That is why it would be helpful for the judges to know your views about their ruling.
They are H. Walter Croskey, Joan D. Klein and Patti S. Kitching. They can be reached
at the Ronald Reagan State Building, 300 South Spring Street, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles,
CA 90013. Phone: 213-830-7000.
The second decision handed down from on high a few weeks ago was even more
egregious. The California Supreme Court, by a vote of 4 to 3, overturned an electoral
decision supported by 4,618,673 voters in the year 2000. It concerned Proposition 22,
which defined marriage exclusively as being between one man and one woman. The
margin of victory for this affirmation of the traditional family was 61 to 39 percent.)
There were many Californians who fought valiantly for what they believed, sacrificed to
help buy advertising space and collect signatures, mobilized their fellow citizens and then
went to the polls to register their preference for marriage between a man and a woman.
Alas, it was all for naught. The Court sniffed, “Not so fast, common people. We hold the
trump card and you lose.” Proposition 22 was trashed in a single blow.
Abraham Lincoln said during the Gettysburg Address in 1863 that ours is a system of
government designed “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” It is sad to note
that this concept of self-determination given to us by the Founding Fathers is no longer
true, at least not in the State of California. The justices there have a better plan. I wonder
how long Americans will permit themselves to be bullied and their beliefs overridden by a
few powermongers in black robes. They have embarked upon a radical social experiment
that carries dangerous implications for society and for generations of children yet to
come. A last ditch effort to persuade the court to stay its ruling was summarily rejected
by the same four judges who created same-sex “marriage” in California. Arrogance has
now been heaped upon arrogance by these judicial tyrants.
The justices who imposed same-sex “marriage” on California and, by extension, on every
other state in the nation, should be etched on the minds of those inside and outside the
Golden State. Once again, it would be useful for you to express your opinions of the
issues at hand. Members of the State Supreme Court, composing the majority in this case,
are Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Justice Joyce L. Kennard, Justice Kathryn Mickle
Werdegar and Justice Carlos R. Moreno. These four individuals can be reached at the
Supreme Court of California, 350 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102-4797, and
by phone at 415-865-7000. They should know that they have over-stepped their authority
and that their decision will not be forgotten. Likewise, the Governor of California, Arnold
Schwarzenegger, should hear from pro-family advocates around the country. He actually
favors the same-sex ruling, after saying for years that he believes in the exclusivity of
marriage between a man and a woman. Well . . . he changed his mind because the winds
changed directions. You can reach him at the State Capitol Building, Sacramento, CA
95814, and by phone at 916-445-2841.
I wonder if any of my readers remember another liberal chief justice of California’s
Supreme Court who incurred the wrath of angry voters? Her name was Rose Bird,
and she continually defied the will of the people. For example, she cast 61 reversal
votes in 61 death penalty cases despite rigorous disagreement. Finally, Californians
had enough.‘ In 1986, she and three of her fellow justices were thrown out of office
by statewide election. Off they went into oblivion. How did Rose Bird react to this
eeHas it occurred to Californians to consider what amounts to another “recall election” for
he four Justices who have disregarded the institution of marriage? I believe it is worth
liscussing. Marriage has been honored in custom and in the law for more than 5000 years.
it has thrived everywhere humankind has resided.
arriage is not simply a Judeo-Christian concept, although it finds its origins in the Garden
f Eden. The Creator said to Adam and Eve, “For this reason a man will leave his father
and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24, nrv).
that is the way it has always been. But now, four members of the California Supreme
‘ourt have come to a different conclusion. They intend to jettison the divine plan and, in
so doing, have opened the door to polygamy, group marriage and who knows what else. In
his daily update following the shocking ruling, Gary Bauer, president of American Values,
ighlighted several telling and provocative quotes related to the case. In the first one, he
noted that, to their credit, three justices vigorously opposed the same-sex ruling. Writing
for the minority, Justice Marvin Baxter stated prophetically:
“The majority . . . simply does not have the right to erase, then recast, the age-
old definition of marriage, as virtually all societies have understood it, in order
to satisfy its own contemporary notions of equality and justice. The California
Constitution says nothing about the rights of same-sex couples to marry. On
the contrary, as the majority concedes, our original Constitution, effective from
the moment of statehood, evidenced an assumption that marriage was between
partners of the opposite sex.”*
How did the ACLU perceive the victory? Exactly as you would expect. They are ecstatic.
Challenges to state marriage amendments and the federal Defense of Marriage Act are
coming. Here are portions of a message sent to supporters of the ACLU following the
California decision:
“We won the marriage case in California. No need for hyperbole here; this
is big... . And as The New York Times recently pointed out, the California
Supreme Court is the most influential state high court in America. . . . Marriage
in California will transform the discussion of marriage nationwide. . . . The fact
that California is marrying same-sex couples will put considerable pressure on
the rest of the country to recognize those marriages. Even more important, the
rest of the country recognizes that California is America’s cultural trendsetter,
that cultural change in California is usually a preview of what is to come in the
rest of the United States. ... This was a prize of inestimable value.””
Homosexual activist Wayne Besen came up crowing:
“If same-sex marriage becomes a reality in America’s largest and most influential
state—and is not overturned by a Constitutional Amendment—it will be the
biggest earthquake to hit in years. The sheer number of couples who will marry
(and divorce, it is California, after all), will forever change this debate. It will
cause a legal mess, as many of these married couples—often with children—
migrate to [other] states.”>
So, chalk up another disastrous loss for the defenders of morality and the family. There
may be some good news on the horizon, however. The battle may not be over. Due tomonths of very hard work and sacrifice by Ron Prentice and his colleagues at the California
Family Council, and a collaboration of numerous pastors including Jack Hibbs at the
Calvary Chapel Chino Hills Church, Jim Garlow of Skyline Wesleyan Church, Chris Clark
of East Clairemont Southern Baptist Church, Miles McPherson of The Rock Church, San
Diego Auxiliary Bishop Salvatore Cordileone and other concerned Californians, there
will be a state constitutional amendment on the ballot in November. Voters in the Golden
State will now have the opportunity to reverse the court’s momentous decision. I am
sending this urgent call to every church, every conservative family, and every supporter
of marriage in the state. Organize. Plan. Give. Campaign. Talk to neighbors and friends.
Get out the vote. Leave no stone unturned. Above all, pray for God’s will to be done.
Everything depends on the outcome. Do not be afraid of criticism and ridicule. It goes
with the territory. But what you are doing is right. I am as certain of that as anything I
have said in the past 35 years.
Before closing this passionate message, let me remind you that California and the rest of
the country would not be in the mess it is in if the U.S. Congress had not ignored and run
from their duty to protect the institution of the family. All three presidential candidates
voted against the Marriage Protection Amendment, and to my knowledge, not a one
of them has uttered a word about the preservation of the traditional family. Honestly,
we have to assume that they don’t give a hoot about marriage. Senator Barack Obama
agrees with the decision by the Supreme Court. Senator Hillary Clinton has attempted to
sidestep the issue by repeatedly saying she supports one-man, one-woman marriage, yet
simultaneously asserting that it should be left to the states to decide. Senator McCain has
taken basically the same position. Obviously, the states can’t protect marriage because the
courts can overrule them. Senator McCain’s own state of Arizona is considering another
effort to pass a constitutional amendment to protect marriage, but he has remained
ominously silent in response to it. In fact, Republican leadership in the Arizona legislature
has gotten cold feet and is holding up the amendment. This is an example of why a federal
constitutional amendment is needed to preserve this precious and critical institution of
marriage.
In 2006, numerous congressmen and senators in both parties issued press releases saying,
“A constitutional amendment is not needed.” Well, as we have seen, they continue to
hide behind that phony excuse. Today, California's Supreme Court has permitted same-
sex “marriage.” Tomorrow, maybe every state in the nation will have its own definition
f what it means to be a family. Can you imagine being legally married in Oklahoma
or Pennsylvania and not married in New Jersey or Oregon? It will create chaos in the
family. New York Governor David A. Paterson recently announced that he was ordering
Il governmental agencies to amend and revise more than 1,300 state policies in order to
recognize homosexual marriages performed elsewhere in the country.’ In other words, it’s
echnically still illegal for homosexuals to marry in New York, but if they are legally wed
elsewhere, their marriages will be just as valid and accepted as the heterosexual unions
among its state residents.
‘e intend to fight for what we believe, and especially for the family, in the days
etween now and the national election. As an organization, Focus on the Family remains
committed not only to preserving marriage, but also to fighting so-called hate crimes,