Posted on 05/15/2008 10:31:42 AM PDT by PROCON
Ping
“California voters already had approved by a wide margin a measure in 2000 that declared marriage to be only between a man and a woman.”
We’re going to have to approve a state constitutional amendment that these judges can’t change by decree.
What a surprise, NOT.
Another nail in the California coffin.
Maybe it will be sooner than later that the homosexual lobby thanks McCain for leading the fight against the Marriage Amendment on the Senate Floor.
I just cannot understand anyone of any sexual orientation who would petition a court for the right to be thrown into slavery, er, marriage.
A court cannot make law, they have overstepped their authority.
Ahnold should say, they have declared it, let them enforce it, not one tax dollar nor government worker will be spent on such things.
Was a time we had leaders like that in this country... long gone anymore.
And what about the right to polygamy if that is what people choose? Incest? Marriage to another species? Why make them second class citizens?
Time for Californians to demand an ammendment to their constitution then... of course their legislature doesn’t have to testicular fortitude to do it.
Next up, dogs or trees.
this news will bring hordes of them to the Sodom of the west coast.
you might even see Gerald Fitzpatrick and Patrick Fitzgerald the two gay Irishmen!
Mayor broke the law so the state supreme court changes the law to suit the law breaker. Doesn’t matter which side you are on, Americans are finished if they don’t care the courts keep changing their laws without a vote.
Well, there’s a movement in the works to have a constitutional amendment in Calif. to define marriage. It could be voted on in November.
This also forces people to take a stand. Some people have opposed these marriage amendments in other states because of reasons such as, the law already defines marriage, an amendment isn’t needed, federal law already defines marriage, for example. Anybody who thought an amendment wasn’t needed in California because the law already defined marriage was proven wrong today. The law defined marriage as 1 man 1 woman, whereas in Mass. the law didn’t specifically say that marriage partners have to be opposite sex. So now activist judges are willing to overturn laws that define marriage as 1 man 1 woman. The only way to define marriage will be a constitutional amendment.
I was hoping that this was one of those joke web sites
THIS IS IT. This is the issue that can literally WIN THE ELECTION for McCain. If he were to immediately issue a strongly worded statement right now, saying that this decision represents judicial activism at its worst, and that this is precisely the kind of ruling that any judge that he would appoint would NEVER MAKE (and would overturn if given the chance), it would be a humongous boost to his campaign - especially among suspicious social conservatives.
Even more importantly, it would force BHO to react to an issue that is toxic for him. He agrees with the ruling - he's a radical that's out of touch with mainstream America; he's against it - he ticks off his base and is no longer a "uniter".
But then again, JMcC will probably turn this (somehow) into another attack on conservatives!
Anyone with a law degree know what this will mean for the rest of the country?
Those who point out how this will help Republicans are absolutely right. McCain and other Republicans need to take a strong moral stand against gay marriage and other attacks on the American family.
This campaign can be defined by two issues: Morality and the War on Terror. If the Republicans stick to them, pointing how Dem weakness on these issues endanger America and all Americans, they can Win.
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.