Posted on 02/24/2004 11:58:33 PM PST by calcowgirl
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 24 — As President Bush declared his support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, the political and legal landscape surrounding the marriage licenses issued here to same-sex couples appeared rockier than ever on Tuesday.
Mayor Gavin Newsom, whose city was singled out by the president, held a news conference at which he called Mr. Bush's support for an amendment "shameful" and "cowardly" and accused the president of a "lack of truthfulness."
Mayor Newsom, whose directive to the county clerk on Feb. 12 has resulted in more than 3,200 same-sex marriages in San Francisco, said Mr. Bush's announcement amounted to "a terrible day" for America.
"They wanted a wedge issue," Mr. Newsom said. "He is appealing to the right wing of his party. And it's shameful to play politics with peoples' lives, and that is what the president of the United States is attempting to do."
Opponents of the San Francisco marriages stepped up their pressure on law enforcement officials to crack down on the city and Mr. Newsom.
There were calls for Mr. Newsom's arrest by some conservative groups, and two Republicans behind the recall of former Gov. Gray Davis announced a petition drive to recall the attorney general, Bill Lockyer, for not doing more to prevent the marriages. Mr. Lockyer and Mr. Newsom are Democrats.
"He was elected by the people and is responsible to the people, so let's go to the people," one of the Republicans involved in the recall effort, Ted Costa, said of Mr. Lockyer. "We are not trying to bully the man. We are not trying to threaten the guy. We are just saying there are two forces out there, and we are trying to equalize that force in San Francisco."
Mr. Lockyer dismissed the recall as a "publicity stunt" by Republicans in advance of next week's state primary. He said he had no intention of arresting Mr. Newsom, whom he described as a "principled" man who was wrong on the law.
Mr. Newsom has acknowledged that the same-sex marriage licenses violate the state's family code but has said guarantees of equal protection in the state Constitution give him the authority to issue them.
"This needs to be resolved in court," Mr. Lockyer said. "We don't need to arrest mayors."
Yet even Mr. Lockyer's court actions drew ire on Tuesday from some of his critics.
At a news conference, Mr. Lockyer said that his office would file papers with the California Supreme Court on Friday asking it to rule on the legality of the same-sex marriages. Judges in two lawsuits against the city filed in San Francisco Superior Court have so far refused to halt the weddings, with the next hearing in those cases scheduled for March 29.
But conservative groups opposed to the marriages as well as gay and lesbian groups that support them said Tuesday that Mr. Lockyer was turning too quickly to the high court. Those groups say they would rather wait until the two lawsuits are heard next month so that they can better present their arguments.
"The record in this case has no kind of full analysis of the depth of the constitutional claims," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "There has been not one word of testimony from a live witness."
Mathew D. Staver, a lawyer representing the Campaign for California Families, one of the groups that sued the city, said he did not trust Mr. Lockyer to aggressively pursue the case against the city. Mr. Staver said he was disturbed by how long it had taken Mr. Lockyer to join the legal fight as well as by comments Mr. Lockyer had made about his personal support for gay rights and for Mr. Newsom.
"The attorney general, in doing what he is doing, might make it appear as if he is defending the case," Mr. Staver said, "when in fact he is attempting to undermine the case by taking it up to the Supreme Court without a proper record."
Mr. Lockyer rejected the criticism, saying he was committed to doing his job as a lawyer regardless of his personal views. He also said that his office had devised its legal strategy in consultation with lawyers for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, who last week expressed frustration with Mr. Lockyer's lack of action but seemed to back off that position on Tuesday.
"It is clear there are critics on the left and there are critics on the right," Mr. Lockyer said. "We all know that when you are in the middle of the road you can get hit by traffic going in both directions."
A spokeswoman for Mr. Schwarzenegger said that the governor was in agreement with Mr. Lockyer's decision to take the case to the Supreme Court. The spokeswoman, Terri M. Carbaugh, also said the governor did not support the Republican-led effort to recall Mr. Lockyer.
"People need to give Lockyer the time to do his job, and he seems to be doing it," Ms. Carbaugh said.
Professor Bruce E. Cain, director of the Institute of Governmental Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, said there was a subtext to the attacks on Mr. Lockyer because Mr. Lockyer is regarded as a favorite in the Democratic field for governor in 2006.
"If the Republicans can find a way to take him out early, with a mistake on this issue, that will make it so much easier to have Arnold run for re-election in two and a half years," Professor Cain said.
Bloomberg Rejects an Amendment
In his first significant departure from President Bush on a major policy issue, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York said through his spokesman last night that he did not support a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
"The mayor believes gay marriage is an issue that should be decided by the state," Edward Skyler, the mayor's press secretary, said in a written statement. "In 2002, the mayor signed Local Law 24, which recognized gay marriages legally entered into in other jurisdictions, but since such marriages are not permitted under New York State law, the mayor will not ask the city clerk to issue licenses to gay couples."
Mr. Skyler declined to elaborate on how Mr. Bloomberg viewed the issue of gay marriage personally.
While Mr. Bloomberg's refusal to take a position of full support on gay marriage could hurt him among gay voters in New York City, his decision to take a stand against Mr. Bush's proposed amendment may be enough to gain him some support. In the past, Mr. Bloomberg has been more or less silent on the issue.
And you gave it to them, Newsome.
How long would it take for Mr. Lockyer to arrest Mr. Newsom if he were, say, closing abortion clinics or handing out concealed carry permits willy-nilly?
Mayor Bloomberg is all live and let live when it comes to the gay agenda, but those gays better not be smoking!
Mike, you don't get to vote on it. Now go flounce off somewhere and sulk.
How they loved to mock the Southerners during the 60s for the same stance.
In fact, it was a perjorative accusation then "States-Righters!"
Very astute observation.
And why do they shoot up our Western Civ Culture ?
BECAUSE THEY HATE IT!!!!!!
| What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda |
|
|
| Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1) |
As the state's Attorney General, your primary responsibility to me as a citizen of California is to see that the rule of law is upheld, including that elected officials do not abuse the power of their office to break the law.
Your inability and unwillingness to take immediate action to stop the illegal actions of San Francisco's mayor is most disappointing to me.
Despite his using the power of his office to break the law, I don't expect you to arrest the mayor, but neither do I expect you to ask the courts to do your job and allow the state-sponsored anarchy in that city to continue beyond today.
Think about the damage you are doing to the rule of law you say you hold so dear. Get off your political behind and do your job, Bill.
Absolutely right!
And they would never read this:
Judaism’s Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then Christianity) Rejected Homosexuality
If one can speak of Judaism's essence, it is contained in the Torah statement, “I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse, and you shall choose life.” Judaism affirms whatever enhances life, and it opposes or separates whatever represents death.
Christianity also!
Actually we need to arrest anybody that violates the law, from illegal aliens to marxist Mayors and all those in between and betwixt.
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.