1 posted on
06/02/2005 8:35:11 PM PDT by
Susannah
To: little jeremiah; scripter
2 posted on
06/02/2005 8:37:49 PM PDT by
Susannah
(http://www.liberalslikechrist.org < BARF !!)
To: Susannah; B4Ranch
"This was progress even though it's not enough."
 |
So, are CA hospitals required to supply AIDS treatment to illegal aliens?
|
Soon, it will be full court press time. The foundation is being whittled one day at a time.
3 posted on
06/02/2005 8:39:30 PM PDT by
glock rocks
("racecar" reads the same forwards and backwards... a fact not lost on Humpy.)
To: Susannah
The bill is denied in legislative process!
And now watch as Leftist judges try to reverse the legislative's decision.
4 posted on
06/02/2005 8:42:14 PM PDT by
Ultra Sonic
(Remember.)
To: EdReform; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; stage left; Yakboy; I_Love_My_Husband; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping.
Tra La La La La. Couldn't get enough legislators willing to not get elected next term. At least Schwarzie is saying let the voters decide, not judges. I guess he wants another term, too.
Let me know if you want on/off this pinglist.
5 posted on
06/02/2005 8:43:48 PM PDT by
little jeremiah
(Resisting evil is our duty or we are as responsible as those promoting it.)
To: Susannah
Looks like the 'RATS are going to have to use their judicial system to sneak this "bill" through.
6 posted on
06/02/2005 8:45:02 PM PDT by
FlingWingFlyer
(We did not lose in Vietnam. We left.)
To: Susannah
70% of Californians said NO to gay marriage.
7 posted on
06/02/2005 8:46:46 PM PDT by
John Lenin
(Liberalism =Mental Illness)
To: Susannah
Did it die of the new Super-AIDS?
9 posted on
06/02/2005 8:48:59 PM PDT by
Duke Nukum
(They're not people, they're hippies! --Eric Cartman)
To: Susannah
Its a reprieve. We need to work hard through the coming year to amend the State Constitution to protect marriage from Leftist legislators and activist liberal judges.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
10 posted on
06/02/2005 8:49:13 PM PDT by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: Susannah
good maybe we are starting to get somewhere maybe LOL the california nut jobs in Sac finally listened to the people who put there sorry butts in office As a CA resident I think I am dreaming actually for that to happen
To: Susannah
...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. It was already decided at the ballot box as an amendment to the state constitution...
To: Susannah
define marriage between "two persons"That seems rather restrictive.
Couldn't they make it between "two bipeds" or "two mammals" or "two entities"?
20 posted on
06/02/2005 9:10:29 PM PDT by
angkor
To: Susannah
Thanks for the update. Glad to hear it.
23 posted on
06/02/2005 9:16:07 PM PDT by
planekT
(Go DeLay, Go!)
To: Susannah
Schwarzenegger, a moderate Republican, had not taken a stand on it. He has said voters or judges, not lawmakers, should make such social changes."Or judges"???
Beam me up.
To: Susannah
The bill would have amended the state family code to define marriage between "two persons" instead of between a man and a woman. 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson