California joins Massachusetts: Redefines marriage
In a stunning 4 - 3 decision today the California Supreme Court ruled that the state statute which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman is unconstitutional.
Cathi Herrod of The Center for Arizona Policy writes: The ruling means that California now becomes the second state to redefine marriage to include same-sex relationships. While our attorneys continue to read and analyze the 172-page opinion, here’s one key excerpt: “We cannot find that retention of the traditional definition of marriage constitutes a compelling state interest. Accordingly, we conclude that to the extent the current California statutory provisions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, these statutes are unconstitutional.”Read her entire analysis and suggestions regarding Arizona’s marriage amendment here.
May 15, 2008 at 6:31 pm
This is a prime example of arrogant judges overruling the will of the people. The Defense of Marriage amendment was overwhelmingly passed in Califronia. Now Governor Awhnold says he will not do anything to overturn this lunacy.
We are raising our children in Sodom and Gomorrah.
May 15, 2008 at 8:25 pm
A perfect example of an out-of-control judicial branch acting as the legislative branch. No wonder the people distrust lawyers and elected officials, This is shameful overreaching.
May 15, 2008 at 8:34 pm
We need to support those who will continue to fight on against this lunacy. California has become a shadow of itself- I’m glad we left 14 years ago.
May 15, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I’m from Massachusetts. The few Republicans I knew there called it Leftachusetts. I was so delighted coming to Phoenix, thinking it was a Goldwater conservative state. What a surprise to find a liberal Democrat governor and a true blue leftie as Phoenix mayor. Both of them are supporters of open borders and any issue that ties the hands of law enforcement. Boy! Was I duped and in for a huge surprise coming here! Both AZ US Senators are willing to sell out the American citizens in favor of the illegals and so are a fair number of the congressman–Republicans are no better than the Dems. This time I’m voting for whichever Libertarians qualify for the ballot. It’s time to clean house.
May 16, 2008 at 4:37 am
“At best, it doesn’t move voters, and at worst for Republicans, it moves them against them,” said Matthew Dowd, who was chief strategist for Mr. Bush’s campaign in 2004. “Not so much on the issue, but it becomes, ‘Why are we having a discussion on this issue when we should talking about things that matter, like the economy, or health care, or the war?’ ”
May 16, 2008 at 7:49 am
Richard:
This is a fundamental issue on several fronts, not the least of which is undermining the basic values of civilization. If same-sex “marriage” is fine, why not three people in a “committed relationship?” Why not have the ability to marry siblings? Or, your dog?
Your question is the one typically articulated by liberals who are now openly past incrementalism, and are staging an all-out war on biblical teachings and societal norms.
They are aided and abetted by judicial activists who override the will of the people–who have already voted this measure DOWN.
May 16, 2008 at 8:12 am
Bat Boy:
There you go again–posting on blogs at 4:00 in the morning. You need your sleep. The additional rest will help you to think more clearly.