California will reject altered marriage forms

Same Sex Marriage Forum

Reference: http://washingtontimes.com/national...23003-6956r.htm

By Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The California state agency that records marriages said yesterday that forms that have been altered, which San Francisco has done on its homosexual "marriage" licenses, will not be registered.

California has a standard application form for marriage licenses, "and if it has been altered in any way, then it will not be registered and recorded. It will be sent back to the county of origin," said Nicole Evans, spokeswoman for Kim Belshe, the California Health and Human Services secretary.

The more than 2,600 homosexual couples who have been "married" since last week with the help of San Francisco city and county officials have been crossing out "groom" and "bride" as printed on the standard application and writing in phrases such as "Applicant #1" and "Applicant #2" or "spouses for life."

None of these forms will be accepted, Ms. Evans said yesterday.

"We have to follow the law when we process these forms. It's part of public statute, so we are following state law in the way we record and register marriages," she said, adding that, to her knowledge, the state agency hasn't received any same-sex "marriage" forms yet.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who orchestrated the same-sex "marriage" spree, could not be reached for comment.

However, San Francisco City Assessor Mabel Teng told the Sacramento Bee that altering the documents to make them gender-neutral had been approved by San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera and that she didn't think the state could invalidate the documents based on those changes.

A spokesman for Mr. Herrera's office said yesterday that "if and when" marriage forms are returned, "the city attorney will evaluate his options about how to proceed, but at this time, it is premature to speculate on what those options are or what he may be doing."

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who generally supports homosexual rights, criticized San Francisco officials for disobeying state law.

"I support all of California's existing laws that provide domestic-partnership benefits and protections," Mr. Schwarzenegger said in a statement released late Tuesday. "However, Californians spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage when they overwhelmingly approved California's law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.

"I support that law and encourage San Francisco officials to obey that law. The courts should act quickly to resolve this matter," the governor said.

Meanwhile, a traditional-values group is scheduled to be in court tomorrow to again ask the judge to stop San Francisco officials from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

"What's happening is not only a violation of civil law, but a violation of criminal law as well," said Mathew Staver, president of Liberty Counsel, which is representing the Campaign for California Families.

State law is very clear, said Randy Thomasson, executive director of Campaign for California Families.

"[I]ssuing invalid marriage certificates and officiating at unlawful weddings is a misdemeanor and punishable with fines and jail time," the group said.

On Tuesday, Mr. Thomasson's group and its attorneys asked Superior Court Judge Ronald Quidachay to issue a restraining order for San Francisco officials. The judge instead asked all the parties in the case to share information and appear before him tomorrow.

Also on Tuesday, Superior Court Judge James L. Warren heard arguments on a separate but similar lawsuit filed by the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of the Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund. Judge Warren issued a nonbinding "cease and desist" order, essentially giving San Francisco officials the choice to comply or return to court on March 29.

San Francisco officials said they would continue issuing marriage licenses, and scores of homosexual couples applied for licenses yesterday.

Earlier in the week, Liberty Counsel filed legal papers with the California Court of Appeal in San Francisco, but those were withdrawn, Mr. Staver said, to keep the case before the lower-court judge.

Attorneys for homosexual rights groups said the Superior Court judges' rulings demonstrated that public concerns about same-sex "marriage" licenses are exaggerated.

"The courts see that there's no need to stop what's happening in San Francisco right now. Clearly, there's no emergency here, and nobody is being harmed by these marriages," said Jon Davidson, an attorney with Lambda Legal.

Mr. Davidson promised that his legal group "will be back in court in the weeks and months ahead to preserve these marriages and make sure every couple who wants and needs the protections that a marriage license provides will be able to get one."

Mr. Newsom said his actions are based on his belief that the state constitution forbids him to discriminate against same-sex couples — if homosexual couples wish to "marry," he should make sure they can.

Traditional-values groups say Mr. Newsom's actions are "anarchy" and an affront to the people of California, who passed Proposition 22, which says that only marriages between a man and a woman are valid in California.

originally posted by kookaburra
I support all of California's existing laws that provide domestic-partnership benefits and protections," Mr. Schwarzenegger said in a statement released late Tuesday. "However, Californians spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage when they overwhelmingly approved California's law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman .


Here's another one....

I guess then Arnold doesnt know that state laws may be considered unconstitutional when the amendments of the constitution are violated or any provisions as set forth in the state constitution are violated.

but I think the mayor makes that perfectly clear in this statement: Mr. Newsom said his actions are based on his belief that the state constitution forbids him to discriminate against same-sex couples — if homosexual couples wish to "marry," he should make sure they can.


These threads you keep opening are almost the same thing.....

You are trying to make a point that the mayor is "breaking the law" when in fact he seems to be the only one acknowledging that the state law is unconstitutional when vs. the state constitution and the Federal Constitution.

Why must you keep ignoring this fact?

Because she has figured out that gays are trying to take over the universe. And once we get the right to marry the earth will be doomed. Muahahahaha

Then we conquer Mars. Those little Million Dollar robots are no match for us.

Our plan is to redecorate the universe in Chintz and Paisley. But the ultimate plan is to make sure everyone has flawless hair.

The law is no match for a pair of finely honed hair clippers.

Quick, mystic, meet me at NASA! We are going steal a space shuttle and journey to Venus. That planet is done all in red, and as you know, red was so last millenium.

LMAO

Chintz and paisley? Hmmmmmm... that scares me. I think that you need a dyke or two, just for some balanced decorating ideas.

You are correct. Pluto NEEDS some flannel. It is so chilly out there. Hey, haven't we passed on Pluto before? Don't deny it, I think we have.

It's possible outsider, but, I was probably so distracted at the time, I didn't notice.

Let's just do something really crazy and do orange and blue! What harm could there be in that, after all we are taking over the universe. I envision a blue planet with orange seas and lakes.

What's you opinion of green sand? Would that go well with orange water? Would it clash?

Excellent, I will order some Sun yellow furniture for the beach. I might have to alter the yellow a bit though, to make it legal.

Hey, my altzheimers seems to be acting up. What was this thread about???

I don't know... was it something important?

Ummm... I just can't think with all of these paint fumes.

---(yells) hey mystic, go easy with the blue there.---

Ummm... maybe...

Can we have some greens and purples?

I'm thinking purple plants and we could make the dirt/soil green. That would go well with the sand. Plus it would add to the over all blue color of the planet.

Okay... I'm for that.

Okay guys... as much fun as I'm having, we really should keep the threads on 'topic'

Though, we could have a thread somewhere (one of you start it) on this, and we can paint a planet!

Okay kids our work here is done. Venus is complete. Our next mission will be on Saturn. I will keep you informed.

Okay....Ill post the last thread that was on topic...



[B]originally posted by kookaburra
I support all of California's existing laws that provide domestic-partnership benefits and protections," Mr. Schwarzenegger said in a statement released late Tuesday. "However, Californians spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage when they overwhelmingly approved California's law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman .


Here's another one....

I guess then Arnold doesnt know that state laws may be considered unconstitutional when the amendments of the constitution are violated or any provisions as set forth in the state constitution are violated.

but I think the mayor makes that perfectly clear in this statement: Mr. Newsom said his actions are based on his belief that the state constitution forbids him to discriminate against same-sex couples — if homosexual couples wish to "marry," he should make sure they can.


These threads you keep opening are almost the same thing.....

You are trying to make a point that the mayor is "breaking the law" when in fact he seems to be the only one acknowledging that the state law is unconstitutional when vs. the state constitution and the Federal Constitution.

Why must you keep ignoring this fact?

I hope I don't get any more private messages saying I go off-topic and it's just "not fair". I'll assume I received the last message on that one.

Anyway to answer your question mystic, I am not deliberately posting repeat topics. I'm posting interesting headline news. Although some of the topics do have similar content, they also have content unique to them. Since I'm not the author of the articles, I left them in tact because of copyrights.

California attorney general asks state Supreme Court to stop San Francisco from marrying more gays and to nullify the 3,400 marriages already performed.

Source: AP

I hope they take this to the Supreme Court.

From:
http://www.glad.org/Publications/Ci...rriagevcu.shtml

What are some of the limitations of civil unions?
Civil unions are different from marriage, and that difference has wide-ranging implications that make the two institutions unequal. Here is a quick look at some of the most significant differences:

Portability: Marriages are respected state to state for all purposes, but questions remain about how civil unions will be treated in other states. GLAD believes there are strong arguments that civil unions deserve respect across the country just like marriages. But the two appellate courts that have addressed the issue (in Connecticut and Georgia) have disrespected them based on the fact that their states do not grant civil unions themselves.

Ending a Civil Union: If you are married, you can get divorced in any state in which you are a resident. But if states continue to disrespect civil unions, there is no way to end the relationship other than by establishing residency in Vermont and filing for divorce there. This has already created problems for some couples who now have no way to terminate their legal commitment.

Federal Benefits: According to a 1997 GAO report, civil marriage brings with it at least 1,049 legal protections and responsibilities from the federal government, including the right to take leave from work to care for a family member, the right to sponsor a spouse for immigration purposes, and Social Security survivor benefits that can make a difference between old age in poverty and old age in security. Civil unions bring none of these critical legal protections.

Taxes & Public Benefits for the Family: Because the federal government does not respect civil unions, a couple with a civil union will be in a kind of limbo with regard to governmental functions performed by both state and federal governments, such as taxation, pension protections, provision of insurance for families, and means-tested programs like Medicaid. Even when states try to provide legal protections, they may be foreclosed from doing so in joint federal/state programs.

Filling out forms: Every day, we fill out forms that ask us whether we are married or single. People joined in a civil union don’t fit into either category. People with civil unions should be able to identify themselves as a single family unit, but misrepresenting oneself on official documents can be considered fraud and carries potential serious criminal penalties.

Separate & Unequal -- Second-Class Status: Even if there were no substantive differences in the way the law treated marriages and civil unions, the fact that a civil union remains a separate status just for gay people represents real and powerful inequality. We’ve been down this road before in this country and should not kid ourselves that a separate institution just for gay people is a just solution here either. Our constitution requires legal equality for all. Including gay and lesbian couples within existing marriage laws is the fairest and simplest thing to do.

I just don't see how people cannot clearly understand that civil unions are not equal to civil marriage. I think it's rather plain to see that in the eyes of the government, homosexuals and their relationships are not viewed as equals.

The weddings in the village of New Paltz, about 80 miles north of Manhattan, came on the day California's attorney general planned to ask that state's Supreme Court to rule on the legality of over 3,300 gay weddings in the past two weeks in San Francisco.


New Paltz Mayor Jason West -- the state's first elected Green Party mayor -- married couples in a festive atmosphere outside Village Hall in what the 26-year-old official has described as "legal marriage ceremonies." West officiated at 19 gay weddings on Friday.


Some 200 people cheered and held up placards saying: "Congratulations" and "Bush Get Out of My Bedroom,"

A New Mexico county also granted same-sex marriage licenses recently.

Gays in Long Island said they would push for gay marriage next week, organizing an effort to march into dozens of town clerk offices until they find one who will marry them.

If none agreed, Long Island Coalition for Same-Sex Marriage Executive Director David Kilmnick said the group will file a lawsuit on the grounds the New York state Constitution bans discrimination

California Supreme Court declines to immediately shut down San Francisco gay weddings.

Source: AP

YES!!!

Slowly, but surely, Shelly!