Gay Marriage Ban Makes California Ballot

Initiative Follows Court's Recent Ruling Legalizing Same-Sex Marriages

(AP)  An initiative that would again outlaw gay marriage in California has qualified for the November ballot, the Secretary of State announced.

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen said Monday that a random check of signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed that they had gathered enough names for it to be put to voters.

The measure would amend the state constitution to "provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

If approved by a majority of voters on Nov. 4, the amendment would overturn the recent California Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state. It is similar to gay marriage bans that have been adopted in 26 other states.

"This signifies the fact that California voters really do favor and will come out to vote for the protection of historic marriage," said Ron Prentice, executive director of ProtectMarriage.com, a coalition of religious and social conservative groups behind the initiative.

In response to the court's May 15 ruling, California public health officials already have amended marriage license applications to read "Party A" and "Party B" instead of bride and groom. Local officials have been told to start issuing the revised licenses to same-sex couples on June 17.

Gay men and lesbians would still be able to get married between then and the election, even with the initiative pending, unless the court agrees to stay its decision until after Nov. 4, as the amendment's sponsors have requested.

If the marriages proceed during the next five months, it is unclear whether they would be nullified if the amendment passes. Some legal scholars have said the state Supreme Court might get called on again to settle that question.

Kate Kendell, executive director of the San Francisco-based National Center for Lesbian Rights, said gay marriage advocates have already launched a campaign to defeat the measure.

"There is just so much at stake, now, in terms of what kind of state we are going to live in and what values we are going to uphold," Kendell said.

To qualify for the ballot, the measure needed 694,354 petition signatures, an amount equal to 8 percent of the votes cast during the last governor's race.

Proponents submitted 1,120,801 signatures in late April, and county clerks determined the measure qualified by verifying the validity of 3 percent of the signatures they received, according to Bowen.

Recent polls have found California voters are about evenly split on whether gay couples should be allowed to marry.

[glidescube]

If this amendment fails to win will the mighty self righteous right shut the fvck up?

[lorinkundert]

The people should make the decision, not the courts who have no constitutional authority to create rights that do not exist.

[suicharbor]

I am not sure if the homosexuals "able" to get married since they can''t even fulfil the meaning of marriage. The purpose of a marriage is to allow two person who are in love to become one (how can two person of the same *** become one?) and be able to multiply (again, how can they get conceived by mating?)... totally ridiculous.

[blackyowe]

Just say no to G*A*Y marriage it''s not right and never will be. There is no social need for it, it''s a trophy G*A*Y*s want to make them look legitimate. Give them civil unions to protect their property rights and leave it there.

[flabear2]

"Fair enough. Don''''t force your lifestyle into everyone elses'''' lives either."

Force, like how? Walking down the street together?

[hypnotoad72]

Please leave our peace-loving and consenting adults alone and stay out of the bedroom!

Posted by antixlayer
----------------------

Fair enough. Don''t force your lifestyle into everyone elses'' lives either. Especially when all sorts of people say "it''s nobody''s business." So why the hypocrisy?

[north1pole]

Hey, A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words:
www.poconocommunitynews.com

[flabear2]

"HOMOSEXUALITY''''''''S ROOTS IS IN CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSE! THESE PEOPLE NEED PSYCHOLOGICAL HELP!"

Funny...I''ve never been sexually abused. Got any more BS easy-fix "reasons" that homosexuality exists?

[flabear2]

Posted by antixlayer at 09:54 AM : Jun 04, 2008

Couldn''t have said it better myself.

Don''t forget to add this to the mix: When all of their arguments and "reasonings" have been shown to be false, the only thing they have left is to fall back on the "icky defense"; they find that homosexual sexual intercourse is distasteful to them personally, so they try to make it distasteful socially.

Such a waste of good energy.

[simonsez40]

Posted by antixlayer

So WELL SAID!

[wulfen1]

"In the mid-20th century, male homosexuals constituted about 8% of men afflicted with anal cancer; by the mid-1980s, this figure had risen to 72%."
--------
Posted by Gaye5

I''ve got to ask, is the percentage of homosexual men with anal cancer in the mid-20th century (1940-1960, roughly) lower because fewer homosexual men had cancer, or because fewer men with cancer would admit to being homosexual? Because those times weren''t exactly friendly and welcoming toward openly gay people.

[fornicario]

I am disgusted by the show of bigotry and prejudice shown on this website. I guess that homosexuals are good enough to fight and die for this country, but not good enough to marry? I find it disgusting that ''Americans'' who talk about freedom and equality would deny that same freedom and equality to others. They are not asking for special privileges, but only the right to be treated like every other American. Tell me, what right do ''normal'' people have to do this to another group of people?

[caldwellptr]

To clarify - I support ***, lesbians or anyone else who wants to get married. The point of my comments are what do any of the good folks here making such horrific comments regarding actually want - it sounds to me they would be happy with some sort of "final solution", and until then are happy to beat them up.

I also think if everyone, not just *** and lesbians, had to have an election just to conduct their life, it would be different. As far as I know, *** and lesbians are the only citzens of the United States that are also the subjects of local, state and national elections. Who else in the United States are the subject of elections to determine if they can do what other Americans are allowed to do.

[brianbwb-2009]

I say let them marry, then discover the joys of divorce. Why should they not also be allowed to suffer the consequences...?

[brianbwb-2009]

If you don''t approve of same gender marriage or activities, I save a sure fire 3-step program to eliminate it.

step 1, Don''t do it.

step 2, If you do do it, don''t get married.

step 3, If you are a closet one, shouting to cover up your own predilections, then ****, it only makes you more obvious.

To sum up, mind your own business.

[rudy654-2009]

HOMOSEXUALITY''''S ROOTS IS IN CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSE! THESE PEOPLE NEED PSYCHOLOGICAL HELP!
**************

And you know this how?

[darnedsocks]

ARE THEY GOING TO PUT A HALT TO THE GAY MARRIAGES SET FOR JUNE 17TH! GAWD, THIS IS SICKENING TO SEE THE COURT BECOME AN "ENABLER" OF SEXUAL PERVERSION!

HOMOSEXUALITY''S ROOTS IS IN CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSE! THESE PEOPLE NEED PSYCHOLOGICAL HELP!

DUDES BF''ING EACH OTHER, RIPPING OUT EACH OTHER''S ANAL LINING IN A BLOODY MESS, IS NOT NORMAL!

LESBIANS WHO USE *** OBVIOUSLY HAVE A NATURAL DESIRE TO BE PLEASURED BY A ***, SO WHY DON''T THEY JUST GO OUT AND GET A MAN!

THE ROOT CAUSE OF THEIR SEXUAL PERVERSION SHOULD BE ADDRESSED VIA PSCHOLOGICAL HELP...NOT SANCTIONED BY THE COURT!

THIS IS LIKE TELLING ALCOHOLICS TO KEEP DRIVING DRUNK OR LIKE TELLING DRUG DEALERS TO KEEP IN SELLING!

THIS IS INSANE!

[honestabe8]

caldwell: allowed to exist? what is your alternative? the final solution?

[wcincott]

I appreciate someone spelling out the consequences of abnormal sexual behavior such as practiced by the gay community.

[caldwellptr]

Are there any other human beings on this planet other than *** that it could be debated whether they should be allowed to exist?