Fundie bigots react to California gay marriage ruling

[Ian David]

Traditional Values Coalition
139 C. Street SE,
Washington, DC 20003.
http://www.traditionalvalues.org

For Immediate Release
March 14, 2005
Contact: Benjamin Lopez
[phone]--Office
[phone]--Cell

CA: TVC Chairman Louis Sheldon Condemns Ruling Sanctioning Homosexual Marriages

Ruling Proves Need for State Constitutional Amendment Protecting Marriage.

Anaheim, California —“The decision issued by Judge Richard Kramer striking the voter-approved Proposition 22 and allowing homosexual marriages is yet another example of judicial tyranny and makes it clearer than ever that California needs a constitutional amendment to protect marriage as a union of one man and one woman,” said the Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, Chairman and Founder of Traditional Values Coalition.

Earlier today, March 14, 2005, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer issued his ruling on marriage. In his 27-page decision, Kramer stated: “This court concludes that…Family Code sections 300 and 308.5 violate the equal protection clause of the California Constitution.” Kramer’s ruling strikes down the language from Family Code section 308.5, which is the voter-approved initiative, Prop. 22, passed in March 2000 with 61.4% of the vote, that stated, “Only marriage between one man and one woman is valid or recognized in California.” Kramer went on to further state that tradition and procreation are not just grounds to prevent homosexual marriages.

“Marriage is a social institution which is the bedrock of society—and the judicial system should never dictate social policies. This should be left to the state legislatures and the U.S. Congress,” said Sheldon.

Numerous lawsuits have been filed in the state challenging the current definition of marriage as only between one man and one woman and counter lawsuits followed suit as well. Kramer’s decision comes after the California Supreme Court ruled in August 2004 that San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom violated state law by issuing over 4,000 marriage licenses to homosexual couples in February 2004.

“Maybe this decision will serve as a wake-up call to California citizens to get behind our proposed constitutional amendments that ban homosexual marriages, civil unions, and any other fake marriage arrangements,” said Sheldon.

Traditional Values Coalition and legislators in the state Senate and Assembly have proposed ACA 3 and SCA 1, which are identical amendments to protect marriage from being redefined by activist judges. Both amendments state:

“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California whether contracted in this state or elsewhere.” “The rights, responsibilities, benefits, and obligations of a marriage shall only be granted, bestowed and conferred upon a man and a woman joined in a valid marriage and may not be conferred upon any other union or partnership.”

TVC’s Legislative Analyst and Lobbyist Benjamin Lopez, who is directly working with legislators to pass ACA 3 and SCA 1 stated, “Judge Kramer’s ruling proves that Prop 22 alone will not protect the institution of marriage as we know it. There must be an amendment defining marriage for one man and one woman only cemented into the constitution to end this debate once and for all.”

Traditional Values Coalition is an inter-denominational public
policy organization speaking on behalf of over 43,000 churches.

For more information or to arrange an interview, please call
Amy Skeen at [phone].

TVC
139 C. Street SE,
Washington, DC 20003.
Web site address: http://www.traditionalvalues.org


Related:

Judge Says Calif. Can't Ban Gay Marriage

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A judge ruled Monday that California's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, saying the state could no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

<snip>

In the eagerly awaited opinion likely to be appealed to the state's highest court, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.

"It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Kramer wrote.

<snip>

"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional," Kramer wrote.

More:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050314/D88QVAD00.html

Related thread:
Court Rules Against California Ban On Gay Marriage
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x8950

[Sugarbleus]

1. LOL-->GOD HATES SHRIMP.COM haahhaahha

Yessiree, I wondered what the Fundies would do when they heard this news.

I think I felt the earth move right about the time of the news/ruling. ;)

[Anakin Skywalker]

2. Oh No! Not Louie Pee Pee

Sheldon again! This guy is so hilarious whenever he shows his bumpkin mug on TV.

[xchrom]

3. i hope this ruling gave fundies nightmares.

and i hope louis sheldon has a damn stroke.

fundies project perversion onto others -- cause they are perverse.
fundies are anathema!

[Ian David]

4. See related DU Threads

Fundie bigots react to California gay marriage ruling
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=8961&mesg_id=8961

Court Rules Against California Ban On Gay Marriage
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x8950

[Langley85]

5. Let Them Yell

The fundamentalists are stepping up their attacks because they see the wheels of time turning, and they know that time is on our side.

[justin899]

6. It's Important To Note This Judge...

Traditional Values Coalition and legislators in the state Senate and Assembly have proposed ACA 3 and SCA 1, which are identical amendments to protect marriage from being redefined by activist judges

This "activist judge" BS is getting on my last nerve. There are "activist judges," but they're on the other side. "Activist judges" are the ones that ignore the constitution and rule based on their personal beliefs.

The anti-marriage religionists have lost every case because their only arguments are based on religion and fake "science" from agenda-driven religionists such as Paul Cameron. That's why they've had to start amending constitutions--because they have no sound legal arguments which prove the state has an overriding interest in denying gays the same basic rights as straights.

Oh and BTW, this 'activist' judge was initially appointed by Pete Wilson in 1996.

[OTownGuy]

7. WHERE?

""The anti-marriage religionists have lost every case because their only arguments are based on religion and fake "science" from agenda-driven religionists such as Paul Cameron.""

Um, WHERE!?? Cause in the South and MidWest they r winning.

[kbm8170]

8. They aren't really "winning" in those areas. . .

they've just been using Ralph Reed-style "stealth" tactics and the MSM has been incredibly cooperative in giving them a platform to spout their deceptions. There was no marriage debate in every one of those states (except perhaps Oregon) - it's just a Right Wing knee-jerk reaction. If you look at those states, none of them even had any basic civil rights protections for gays anyway, and most already had DOMA laws on the books.

I think what is most disturbing is that the Right claims "activist" judges are any that actually determine "equal" and "all" as meaning what they say - and the Right has never been about treating citizens the same.