Defending the Truth

After the latest attack on marriage from homosexual activist groups, the fight to dedfend traditional marriage and the family intensifies.

The CA Supreme Court squeeked through their anti-marriage ruling by the narrowest possible margin 4-3.

The dissenting Justices said:

"A bare majority of this court, not satisfied with the pace of democratic change, now abruptly forestalls that process and substitutes, by judicial fiat, its own social policy views for those expressed by the People themselves."

"The majority … simply does not have the right to erase, then recast, the age-old definition of marriage, as virtually all societies have understood it, in order to satisfy its own contemporary notions of equality and justice. The California Constitution says nothing about the rights of same-sex couples to marry. On the contrary, as the majority concedes, our original Constitution, effective from the moment of statehood, evidenced an assumption that marriage was between partners of the opposite sex."


"If there is to be a further sea change in the social and legal understanding of marriage itself, that evolution should occur by similar democratic means. The majority forecloses this ordinary democratic process, and, in doing so, oversteps its authority."


Justice Marvin R. Baxter joined by Justice Ming W. Chin

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF

Defenders of traditional marriage promised a no-holds-barred battle to amend the state constitution to explicitly ban same-sex marriages.

Although the ballot initiative only requires 694,354 signatures to qualify, Protect Marriage said it had received 1.1 million signatures, which is more names than the law mandates, and it has no doubt the question will be put to voters.

According to Robert Tyler, General Counsel for Advocates, “This may be our only hope to preserve marriage in California if the California Supreme Court takes an activist approach to its upcoming decision on marriage. No doubt, marriage will continue to be attacked in future years, so it is imperative that we succeed in amending the state constitution so that activist courts will not be able to reverse the will of the people.”

The measure promises to be the center of a tedious battle, and it is critical that Christians, churches, pastors, and leaders unite to spread the word about the importance of this amendment and bring them to the polls in November to vote.

If passed by a majority of voters in November, the constitutional amendment will overturn the court ruling in favor of homosexual marriage advocates.

Yeah - every losing side has an opinion.

If there's a court case, there's an opposing opinion.

So?

How many legal gay marriages will there be in CA before that happens?

No matter how much discrimination is written into the CA constitution, there will be and always will be legally married gay couples.

By the time November rolls around, many people may just be sick of this being a wedge issue for politicians to whore around.

But if the legal case for homosexual marriage was so clear cut why would there be any dissenting opinions?

Why would experienced, highly-qualified CA Supreme Court Justices say that:

The California Constitution says nothing about the rights of same-sex couples to marry.

One of the dissenting Justices, Justice Corrigan, went so far as to say that she personally thought that homosexuals should be able to marry:

"In my view, Californians should allow our gay and lesbian neighbors to call their unions marriages. But I, and this court, must acknowledge that a majority of Californians hold a different view, and have explicitly said so by their vote.

This court can overrule a vote of the people only if the Constitution compels us to do so. Here, the Constitution does not. Therefore, I must dissent"

We don't really care about all the gay couples and gays getting married. Just keep the kissing and humping out of our face. That's the real issue. Most heterosexual couples don't do that shit in public. However, gay couples are so damn fond of doing it! You want fucking get married - fine. Just keep the kissy shit to yourselves.

If there is a compelling reason to rule any way on any case, why is there a dissenting opinion?

I don't see that at all in my daily life. In fact, exactly the opposite.

Perhaps you should move to a better neighborhood.

You don't see much of anything in your life. It seems you live in a hole somewhere.