Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Schwarzenegger May Veto Gay-Marriage Bill
Associated Press Writer via Yahooooooooooooooo! ^ | September 7, 2005 | By STEVE LAWRENCE

Posted on 09/07/2005 7:33:54 AM PDT by Simmy2.5

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Gay rights supporters cheered loudly from the gallery as California lawmakers became the first in the country to approve a bill allowing same-sex marriages. But their celebration may be short-lived. ADVERTISEMENT

The legislation could be vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has expressed an acceptance of gay marriages but said it's an issue that should be decided by voters or the courts.

"He will uphold whatever the court decides," spokeswoman Margita Thompson said Tuesday after the state Assembly approved the same-sex marriage measure, 41-35. The Senate had approved it last week.

A state appellate court is considering appeals of a lower court ruling that overturned California laws banning recognition of gay marriages. And opponents of same-sex marriage are trying to qualify initiatives for the 2006 ballot that would amend the state Constitution to ban gay marriages.

The bill's supporters compared the legislation to earlier civil rights campaigns, including efforts to eradicate slavery and give women the right to vote.

"Do what we know is in our hearts," said the bill's sponsor, San Francisco Democrat Mark Leno. "Make sure all California families will have the same protection under the law."

But opponents repeatedly cited the public's vote five years ago to approve Proposition 22, which prohibits California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states or countries.

"History will record that you betrayed your constituents and their moral and ethical values," Republican Assemblyman Jay La Suer said.

Leno had sponsored an earlier bill that fell four votes short of passing the Assembly in June. He kept the issue alive by adding the language of the defeated measure to another bill that had already passed the Assembly and was awaiting action in the Senate.

The Senate approved that bill and sent it back to the Assembly for another vote. Four Democrats who didn't vote the last time tipped the scales.

One of them, Assemblyman Tom Umberg, said Tuesday he was concerned about what his three children would think of him if he didn't join those "who sought to take a leadership role in terms of tolerance, equality and fairness."

California already gives same-sex couples many of the rights and duties of marriage if they register with the state as domestic partners.

Massachusetts' highest court ruled in November 2003 that the state constitution guarantees same-sex couples the right to marry. The nation's first state-sanctioned, same-sex weddings began taking place in May 2004.

Vermont began offering civil unions in 2000, after a ruling by the state's Supreme Court. Earlier this year, Connecticut became the first state to approve civil unions without being forced by the courts.

Tuesday's vote showed that gay rights advocates have "turned the corner on the issue of marriage equality for lesbian and gay couples," said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, a backer of the bill.

"As the debate today shows, love conquers fear, principle conquers politics and equality conquers injustice, and the governor can now secure his legacy as a true leader by signing this bill," he said.

But Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children and Families, a conservative group opposed to the bill, said Schwarzenegger should veto it.

"Schwarzenegger can't afford to sign the gay marriage license bill," he said. "He'll actually become a hero to the majority of Californians when he vetoes it."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: ab849; arnold; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; markleno; samesexmarriage; schwarzenegger; veto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last
The legislation could be vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has expressed an acceptance of gay marriages but said it's an issue that should be decided by voters or the courts.

Am I the only one that sees a problem with this logic?

1 posted on 09/07/2005 7:33:55 AM PDT by Simmy2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

Yay!


2 posted on 09/07/2005 7:34:43 AM PDT by KC_Conspirator (This space outsourced to India)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

I don't care what his reasoning is, just veto it Arnold.


3 posted on 09/07/2005 7:35:18 AM PDT by bahblahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

He better damn well veto this. Nobody at least the majority of us here in California want this.


4 posted on 09/07/2005 7:35:34 AM PDT by mzbzybee (Proud To Be a Army Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

Logic has no place in politics.


5 posted on 09/07/2005 7:35:56 AM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5
California has the initiative petition process.Put it on the
ballot...call it Proposition 69.If it passes,so be it.If it
fails,enter the 9th Circus,stage left!
6 posted on 09/07/2005 7:37:22 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Cross your fingers


7 posted on 09/07/2005 7:37:26 AM PDT by martin_fierro (_____oooo_( ° ¿ ° )_oooo_____)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

I saw the problem with his logic immediately.

The issue really does belong to the legislature, but a referendum should be capable of reversing legislation when it is clearly out of step with the majority.

The courts should have no say except to uphold what the voters say is the law.


8 posted on 09/07/2005 7:38:35 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

You cannot have it both ways Arnie! You need to protect and uphold the WILL OF THE VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA -- that is your job. VETO THIS PIECE OF PERVERTED TRASH...


9 posted on 09/07/2005 7:39:32 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mzbzybee

The media speaks of Arnolds or Bush's approval ratings.

They are still higher then the state/fed congresses.

80% of Californian's say NO to gay marriage yet here we are.

I got a call from a republican fund raiser last night - it did not go well for their end.

Arnold vetos this and the driver license bill upon first entering office becuase we elected him to do so. This has not changed.


10 posted on 09/07/2005 7:40:25 AM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion; Tempest; EggsAckley; redlipstick; onyx; Tamsey
I hope he does for many reasons -- one of which will be the entertainment value in watching the Scorched Earthers, still trying hard to make themselves feel better for their behavior during the election, explaining why he's still no better than their man Bustamante.

Dan
Biblical Christianity BLOG

11 posted on 09/07/2005 7:41:43 AM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000
The issue really does belong to the legislature, but a referendum should be capable of reversing legislation when it is clearly out of step with the majority.

I tend to agree. This an issue for the legislature to decide, or for the people in a referendum.

12 posted on 09/07/2005 7:42:52 AM PDT by Modernman ("A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy." -Disraeli)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

The courts?


13 posted on 09/07/2005 7:46:00 AM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (The repenting soul is the victorious soul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

Well, I guess he figures the courts should choose between the people via prop 22 and the people via their representatives. What a joke. Anyway, it is hardly worth fighting for since California already has gay marriage by the name domestic partner.


14 posted on 09/07/2005 7:48:48 AM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (The repenting soul is the victorious soul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

Why is it that politicians (especially in California) insist they know what is best for the state and then repeatedly, And I do mean repeatedly, go directly against the wishes of constituents?

Examples: California voters voted down outdated affirmative action laws. Californian's voted down gay marriage. Californian's voted down increases in taxes for state schools (1997 - this followed $900 Mil spent to save a redwood forest from a 3rd generation family of loggers).

Even more frustrating is that the ignorant citizens of California continue to vote for these people. When asked to vote for something they vote conservative. When asked to vote for a government rep., they either do not show up or are programmed to vote democrat and then consistently hate the people they vote for.

Arlnold is the Gov. of California because Davis was a snoozing, conspiring, activist, crook that finally got some press when the lights kept going out and companies kept moving away.

...I'm done ranting for now....


15 posted on 09/07/2005 7:49:05 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Dems: "It can't be done" Reps. "Move, we'll find a way or make a way. It has to be done!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

The judges will strike down the law no matter what Arnold does. The Constitution clearly says that no law may violate an accepted proposition.


16 posted on 09/07/2005 7:58:21 AM PDT by DoraC (To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

He'll veto it. Bet on it.


17 posted on 09/07/2005 7:59:02 AM PDT by SmithL (There are a lot of people that hate Bush more than they hate terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tenacious 1

The only thing keeping CA from falling into the abyss is a RINO actor trying to straddle the moral-leadership fence from deciding what's right and wrong.


18 posted on 09/07/2005 8:03:03 AM PDT by LibFreeUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: LibFreeUSA

"The only thing keeping CA from falling into the abyss is a RINO actor trying to straddle the moral-leadership fence from deciding what's right and wrong."

Huh?


19 posted on 09/07/2005 8:09:36 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Dems: "It can't be done" Reps. "Move, we'll find a way or make a way. It has to be done!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Simmy2.5

Very interesting, considering that Arnold was the best man in the 1989 gay "wedding" of fellow bodybuilder Bob Paris.


20 posted on 09/07/2005 8:10:23 AM PDT by linkinpunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson