16 May
2008
Posted in: Blog
By    4 Comments

Equality for CA Gay Couples

Of course, the morals police are all up in arms about the CA ruling, but at least one GOP group can celebrate. Here is the Log Cabin press release on the CA ruling:

For Immediate Release

May 15, 2008

Log Cabin Republicans Applaud California Supreme Court’s Decision on Marriage Equality


(Washington, DC) – Log Cabin Republicans applaud today’s historic ruling by the Supreme Court of California. In a 4-3 decision, the Court ruled that loving, committed gay and lesbian couples in California cannot be denied a civil marriage license. Republican governors appointed six of the seven justices on the high court.

“We commend the Court for carefully reviewing this case and reaffirming the principles of liberty and justice for all,” said Log Cabin Republicans President Patrick Sammon. “This ruling is a conservative one. The justices have ensured that the law treats all Californians fairly and equally,” said Sammon. “This decision is a good one for all families—gay and non-gay. Two people in a loving and committed relationship deserve the support and dignity that come with marriage.”

Immediately after the Court issued its ruling, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA) issued the following statement: “I respect the Court’s decision and as Governor, I will uphold its ruling. Also, as I have said in the past, I will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling.”

In April 2008, Gov. Schwarzenegger publicly opposed any effort to pass a state constitutional amendment banning marriage for same-sex couples. He called such an effort a “total waste of time” and told a national gathering of Log Cabin Republicans “I will always be there to fight against that.”

“The California legislature has voted in favor of the freedom to marry, the State Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the freedom to marry and in November, the people likely will have the opportunity to support the freedom to marry by voting against a proposed constitutional ban on marriage,” said Sammon.

Opponents of marriage equality are pushing a signature gathering effort to put an anti-gay constitutional amendment on the November ballot. The California Secretary of State is reviewing the signatures. If the state certifies enough signatures, this initiative will go on the November ballot.

“The debate does not end with this decision,” said Sammon. “Discussions about the freedom to marry will continue with our families, co-workers and neighbors.

“Marriage is good for all Americans—gay and straight. It promotes values that strengthen society and the family,” said Sammon. “Today’s ruling shows once again that states are capable of making these decisions on their own, without unnecessary intervention from the federal government. Marriage has always been, and should continue to be, a state issue. This is the essence of federalism.

This ruling by the state Supreme Court does not affect the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prevents any state from having to recognize a marriage performed in another state.

Click here to read the court’s opinion in the case. Background on the case is available on the court’s website.

###

Log Cabin Republicans is the nation’s largest organization of Republicans who support fairness, freedom, and equality for gay and lesbian Americans. Log Cabin has state and local chapters nationwide, full-time offices in Washington, DC and Sacramento, CA, a federal political action committee and state political action committees. www.logcabin.org

According to Politico.com, one anti-gay/anti-choice Southern politician is already using this issue to garner votes. Republican candidates need to stop relying on politics of hate and start talking about real issues like the economy and national security.

DISCLAIMER: This post and the contents thereof are the views of only the author identified immediately above and do not necessarily represent the views of the New York Young Republican Club (the "NYYRC"), its officers or its members. The NYYRC expressly disclaims responsibility for the contents thereof and by its charter documents may not, and does not, endorse any candidate for any office, except in a general election.

4 Comments

  • “Republican candidates need to stop relying on politics of hate and start talking about real issues like the economy and national security.”

    The moral fabric of our country is a “real issue” to most Americans. This is why gay marriage is such a large topic. If it wasn’t a “real issue” then it wouldn’t be so prominent. Many Americans believe the family structure that has defined our Country’s entire existence is worth upholding.

  • The family structure that defined our country’s existance excluded interracial couples. That has since, rightly, been changed. Many see the issue of homosexual marriage as a parallel. I realize that many Americans for religious reasons oppose the issue, and this is why I don’t think that churches or synagogues should be forced to officiate gay marriages, but as far as government sanctioned marriage, homosexuals should have equal access.

  • I do not think it has “been changed” since now only two states out of fifty allow gay marriage.

    Religion aside, cohabitation between male and female and the reproduction that takes place is natural and the most basic form of survival and nature involving our species. The relationship between male and female is a natural part of our evolution and genetic makeup. Homosexuality in the human species has not been proven to be biological or genetic with the science being inconclusive.

    I also find it highly activist that a court would overturn the will of the people like a previous post said but has now been deleted. A court is now overturning the majority of the people? Does that not define activism?

    Was it censored? Where did the other posts go? They made valid points.

  • If marriage is supposed to be for procreation, then why allow couples to marry who do not plan on having children? Also, considering that there is still a significant social stigma in many areas to being gay, why would one choose that? Seriously.

    I don’t consider it to be an activist ruling because they are basing it on a ruling that overturned a ban on interracial marriage – so in my opinion, they are offering equal access.

    The other posts were not censored – they were deleted because of inappropriate comments and my technological ineptitude (i.e. I couldn’t figure out how to delete only the comment).