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

Skip to comments.

California Governor Urged to Arrest Mayor of San Francisco
Agape Press ^ | 1/16/04 | Fred Jackson, Allie Martin, and Jody Brown

Posted on 02/16/2004 2:05:54 PM PST by truthandlife

A Christian law firm is calling for the arrest of the mayor of San Francisco in the wake of his decision last week that has resulted in hundreds of same-sex marriage licenses being issued. Despite the threat of that lawsuit, the City by the Bay continued throughout the weekend to grant licenses to homosexual couples who waited in long lines.

Steve Crampton, a spokesman for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy (CLP), calls Mayor Gavin Newsom's move "an arrogant stunt [that] proves the radical homosexual movement will trample the rights of all who stand in their way."

Newsom started handing out marriage licenses to homosexuals on Thursday in the midst of the debate on homosexual "marriage" in Massachusetts. According to the mayor, California's law banning same-sex marriage amounts to discrimination -- and he is ready to go to court to make his point.

Crampton believes the mayor's action demonstrates that "even criminal law and the constitution of the State of California are no barrier to radical homosexuals attempting to force their agenda on the rest of the nation."

On Friday the CLP sent letters to the governor and attorney general of California and to the San Francisco city attorney, calling for Newsom's arrest and removal from office. Those letters state that it is "patently unlawful" in California to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples, citing the specific portion of the California Family Code being violated. But the CLP's letters do not stop there.

"Mayor Gavin not only acted in violation of the civil law, he apparently violated the criminal law as well," the letters state. "California Penal Code section 115 prohibits the knowing procurement of any false or forged instrument to be filed or recorded in any public office, making such an act a felony punishable by up to three (3) years in prison. Since Mayor Newsom has procured approximately 96 such false certificates as of yesterday [Thursday], he may face up to 288 years in prison."

The potential penalty has increased substantially since those letters were written. Associated Press reports that the city hall offices in San Francisco remained open over the weekend and experienced brisk business from homosexual couples. According to AP, more than 1,700 marriage licenses have now been issued -- and that the demand was so high that authorities had to turn away hundreds of waiting "couples" on Sunday, many of whom had rushed to the Golden State from around the country.

Many of those couples chose to go before city officials, exchange vows, and be declared "spouses for life." Among those were the mayor's chief of staff and policy director, both of whom married their long-time "partners" with Newsom himself officiating.

Pro-family activist Gary Bauer says Newsom's action has created "yet another constitutional crises with respect to marriage" -- a direct reference to events last week in Massachusetts. "But this time instead of activist judges rewriting the law, renegade municipal officials are flagrantly violating the law and ignoring the will of the people," he says. In March 2000, more than 60 percent of California voters approved Proposition 22, the Defense of Marriage Act in that state.

Bauer says it remains to be seen what Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will do. "[Thursday's] actions by a radical sexual minority and their liberal sympathizers are direct assaults upon the rule of law and the institution of marriage," he says. "Will Governor Schwarzenegger act to impeach the mayor and county clerk? Will he issue executive orders rescinding the phony 'marriage' licenses?

"It's time to see just how tough Arnold really is," Bauer says.

No Court Hearing Till Tuesday Meanwhile, the president of Liberty Counsel describes Newsom's decision to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples as "a reprehensible abuse of power." Mat Staver's group has filed a lawsuit in San Francisco, claiming the mayor's actions are void and unconstitutional -- and ridiculous.

"This particular mayor [Newsom] has a radical homosexual agenda to push," Staver says. "Back in 1998, this same mayor issued a resolution that said that pro-family groups that say homosexuality is wrong or is a choice [constitutes] hate speech and ought to be prohibited. This [recent action] is simply ridiculous, and he's engaging in illegal acts that we intend to stop."

The lawsuit, filed by Liberty Counsel on behalf of the Campaign for California Families, was filed Friday morning in San Francisco Superior Court but, because of the Presidents' Day holiday, will not be heard until Tuesday morning. In contrast, the County Clerk's office remained open on Monday, staffed by employees volunteering their time, to accommodate the demand for same-sex marriage licenses.

Randy Thomasson, executive director of CCF, says the city's open defiance of state law and "trashing" of traditional marriage is getting the attention of people across the globe.

"Parents and grandparents are shocked at seeing these counterfeit marriages being paraded on TV," Thomasson says. He adds that his group is looking forward to the citizens of California having their day in court on Tuesday to protect marriage for a man and a women -- as they did when they passed Proposition 22 in 2000.

Across the nation in Charlotte, North Carolina, a black pastor from Detroit told the National Religious Broadcasters convention that most black and white churches agree that homosexual marriage is wrong. Glenn Plummer, who is also the NRB's chairman, says the organization want to help black and white Christians unite in bringing the nation "back in line" so that "one man and one woman are man and wife in a marriage."

Also speaking at the NRB convention, Christian broadcaster Warren Duffy told his colleagues that the hustle and bustle surrounding the issuance of marriage licenses for same-sex couples in San Francisco makes it seem like a "different country" -- one he jokingly calls "the people's union of soviet socialists of northern California."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; US: California
KEYWORDS: arrest; gavinnewsom; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; lawbreakers; marriage; mayor; prisoners; samesexmarriage; sanfrancisco; sanfransisco; schwarzenegger; sf; stunt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-172 last
To: BikerNYC
As noted in the article:

""Mayor Gavin not only acted in violation of the civil law, he apparently violated the criminal law as well," the letters state. "California Penal Code section 115 prohibits the knowing procurement of any false or forged instrument to be filed or recorded in any public office, making such an act a felony punishable by up to three (3) years in prison."

The documents are false because they were never created by the California legislature as official documents.
161 posted on 02/17/2004 6:24:40 PM PST by torchthemummy (Great Liars Need To Have Great Memories)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: torchthemummy
Just to add: As also cited, each infraction is a single offense and cannot be deemed concurrent offenses. Each marriage license is therefore a single felony.
162 posted on 02/17/2004 6:27:37 PM PST by torchthemummy (Great Liars Need To Have Great Memories)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: torchthemummy
But he didn't procure the documents. The same sex couples did.
163 posted on 02/17/2004 6:30:37 PM PST by BikerNYC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: inquest
templar:
I think it wa, maybe, six months or so ago we went through this and I DID prove it, I stated the article and section and posted the language as well.

______________________________________


Sorry, I happened to miss that thread. And since you posted the contended statement to me on this thread, I'd like it if you could now back it up.
150 -inquest-






I happened to miss that one myself..

If our boy FReepmails you the mystery 'specific constitutional authority', please share. I need the laugh.
164 posted on 02/17/2004 6:33:39 PM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but the U.S. Constitution defines conservatism; - not the GOP. .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
Total disregard for the rule of law. Yeah, man, everyone must do as they please, screw the so-called laws. What's the sense of having laws when no one is left to play the game?

Our politicians are silent on people coming into our coutry illegally. They are silent on gay marriages. They want to give illegal aliens drivers licenses. So what's to stop old Mabel who just had her driver's license revoked from driving without a license. Heck, lots of people are breaking the law and no one gives a damn. It's their personal lives and they are good people too! Mabel is a good person too. She is a citizen, pays taxes, raised lots of good children who are paying taxes, and she was really hard working too, but she failed her road test, so the state took her license away, but what the heck, laws are meant to be broken.

165 posted on 02/17/2004 6:36:17 PM PST by harpo11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
If I should become convinced (by anyone at all) that the courts have the ultimate power to say what is and is not constitutional, I'll share my reasoning with you. Beyond that, I'm not at liberty to discuss private items I may or may not receive.
166 posted on 02/17/2004 6:49:17 PM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: inquest
If our boy FReepmails you the mysterious 'specific constitutional authority', please share.
The fate of our nation may depend on it.
164 tpaine

______________________________________


If I should become convinced (by anyone at all) that the courts have the ultimate power to say what is and is not constitutional, I'll share my reasoning with you.
Beyond that, I'm not at liberty to discuss private items I may or may not receive.
166 -inquest-






I beg of you, -- reconsider.. This is serial bidness. Lifes are at steak.
167 posted on 02/17/2004 7:07:16 PM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but the U.S. Constitution defines conservatism; - not the GOP. .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Aisle still halve two ants her "know".
168 posted on 02/17/2004 7:46:57 PM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: inquest
That clause is for things like military coups.

So we can't apply it to a Gaystapo coup!

169 posted on 02/19/2004 5:05:42 PM PST by reg45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
Reagan would have done it.
170 posted on 02/19/2004 5:06:48 PM PST by ChadGore (Viva Bush. He's EARNED a second term.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bluegrass
The media's filming it, everyones discussing its merits nonchalantly, meanwhile... This mayor has been BREAKING THE LAW for days! What is going on? Does anyone in CA have a spine?

Guess your were asleep on the bluegrass when Californian's took the liberal Gray Davis and hung him with a political rope. It was historic.

BTW I DO NOT want to see anymore kissing of the bride/ groom whoever is whom on TV again. God help us.

Then turn off your stupid TaaaVaaa. It'll make you go blind anyway.

171 posted on 02/19/2004 5:12:29 PM PST by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cupcakes
"Isn't this what the libs are so concerned about the right doing? That we will let our personal views get in the way of law?"

Only when it comes to us doing what they want US to do.The law seldom applies to them, especially if it gets in the way of their agenda.

172 posted on 02/19/2004 6:47:57 PM PST by sweetliberty (To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-172 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