I don't think it really mattered what he did today or Gastric Nuisance did early this year, both decisions were and are mute and are for political gain only, imo.
As things sit now, it is up to the court,, he could have let it set on his desk and done nothing. I don't recall it haveing overwhelming support or that it as vetoproof.
If I am wrong, correct me. Please.
In gfact, he may have effectively killed any possibilities of gaining support from gay folks for his initiaitves by acting as he has, so which is more important long-term?
as=was
Long or short term doesn't matter. He stood on principle.
It makes no sense from any perspective to not act on a principle out of concern for alienating 'gay voters'. I mean, let them be alienated, the principle of the thing is what's the issue. A majority of voters determined for the State of CA not too long ago that marriage was to be defined as a legal relationship between one man and one woman and some people in the legislature turned around and tagged this "gay marriage" thing onto a Department of Fish and Game bill and tried to squeak it past that way into law.
No consideration of what the majority of voters just decided. No media, no press, just a sneaky attempt to manipulate our state laws by hook or by crook, just however they could.
The legislature can't write and pass laws that are unacceptable to the majority of voters. The voters decided this issue and that's that.
Alienate whomever, because fear of alienation is no reason to deny a principle, like this, as with others as clearly decided (already) by the voters as this.