Posted on 06/02/2005 8:35:10 PM PDT by Susannah
Someone, please post the roll call.
I believe the Rats can still bring this up again until tomorrow.
Thanks for the update. Glad to hear it.
Too bad I'm no longer in California - -just so I can vote for it. (But, hey why should that stop me?)
I now live in Southern Oregon. I noticed Oregon passed an amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman. The state supreme court validated it. The leftist idolators are now calling their fetish 'civil unions.'
The governor here is a real pervert nut case. Even some of the so-called Republicans support the idea.
According to the linked article at http://www.savecalifornia.com :
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20050602-1935-ca-xgr-gaymarriage.html
The vote in favor of AB19 to "make marriage gender neutral" was 37 to 36, which means it was 4 votes shy because a simple majority is required of the 80-member assembly.
Unfortunately, I don't know how to look up who actually voted for/against it. I know the sponsor of AB19 is Assemblyman Mark Leno.
How to look up the roll call: savecalifornia.com
has a "statement" about AB 19 on its home page.
At the bottom of the statement is the roll call.
Thanks for the link. Much appreciated. One "Republican,"
Keith Richman, abstained instead of voting NO.
"Or judges"???
Beam me up.
Good!
Here is what my Webster's New World Dictionary says:
"Marriage refers to the state of, or relation between, a man and a woman who have become husband and wife or to the ceremony marking this union."
So the Kalifornia legislature is now in the dictionary business, developing new definitions for English words whose meaning has been clearly understood for centuries? Kalifornia is another planet. A disgusting planet.
Scary, huh? So, if Lockyer (who supports Gay marriage) is unsuccessful in the current court cases, Arnie won't fight it.
Nothing like representing "the people," huh?
Good news, for now. But, I fear, they won't stop trying!
Arnold is a huge disappointment. Huge.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - A bill to legalize gay marriage in California died Thursday after it failed to gain the simple majority needed to pass the state Assembly.
In the second and final time in two days before the 80-member house, the tally was four votes shy of a majority.
Nearly a quarter of majority Democrats either joined Republicans in opposing the bill or chose not to take a stand on the hot-button topic, now headed for likely showdowns in the state's courts and at the ballot box.
"Voting for this bill may erode the advances we have made," said Gloria Negrete McLeod, a Democrat who abstained despite a previous record that gay rights advocates considered friendly to their cause. "It's a shame we get into these things where we become so politicized and polarized."
While it took a court order for Massachusetts last year to become the first state to grant marriage rights to same-sex couples, gay rights advocates had looked to California to be the first Legislature to do so voluntarily.
The bill would have amended the state family code to define marriage between "two persons" instead of between a man and a woman.
Supporters expressed disappointment with Thursday's outcome but said the floor vote nonetheless represented a historic event for the gay rights movement.
"We had people who were adamantly against it last year who were speaking adamantly in favor of it on the floor," said Democratic Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, a supporter of the bill. "This was progress even though it's not enough."
Lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of California's marriage laws are likely to wind up before the state's Supreme Court within the next year.
Opponents of gay marriage also have begun the process to put a constitutional amendment before voters that would ban gay nuptials and strip gay couples of domestic partnership benefits. They hope to get the initiative on the June 2006 ballot.
--
Isn't that the same article from AP that was posted (or a shorter version)?
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
I posted this article at http://www.christianforums.com in the "News & Current Events" section....and the post was deleted within an hour by a moderator...I received a PM from one of the site's monitors saying the news item was deleted because it violated their forum rules regarding homosexuality.
That forum is loaded with liberals (obvious from the number of "reps"-reputation they give each other compared to true christians who care about the basics) and has strict rules. There are a lot of members with donkey symbols that have their own version of Christianity: they think they are "pro-life" AND Christ-like....no death penalty, no wars, love everyone no matter what!
Their concept is "uniting all Christians as one body."
With all due respect, this is sheer fantasy. The Christians who voted for John Kerry are refusing to defend their civilization and the beliefs of their church. I don't accuse them of being insincere Christians, but I do accuse them of confusion. It is not worthwhile talking to them unless, and until, they show signs of understanding what sort of threat they are under from the Left.
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.