Schwarzenegger says he will veto gay marriage bill

AP ^ | 9/7/5

[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.

[SierraWasp]

Angelides stepped on his own anatomy just the other day and I'm trying to remember what it was about. It was something about the state needing to own more property for some asinine reason.

calcowgirl, do you have time to find it and make sure us FReepers are aware of it for posterity??? It's been less that a week ago, I think...

Anyway, youthgonewild, I like you and anybody else that's actually paying attention to politics, in direct proportion to how much they are paying in taxes!!!

[Nice50BMG]

[AuH2ORepublican]

"re-elect arnold or...even better...vote for mcClintock"

---

I supported McClintock, not Arnold, in 2003, but in 2006 McClintock is running for Lieutenant Governor and I will support Schwarzenegger for Governor and McClintock for Lt. Gov. That's the winning ticket for California, bringing out both the conservative and the RINO vote, and McClintock will accede to the governorship when Arnold resigns in early 2010 to run for the Senate against Barbara Boxer (which will give McClintock a leg up for the 2010 gubernatorial election).

[calcowgirl]

>>calcowgirl, do you have time to find it ...

Here you go:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1477202/posts
Taxpayer group criticizes plan - Legislators could sell land to create education fund
Record Searchlight ^ | September 4, 2005 | Tim Hearden
Posted on 09/04/2005 11:26:09 AM PDT by calcowgirl

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1477957/posts
Angelides Stubs Toe with Idea for California government to be Super Landlord
The Pasadena Pundit ^ | 9/5/2005 | Wayne Lusvardi
Posted on 09/05/2005 1:09:08 PM PDT by WayneLusvardi

[conservative blonde]

With this veto of same-sex marriage, Arnold will keep together the conservative GOP vote. Without that, he would have no chance of winning governor again.

[CyberAnt]

You got that right!

[SierraWasp]

Ok, y.g.w., did ya see this? (calcowgirls links above)

Thank you c.c.g.!!!

[Amerigomag]

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.

You're correct.

I'm saddened to acknowledge that today, in the United States, the Judeo Christian ethic is being deemphasized as a fundamental of our culture and many of its time proven, basic tenants are no longer universally accepted as essentials for a healthy society.

[laz]

I'm saddened to acknowledge that today, in the United States, the Judeo Christian ethic is being deemphasized as a fundamental of our culture and many of its time proven, basic tenants are no longer universally accepted as essentials for a healthy society.

All part of the Enemy's plan, in his attempt to subvert and pervert humanity and prevent his expulsion from this world as he was expelled from Heaven. He is trying to destroy the foundation upon which the Kingdom will be built. And his minions on the Left are much like the Iraqi insurgents, fighting to preserve the status quo and keep him in power and prevent a new day from dawning.

Almost two thousand years ago, St. John wrote that the antichrist was already here. In our times, Christians sit around waiting for the Antichrist to appear. Such a man will come, but the spirit of the antichrist is already here, masking itself over the past several decades in the guise of such things as fascism, communism, and now liberalism. The mouth that Revelations tells us would be given to the Antichrist to say great things and blasphemies, to perform signs and lying wonders and deceive many -- is that not a perfect description of the liberal media?