented minorities" have a much better chance of being admitted to UC schools than whites and Asians.

That clearly violates the eight-year-old California law, which unequivocally declares that the state "shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin."

Of course, there are certain exceptional cases where state law ought to be ignored. Not because some mayor or some board of regents thinks so, but because state law conflicts with superior federal law.

That is the case with the highly controversial California law that allows marijuana use for – purportedly – medicinal purposes.

It clearly runs afoul with the Controlled Substances Act, the federal law that classifies marijuana as a Schedule I substance with a high potential for abuse.

And it violates the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which requires that a drug be scientifically proven safe and effective before it can be used for medicinal purposes.

In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is no medical marijuana exception to the federal Controlled Substances Act and the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Yet, state and local officials in California pretend that the ruling was never issued.

Indeed, San Diego Police Chief Bill Lansdowne recently informed the City Council, "Our current procedure protects the rights of qualified patients and primary caregivers to have access to legal amounts of marijuana."

If San Francisco Mayor Newsom is offended by the law limiting marriage to a man and woman, if the UC Board of Regents doesn't care much for the law forbidding racial preferences in admissions, if San Diego's police chief and City Council have a problem with federal drug laws prohibiting marijuana use for medicinal purposes, they should work to change those laws.

But they should not presume to ignore those laws, to undermine the rule of law.

For as Thurgood Marshall said: "Lawlessness is lawlessness. Anarchy is anarchy is anarchy. Neither race nor color nor frustration is an excuse for either lawlessness or anarchy."

[Travis McGee]

Feeling chipper esta noche?

[onyx]

LOL! Yes, nice to have you with us again on the night shift, wardaddy.

I tell you Trav, my blood is boiling over this homosexual marriage. CA is in near chaos. I am so happy we are getting out of here, but it can't happen soon enough.

[wardaddy]

Si, yo siento muy fuerte pero no puedo dormir temprano.

[Travis McGee]

Good to hear. I have to hit the rack soon, myself.

[Travis McGee]

Where can we run to that this fecal storm won't follow us, and pollute our children?

[onyx]

We're going to Vicksburg, Mississippi. Soon. Going in late April to buy a house.

[Travis McGee]

I hope you can hold the gaystapo at bay in Ole Miss.

[wardaddy]

Ole Miss is relatively speaking the Bay Area of the state but is still one of the nation's most conservative student bodys(sic).

The faculty and townie activist crowd have sure gotten more liberal and gentrified from when I was there in the late 70s.

[onyx]

I think the "gaystopo" is more at home in New Orleans than anywhere in Mississippi.

wardaddy: I think Trav was referring to the state when he wrote "Ole Miss," but I could be wrong. It would be the first time I read something wrong.

[wardaddy]

The Vieux Carre of New Orleans has always been very homosexual. I think I saw my first blatant homos there as a boy with my folks....hanging in front of the Gunga Den club on Bourbon..lol

[onyx]

LOL! Oh No! You mean you knew what homosexuals were when you were a mere lad?

[wardaddy]

We went to New Orleans a couple of times a year ...it being so close and all and I had kin there with Exxon (Humble).

I think I could tell a man dressed as a woman in fairly early grade school.

[onyx]

A little off-subject, but tonight husband and I watched a NBS news magazine type program (never remember the title of the show) about a marriage between a wife of 32 years and her 53 year old husband who decided to become a woman via surgery.

Now you know, my husband is a psychiatrist, but I'm telling you, this program had him swearing and thoroughly disgusted.

The husband in the story, treated himself to facial reconstructive surgery, good-sized boobs and he still loooked like a freak.


I will never understand this. Don't care to, but now with this homosexual marriage thang in the forefront where it belongs, I think we're in for some truly hideous weddings. Here comes the bride...

[Cowboy Bob]

I think that a lot of people are going about this "gay marriage" issue the wrong way. Rather than changing the constitution or trying to recalling the AG of California, etc. what needs to be done is to trivialize the whole matter. As Rush would say "point out the absurdity by being absurd."

What needs to be done is to have mayors perform polygomy ceremonies, or marrying people to animals. (I remember Jimmy Kimmel on the Men's Show with "Monkey Mom")

Rather then fight "gay marriage" and create heros and martyrs, we need to ridicule the whole concept. Once it becomes a joke, it will disappear.

[Viking2002]

Once again, The State That God Should Destroy leads the rest of America closer to the cliff......here's to hoping that America digs in it's heels.

[longtermmemmory]

DOES ANYONE know if there is a LIVE WEBCAM set on City Hall?

It would provide a live UNCESNSORED VIEW OF THE HOMOSEXUALS lining up for marriage?

You could see the joke for what itis.


(BTW: these endless city hall marriages remind me of marriages in Moscow during the USSR.)

[fly_so_free]

In honor of the new state of anarchy, I 've decided I don't need to pay my tickets-I declare my car to be a separate country. My car proclaims diplomatic immunity. When I'm in my car, I am in a separate country, therefore, I am not subject to state or federal laws. I am mailing my speeding and parking tickets back to the courts unpaid, with a note to contact the mayor of San Francisco for further details.

We sure need to pray about this issue of gay marriage, I think we need divine intervention here. Scary, all the things that are happening today.

[StonyBurk]

Do agree with your assesment.However I recieved many replies from freepers who seem to think Roy S.Moore ought
be compared to that fruit in SanFrancisco-simply because
he honored the written langauge of the Constitution,and
its' intent--and beleived as I do that the Fed Judge had
no justification for his invalid order.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

More outrage.

Let me know if you want on or off this ping list.

[Brad’s Gramma]

That disgusting show was on here, too.