More Gay Marriage Legislation From the Bench

According to AP, “San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.”

Kramer wrote:

“It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners,”

…that the state’s historical definition of marriage, by itself, cannot justify the denial of equal protection for gays and lesbians.

“The state’s protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional,”

Obviously this case will be appealed to the California Supreme Court. However, there are also bills pending in the CA Legislature that would put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. Frankly, this is where it should be decided, the voters. It is far time that the electorate be allowed to vote on this issue instead of unelected men and women in black.

This issue should be removed from the hands of the liberal California Courts and given the voters decide for themselves. On November 2, 2004 eleven states were provided this same opportunity and all voted against same sex marriages. Different states in the US have different provisions afforded to gay couples when it comes to marriage or civil union. Legislation from the bench must stop, let the people be heard.

Update: On March 7, 2000 Californian’s overwhelmingly voted for Proposition 22, known as the “California Defense of Marriage Act, 308.5 the Family Code.”

Proposition 22 was ratified by an overwhelming majority of California voters, prevailing by a 23-point margin. Statewide, 4,618,673 votes were cast in favor of the proposition, comprising 61.4% of the total vote. Opponents garnered 2,909,370 votes, for 38.6% of the vote. The test of the proposed law can be found here.

The people of California have already spoke and said, “”Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” What is most interesting is that some opponents to proposition 22 had stated that, it was unnecessary for government interference since the measure does not ban same-sex marriages in California and that it was already banned by current law.

Thus in California, we have a proposition that was passed when an existing law was already in place, whereas a Judge has reversed the ruling of a lower court to make ban’s on gay marriage unconstitutional. Meanwhile bills are in the State Legislature to create an amendment baning same sex marriage. Sound confusing?

It has been said that America was not ready for a Constitutional Amendment to ban same sex marriage, but it is obvious from the actions of the Courts in not listening to the will of the people that this is what needs to be done.

And more found at Wizbang and OTB. And an interesting take at The Jawa Report