Posted on 09/07/2005 6:06:36 PM PDT by SmithL
SACRAMENTO - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Wednesday that he will veto a bill seeking to allow gay marriages in California.
Schwarzenegger said the legislation, given final approval Tuesday by lawmakers, would conflict with the intent of voters when they approved Proposition 22. That measure was put on the ballot in 2000 to prevent California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.
"We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote," the governor's press secretary, Margita Thompson, said in a statement. "Out of respect for the will of the people, the governor will veto (the bill)."
Despite his promise to veto the bill, Schwarzenegger "believes gay couples are entitled to full protection under the law and should not be discriminated against based upon their relationship."
"He is proud that California provides the most rigorous protections in the nation for domestic partners," the statement said.
The Republican governor had indicated in previous statements that he would veto the bill, saying the debate over same-sex marriage should be decided by voters or the courts.
A state appeals court is weighing an appeal of a San Francisco judge's ruling striking down state laws barring gay marriages. Meanwhile, opponents of same-sex marriages are planning measures on the ballot next year that would place a ban on gay marriages in the state constitution.
The announcement dampened a celebratory mood among the bill's supporters, who only the night before cheered, hugged and kissed as the state Assembly narrowly sent the bill to the governor's desk.
Assemblyman Paul Koretz, D-West Hollywood, had called bans on gay marriage "the last frontier of bigotry and discrimination."
The bill passed the Legislature through the persistence of its sponsors, Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco. His original bill had failed in the Assembly by four votes in June, but he then amended it to another bill in the Senate, which voted to approve it last week.
It was that amended bill the Assembly passed by a bare majority on Tuesday. Four Democrats who did not vote on the bill in June provided the winning margin this week.
The vote made the California Legislature the first legislative body in the country to approve of same-sex marriage. Gay marriage licenses in Massachusetts and civil unions in Vermont were granted through court rulings.
No, it is not. By attempting to change the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, the Left has actually been attempting to rewrite the Bible, not the dictionary. In the Bible, God defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. The Left wished to trump the Bible, or more accurately, invalidate it. They attempted to replace a law of God with one of their own. They failed. And that is a tremendous victory.
Actually, he did the right thing by stating the political justification. We all know the moral one carries more weight, but to the Left, morality is in the eyes of the beholder, and the moral justification would be debated ad infinitum. However, there's no debating that if the majority of Californians wanted the definition of marriage kept intact in their state, then that's what had to be done. For the Left to debate THAT, they would have to expose the fact they really don't give a damn about the will of the people.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Wednesday that he will veto a bill seeking to allow gay marriages in California.
Keep the faith Arnold, don't back down.
On March 7, 2000, the people of California voted on Proposition 22, a proposal to enact a state "Defense of Marriage Act" as an initiative statute. The text of Prop 22 reads:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Proposition 22 was ratified by an overwhelming majority of California voters, prevailing by a 23-point margin. Statewide, 4,618,673 votes were cast in favor of the proposition, comprising 61.4% of the total vote. Opponents garnered 2,909,370 votes, for 38.6% of the vote.
Final vote counts revealed that Proposition 22 won in 52 of California's 58 counties, including all of the major metropolitan areas except for San Francisco. The six counties which did not approve Prop. 22 were all in the immediate San Francisco Bay area, including: Alameda county, Marin county, San Francisco county, Santa Cruz county, Sonoma county, and Yolo county.
Full election returns are available on the California Secretary of State website (PDF - 73KB). http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_primary/measures.pdf
Oh my!
That's what I thought. Nothing really changes except the homosexuals can't get "married", which really doesn't mean much any more.
Outstanding
A Democrat Governor wouldn't VETO that Bill. Hope people remember that at his election.
GOOD FOR ARNOLD! He's going with the Will of the People!
Huh?
Ahnuld's awesome. He's my man. Don't you be dissing Ahnuld around me.
A lot of folks are concerned about the phrase "or the courts." Although Prop 22 was passed by an overwhelming majority of Californians, it is still being challenged in the courts. That's what Arnold is referring to.
"He is proud that California provides the most rigorous protections in the nation for domestic partners," the statement said."
For what?
Policies reflect the same thing as "marriage" in "domestic partnership".
He is essentially lying and obfuscating his position with this.
It's a silly dishonest semantic distinction.
People on this thread are dumb as cows.
It's the same thing. DP probably have even more rights and perqs.
I think Arnold is essentially lying with this -- fig leaf type stuff that apparently fools a lot of people.
Not that I approve... But you are very astute and perceptive in your analysis for a "youth gone wild!"
Is that the "Denny Crane" lawyer from the Boston Legal show, played by Captain Kirk?
Decided by the courts? No thanks. It should be decided by the people or the legislatures.
Okay, I'll oblige. He vetoed it, but said that he favors full "civil rights" for homosexuals, but wants the voters or the courts to decide...
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.