Profile | Ken Campbell
Author's Latest Posts |
- Remember when we were not embarrassed with the State of the Union...
- Global Warming Scientist: "in for 20 to 30 years of cooling"
- Placer's Karen England to speak at Constitutional Coalition
- Lacking Common Sense
- Anthony Adams: It is Orange County's Fault
More»
Charlie Brown and Gay Marriage
By Ken Campbell | 09/16/08 | 05:51 PM EDT | 0 Comments
Blogger's note: I posted PJI's press release on this last week, but the Sacramento Bee is finally covering this story, albeit a day late and a dollar short. Liberal Democrat Charlie Brown along with liberal Democrat Nancy Pelosi and the usual suspects of liberal Democrats are trying to impose their view of gay marriage on the people in CA. All this newly married couple is asking for is to be called a "groom" and a "bride"... but liberal Democrats like Charlie Brown will not stand for that.
These liberal Democrats say they believe in "equality for all". O.K., if marriage between two men or two women is acceptable, how about marriage between one man and two women? Or one man and a boy... or a man and his dog? If they love each other and are committed to each other... well "equality for all", right?? That is Charlie Brown and Nancy Pelosi's world.
The Bee article is pasted below of link here.
Couple fight gender-neutral language in wedding license
By Jennifer Garza
Last month, Rachel Bird exchanged vows with Gideon Codding in a church wedding in front of family and friends. As far as Bird is concerned, she is a bride.
To the state of California, however, she is either "Party A" or "Party B."
Those are the terms that have replaced "bride" and "groom" on the state's new gender-neutral marriage licenses. And to Bird and Codding, that is unacceptable.
"We are traditionalists - we just want to be called bride and groom," said Bird, 25, who works part time for her father's church. "Those words have been used for generations and now they just changed them."
In May, after the California State Supreme Court ruled same-sex marriage legal, the courts mandated state officials to provide gender-neutral licenses and other marriage forms. "Bride" and "groom" became "Party A" and "Party B."
Bird and Codding have refused to complete the new forms, a stand that has already cost them. Because their marriage is not registered with the state, Bird cannot sign up for Codding's medical benefits or legally take his name. They are now exploring their options, she said.
Bird's father, Doug Bird, pastor of Roseville's Abundant Life Fellowship, said he is urging couples not to sign the new marriage forms, and that he is getting some support from congregants and colleagues at local churches.
"I would encourage you to refuse to sign marriage licenses with 'Party A' and 'Party B,' " he wrote in a letter that he sent to them. "If ever there was a time for the people of the United States to stand up and let their voices be heard - this is that time."
So far, however, officials with conservative legal foundations, gay groups and the state say they are unaware of anyone else making a similar stand.
And Rachel Bird described her position as "personal - not religious."
"We just feel that our rights have been violated," she said.
To some, the couple's stand may seem frivolous. But others believe "bride" and "groom" are terms that are too important for the state to set aside.
"Those who support (same-sex marriage) say it has no impact on heterosexuals," said Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute. "This debunks that argument."
But those who favor the gender-neutral language say it is fair and treats all citizens equally.
"These are legal forms meant to uphold the law, changes that were meant to accommodate all Californians, which includes gays and lesbians," said Ed Bennett, president of the Sacramento Stonewall Democrats.
Bird and Codding said they didn't intend to become part of the culture debate. They didn't know about the change when they applied for their marriage license in August. When they saw the terms, Codding wrote "groom" next to "Party A" and "bride" next to Party B
and submitted their license. On Aug. 16, they married at her father's church.
On Sept. 3, the couple received a letter from the Placer County Clerk-Recorder Registrar of Voters informing them that their license did not comply with California law and that the state did not accept licenses that had been altered. The couple had 10 days to complete a duplicate form.
The couple say they have no intention of signing the forms.
"We feel that some things are worth fighting for," said Gideon Codding, 29.
Officials said the law is clear.
"I can understand their frustration," said Gloria Coutts, assistant county clerk for Placer County." But their marriage is not registered with the state."
Bird and Codding say they are trying to figure out what to do next. Bird said she does not know what she will do if she should become ill and need insurance. "I really don't know," she said.
For now, they are busy with their family (she has two children from a previous marriage and he has three) and starting their new life.
0 Comments | Related Topics »Placer County (CA) | 4th Congressional District Race
RECOMMENDED SITES
















Comments
Post new comment