EXCLUSIVE: "Legal" Gay Marriages? Not So says Writ of Mandate
Posted by: Aaron Park | 06/17/2008 8:18 AM
As a follow-up to a daily roundup story... Dan Logue and other County Supervisors have filed a "Writ of Mandate" challenging the legality of Gay Marriages in California.
(The Entire Writ of Mandate will be linked as soon as Mr. Flint can uplaod it onto this site)
As often happens with cases of Judicial Activism, they don't do their homework - rather the Judges render a decision based on their opinions of the way things should be without understanding that they emperil others...
Case and point - Logue and other Supervisors from Four Counties have asserted that they can be sued over "gender neutral marriage licenses" because:
(Respondent = State of California)
10. The California Family Code specifies in additional places the requirement for both one male and one female for a valid marriage. "An unmarried man of 18 years or older and an unmarried female of the age of 18 years or older" may marry (Family Code Section 301 (enacted in 1992)); If "an unmarried man and an unmarried woman, not minors, have been living together as husband and wife" they may qualify to be married in a confidential marriage (Family Code Section 500 (enacted in 1992)); As a part of the marriage license, "the form shall include an affidavit, which the bride and groom shall sign" (Family Code Section 505(c) (amended in 2006)); In detailing what is to be included in the License and Certificate of Declaration of Marriage, there is a requirement for "the maiden name of the female, if previously married and if her name has been changed" (Family Code Section 103180(c)(1) (enacted in 1995)). These statutes are valid, three were enacted prior to the passage of Proposition 22, the fourth was amended in 2006, and the California Constitution expressly forbids RESPONDENT, or any other administrative agency, from declaring a statute unenforceable, or refusing to enforce a statute, on the basis of it being unconstitutional unless an appellate court has made a determination that such statute is unconstitutional (California Constitution Article 3 Section 3.5(a)).
I am sure that Logue and others will be assailed in the media over this writ - but the reality is clear... The State Supreme Court Really overstepped its' bounds. When you add the above that clearly points out how marriage is defined EVEN BEFORE PROP 22 - which is what the court overturned... you have a problem.
Take a look at this:
7. On May 15, 2008, the Supreme Court of California held that California Family Code Sections 300 and 308.5 were unconstitutional, and that same-sex couples must be included under the definition of marriage.
8. In response, RESPONDENT has altered the marriage forms that it issues, removing and adding verbiage, so as to provide forms for same-sex, as well as opposite sex, couples.
9. The Supreme Court did not, and can not, change the language of California statutes, as such can only be done by the California Legislature (Kopp v. Fair Pol. Practices (1995) 11 Cal.4th 607, 675) (Werdegar, J., concurring, stating that the power to write laws belongs to the people and political branches of government, not the judiciary).
The bottom line is that this Writ of Mandate exposes the adsurdity of Judicial activism. What is going to have to happen again is the courts are going to have to write laws from their bench in order to rule against this writ.
the California Supreme Court does not write law and their decision has created a conflict that could expose counties to legal trouble. Do the courts care?
What is more likely is that our "Republican" governor is going to sign a bill re-defining the marriage code. I am sure Senator-Elect Leno has his staff getting on the bill as we speak.
Meanwhile - the Secretary of State had to certify the initiative that is hitting the ballot in November that will end the debate permanently.
Aaron
I am glad that Dan is on the case.
I am leaving to take my son/daughter-in-law and our 2 bi-racial adopted grandkids to SMF to go back home to ND. I am afraid my marriage to Carole is "empiriled" and will not exist by the time I get back...
Please tell Dan, et.al to drop everthing else on their plate and move post haste so that my marriage will be dis-empiriled.
Boy, I am glad someone is covering my back...
Nice sarchastic Dodge Lee... answer the question:
Is judicial activism OK? Is a court with 7 individuals dictating legal precident to 40 million people what the Founders of this Country intended?
Then you can get to the question of the sloppy matter with which they imposed their will on the State.
Finally - we can address the butt of your sarchasm about your marriage being in peril... right about the same time I ask you how your support for Gay Marriage meshes with your faith.
Those are all straightforward questions that deserve answers - look for the hyperbolic ads to come out in the fall, "if you vote against Gay Marriage, you're a bigot."
I can't wait.
P.S. What is Charlie Brown going to do? Where does he stand on Gay Marriage? His website is quite vague...
"The right to marry whoever one wishes is an elementary human right compared to which ‘the right to attend an integrated school, the right to sit where one pleases on a bus, the right to go into any hotel or recreation area or place of amusement, regardless of one’s skin or color or race’ are minor indeed. Even political rights, like the right to vote, and nearly all other rights enumerated in the Constitution, are secondary to the inalienable human rights to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence; and to this category the right to home and marriage unquestionably belongs."
That's Hannah Arendt in Dissent in 1959.
Cabana - your partial answer is in error, Gay Marriage and interracial marriage are not the same thing.
Craig De Luz has made some excellent posts on that very subject that you should read.
Let's take the last question first. I don't know where Charlie stands. I haven't talked to him since I played a bit part in his main TV spot.(see if you can find it on YouTube. I'm the guy in the yellow polo walking down old town Roseville Lincoln St with Charlie. I still have that yellow polo in the closet at the ready)
If I can venture a guess, Charlie is pretty much in line with most NORMAL CA-04 residents. Most NORMAL residents are pretty focused on how to make ends meet and that includes meeting their mortgage payments and being able to keep their jobs and being able to put gasoine in their vehicles and being able to put food on their tables. If they are military families, they are additionally very focused on military related issues.
The only dodge that is going on here is trying to distract NORMAL residents from these very serious issues...'tain't going to work. Go "goggle" (as you quaintly call it) Maslow's hierarchy of needs...You’ll see what I mean…
As for my faith, the more relevant issue for me is my 5 yo grandson. He was diagnosed as having mild cerebral palsy before he was 2 yo. Now at 5, it is quite apparent that he is mentally retarded. There is no way to white wash that.
As you well know, I am a Sermon on the Mount Christian. My understanding of the 3 year ministry on Earth by the Nazarene is centered there. This is where he showed the Face of God. So the relevant question for me is: Where does my grandson’s needs fit into the Nazarene’s Face of God?
That is both a faith issue and a political issue…
Opponents lose last-ditch legal bid to stop same-sex weddings
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff WriterTuesday, June 17, 2008(06-17) 12:41 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- While today's gay and lesbian weddings proceeded, a state appeals court rejected a conservative religious group's last-ditch attempt to put same-sex marriages on hold until California voters consider the issue in November.The Campaign for California Families argued that the state Supreme Court's ruling legalizing same-sex weddings should not take effect until the Legislature had a chance to rewrite or repeal a host of laws governing marriages and domestic partnerships. The organization also said the courts should avoid confusion about the status of marriages performed in the next few months by suspending the ruling until a Nov. 4 vote on an initiative that would write a ban on same-sex marriage into the state Constitution.The First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco denied a stay without comment this morning after receiving the case from the state's high court, whose ruling became final at 5 p.m. Monday. The appeals court returned the case to a Superior Court judge in San Francisco for final orders to state officials to make sure each county clerk's office was complying with the marriage ruling.E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
OK, may we get back to issues that really, really matter to NORMAL residents of CA-04?
Ken Campbell represents the concerns of NORMAL middle class folk when he puts up: . High Gas Prices-- Thank You Congress
Ken is a true Conservative. I respect Ken even though I do not subscribe to some of the solutions he advocates. I also think that Ken was on the money when he cautioned against negative campaigning. McClintock will not go there.
What is so hard to stick with real issues that really, really concern middle class folks? What is so hard about supporting your candidate of choice without trying to smear the other?
So a Court in San Francisco has ruled against stopping Gay Marriages leading up to November's referrendum...
Let's get back to the questions I asked that both of you are avoiding - questions you refer to as a smear against Charlie... Questions that Middle Class Voters care about, by the way and they will impact elections results.
Is judicial activism OK? Is a court with 7 individuals dictating legal precident to 40 million people what the Founders of this Country intended?
P.S. What is Charlie Brown going to do? Where does he stand on Gay Marriage? His website is quite vague...
Lee- Charlie is your guy for Congress and this issue is going to hurt him bad depending what he does - trying to ignore it or minimize it is not going to help one bit.
McClintock is a viable choice.
I will put it pretty bluntly, Aaron. McClintock will run a smart and principled campaign. He is a good man. His principal campaign advisors are of the same stuff.
You would never ever see him embracing your kind of campaigning. You do him no good. You do not add to his campaign.
People are sick and tired of your kind of campaigning. Here is what a Republican says:
"I talk to a lot of voters," the Republican Maki said, "and it's become quite obvious that they're being turned off by these dirty campaigns"
Aaron, if you were more winsome…
You might win some….
…
Thanks for the advice Lee...
Now back to the questions - what say you?
Is judicial activism OK? Is a court with 7 individuals dictating legal precedent to 40 million people what the Founders of this Country intended?
Now, in a separate answer to the Republican, Cheryl Maki that you cited...
Cheryl has had a history of railing on other Republicans, publicly and otherwise. (Details are not necessary)
If Cheryl cared about dirty campaigns in the manner that you suggest - then where was she when Ose (who she endorsed) unloaded $4.6 Million of character assassination against McClintock?
Add the above to the list of fair questions...
One of the reasons Ose lost was that he didn't answer any questions - or as few as possible... Charlie Brown is headed down that same road. Second is his choice of campaign action... as you suggested against me above.
If you think Brown is going to stay above the belt in his campaign, you are a lot more naive than you appear...
Brown like Ose has no moral high ground as his 2006 campaign against Doolittle was replete with half-truths and character attacks against Doolittle.
Brown will attempt the same against McClintock in 2008, and like Ose he will be held accountable.
I literally cannot wait for the Republican smear and fear machine to go into action against Charlie Brown, and for that matter, against Obama. This county, district, state and country are fed up with that kind of politics. It already has and it will continue to backfire for Republicans in elections nationwide this year.
Did it work for Doug Ose? Hell no! Will it work for McClintock's campaign (through a thin web of plausible deniability)? Hell no! People are too smart and will reject tactics like Doolittle's robo call / NAMBLA / ACLU / Nancy Pelosi hysterics and like Aaron's divisive wedge gay marriage issue.
The gay marriage amendment is going to go down to defeat. By ten points or more. And when the dust settles, people will know that one of the reasons Republicans took more losses in California this year than in 2006 was because of the MPA.
Mark my words.
Keep it up, Aaron. I am ALL FOR your smear and fear campaign because it will take Tom McClintock right down the proverbial toilet. The sewer line empties out somewhere in Southern California, I hear...they'll take the water any old which way it comes. Toilet to Tap, I believe they call it down there.
Early morning is my Benedictine Monastery time. The morning before dawn is always focused on the greatest Christian imperative...
GRATITUDE
I am grateful for another day on Earth...
I am grateful for the coming of another beautiful day in Northern California...
I am grateful that my family arrived safely back in ND
I am grateful that my wife sleeps peacefully in the marriage bed, safe from preditory lesbians seeking her hand in marriage...
I am grateful that my yellow dog Democrat neighbor has asked my to take her to SMF at 6am this morning
I am grateful for abundance bestowed upon me, much more than I ever deserved...
I am grateful for my trusty laptop computer...
I am grateful for Bob who is much much more smarter than I am and has come back...
Thanks be to God...
Lee / Bob - another scriptural context for you "hardening your heart to the truth you will always deny"
I am going to save Bob's comment above and I will re-post it in its' entirety when Charlie Brown starts his smear campaign.
Apparently, Bob is so blinded by the partisanship that Charlie says we need to get away from that he forgot about Charlie's $2.5 million smear campaign against John Doolittle.
Lee - I am not being as hard on you becasue you have the integrity to post under your own name. Bob, on the other hand hides behind his anonymity to hurl insults and make extremely partisan comments that he will be able to avoid the embarrasment of when they are proven wrong.
So - please continue to blame me. Meanwhile, some 55-60% of the voters are going to agree with Tom in November.
Winning two popularity contests in the last 24 hours, my cup runneth over…
But (sigh) popularity in these parts is a transient thing, about the half-life of a fruit fly…sometimes much shorter…
ummm...2.5 mil to slime JTD?...I have to hand it to ya, Aaron, you are one creative guy.
The fact is that JTD slimed himself, his "I Stand With Doolittle" supporters, and his party.
Now let's just say a little birdie has told me that there is this guy singin' like a canary as we speak... and he will be singin' in public come Septemberish
The thing of it is, McClintock knows this. He also knows that he will be OK as long as he keeps some distance from the JTD machine crowd.
But Aaron, don't let that cramp your style.
I'll add a little scripture for you to ponder...
I Corinthians 5:12-13 says
"What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. 'Expel the wicked man from among you.'"
To me, the answer is always in the Scripture. We have an imperative to judge only those who have decided to live by our rules: we have no place to restrict someone else's freedoms unless they decide to hold themselves to the same accord the Bible does.
Lee - thanks for your answer. I guess Doolittle made the negative, misleading advertisements himself and Brown is as clean as the wind-driven snow.
Charlie Brown is off the hook folks... according to Bob and Lee, he has a free hand to attack all he wants. However, if this blogger points out that Brown is a liberal - it is "slime that everyone is tired of". Nice.
What is everyone going to do when the investigation is dropped?(remember, Doolittle has not been charged in now 4 years of investigation...)
(Hey! Kool-Aid)
3:8 - using scripture to justify sin is not cool, you ought to check with your pastor about that. I may not have the right to judge a homosexual... however, that does not change the fact that their lifestyle is morally / Biblicaly wrong.
There is a difference between judging the person and their actions. You know this, and using a passage of scripture to paint a broad brush over both shows your agenda loud and clear.
No amount of court decisions attempting to muzzle the Church or any inuendo / name-calling against this blogger is going to change the fact that some choices are wrong. (wrong = sinful)
Please also refer to Romans Chapter 1.
And another thing to ponder:
The Sheep and the Goats
31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Aaron, food banks across this great nation are not able to keep up with the needs of the hungry.
There is St. Vincent de Paul's food locker just a stone's throw from your office. Would the Park Brother's Foundation consider delivering a trunk full of food there?
Here are the directions: go right on Cirby to the light at Vernon...and turn right...and then a fast left that will take you to the back of St. Vincents...there will be volunteer guys who will say, " God bless you "...and God will smile down at you...
On the general issue of slime in campaigns and the inevitable ramping up of the Republican smear and fear machine folks should note Mike Huckabee's words:
"The Republicans will make a fundamental, if not fatal mistake, if they seek to win the election by demonizing Barrack Obama," Huckabee told reporters in Tokyo. "Don't underestimate the extraordinary, substantive moment that Barack Obama's nomination represents in our country."
On a much smaller scale the same will be true of Aaron's promised smear and fear campaign against Charlie Brown which will no doubt include the ACLU and Stephen Pearcy nonsense, the supposed connections to Code Pink and a hue and cry about the MPA. All the unimportant low-brow misrepresentations and outright falsehoods.
It will all backfire.
My faith is the bedrock of my life, Aaron. I don't ever justify "sin" through Holy Scripture. If someone from my church were engaging in anything contrary to biblical teaching, I would be the first to pull that person aside. But it is no our place to judge those OUTSIDE the church. Something about being the first without sin being able to cast the first stone comes to mind.
Its completely biblically sound for me to not judge someone from outside my faith. But I am called to be a witness to the world, Aaron, and you are too. We are supposed to show the world that we've got something better in our lives and it is supposed to attract people to live by a different set of standards.
Using Scripture to hate or suppress is blasphemous and goes against everything my Christianity represents.
3:8 I was waiting for something like: "Using Scripture to hate or suppress is blasphemous and goes against everything my Christianity represents."
I was waiting for the H-Word to be rolled out just like the Nazi word was used in a different thread.
Some choices are wrong - taking your faith and bottling it up inside a church and then taking an attitude you characterize as "Non-Judgemental" to say that standing up against immorality is hate reminds me of the passage - "Faith without works is dead".
It is not hate to say abortion is murder, nor is it hate to characterize Homosexuality as immoral. Those that wish to have abortions or live the gay lifestyle attack those who disagree and have framed the arguments of those who disagree with them as hate.
Sitting idly by while society disintegrates is blasphemous and goes against everything my Christianity represents.
BTW - have you noticed that court after court are now refusing religious exemptions?
Laws passed in California could be used to force Churches to employ cross-dressers, SB 777 and laws like it are being used to promote the Gay lifestyle and sexualize children as young as 7 years old... 7 year olds should be allowed to keep their innocence.
Coming soon - churches and pastors could be forced to marry homosexuals as well... think it is far-fetched? Look at Europe - they are already there and Massachusetts is on their way.
Does your faith command you to sit by and do nothing while this sort of thing occurs? Where does Romans Chapter 1 fit into all of this?
I am sure you and your other Charlie Brown supporters are going to keep calling me a Nazi and a Hater and you will dismiss these arguments...
Faith without works is dead - sitting by and doing nothing to be "non-judgemental" is the same thing as condoning the behavior. Being a Christian witness is standing up for what is right inside and outside the church e.g. "being salt and light".
Aaron,
I never called you a Nazi and never would. I'm not stupid. I know that you love our country just as much as I do (which IS a lot). I think you missed my point-- that I am not one that stands idly by twiddling my thumbs. But instead of preaching, I'm trying an "old school" approach and just being with these people. You have NO clue how hard it is for me to not want to shout out "This is wrong! Stop doing it!" to people I know. But that's the judgemental nature in me that's trying to ruin my witness.
Instead, I try to do what's right, keep my temper down, apologize as soon as I've made a mistake, and set an example that I'm hoping will change their minds. I tell them of MY love for another man (Jesus), and how he fills me up every day with the strength I need. I am NOT going to convince them to change their ways because I'm standing out in front of the courthouse with a posterboard sign. I'm going to convince them because they see something different in me.
June 18, 2008 It's Your Move, Says Log Cabin's Patrick Sammon Today hundreds of committed, loving gay and lesbian couples in California will affirm their relationships by becoming legally married. This is an historic day for all fair-minded Americans who believe that all of us—gay and straight—are worthy of the same dignity, responsibilities, and rights that only come with a civil marriage license. This is a bipartisan issue. All of us in the LGBT community must stand together and fight to keep marriage equality and defeat the proposed constitutional amendment in November.
The campaign ahead will be a difficult one, but victory is possible. Log Cabin is committed to doing all we can to convince Republicans to oppose the amendment. I am proud that Governor Schwarzenegger chose the Log Cabin national convention in San Diego to announce his opposition to this amendment. We appreciate his support.
I am optimistic about the campaign ahead but victory will take a lot of hard work. Every LGBT American has an obligation to step forward during this important time. Victory will be determined by what of each of us does to help the effort. Some might go door to door or give speeches to community groups or call talk radio stations. Others may write a check. Others might simply have a conversation with a friend, a family member, or even a stranger.
Think about how you can help this effort. Everyone must step forward in big and small ways to help this cause. It doesn’t matter if you’re from California or Connecticut or Sacramento or Savannah. This is the fight of our generation—now is the time. If not this, what? If not now, when?
The story of our lives is the strongest tool we have as this campaign begins. In moments like these when our dream of freedom and fairness for LGBT Americans becomes a little closer to reality, I urge everyone in our community to share their personal stories—their lives, their loves, and their relationships— to everyone they know. But especially to conservatives and Republicans.
We all know that when hot-button issues like gay rights are taken out of the abstract and made real and personal, the vast majority of Americans become more accepting of LGBT people. As we continue to share our stories and come out to our friends, our family, our co-workers, and our neighbors, we all take our movement closer to the day when every American, regardless of sexual orientation, is treated with the same respect and dignity.
Many millions of votes will determine the outcome in California. Each vote is an individual. Each decision a personal one. Each of us has the power to influence votes in California. All of us must put aside partisan differences to step forward and work together to secure this win. History is not destiny. Victory is possible but not assured. The outcome depends on you.
Sammon is president of the Log Cabin Republicans and the Liberty Education Forum.
3:8 - I did not miss your point.
You, like other Christians who are Democrats are going to have to choose at some point when you are going to stop and start speaking up.
How much further are the rights of the Church going to be restricted or rescinded by activist courts before you and others like you will reconsider?
That's the question I ask every friend of mine at Church thinking about supporting Obama or Charlie Brown - what do you stand for, what do they stand for, and how is any of it congruent with your faith?
50 years ago, it was possible to comfortably be a Democrat and a Christian.
Today - being a Democrat and a Christian is exceptionally difficult because of what the Democrat mainstream is promoting.
Faith Without Works is Dead - maybe your friends on the Dem Central Committee could use some of your Christian wisdom - that is if they even care about freedom of religion.
Someone should speak some reason to those the worship the creation rather than the creator... someone should speak reason to those that glorify lifestyles that are wrong... the Dem leadership is apparently blind to the witness of people like yourself.
If I knew anyone on the Central Cmte I'd be glad to! Hey, quick question if anyone's stil on this thread: what denomination is Tom McClintock? I'm guessing Catholic based on last name?