Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Amends California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid "

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:01 PM
Original message
"Amends California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid "
I got a robocall last night about this proposed ballot measure here in California - they wanted me to sign a petition. These people are relentless. Has anyone else gotten one of these calls?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. i get calls comparing ''the gay agenda and child molestors'' all the time
regarding some legislation or other.

tell me a conservative catholic think tank isn't behind that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It was sponsored by Focus on the Family, among others. Heres more info.
http://www.eqca.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=9oINKWMCF&b=40337&ct=5006353

For Immediate Release
February 1, 2008

Contact: Corri Planck, Equality for All
Phone: (619) 251-5589

Contact: Lorri L. Jean, L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center
Phone: (323) 993-7609

SIGNATURE GATHERING HAS BEGUN TO PLACE DISCRIMINATORY MARRIAGE MEASURE ON CALIFORNIA’S NOVEMBER 2008 BALLOT

LOS ANGELES – After failing multiple times to qualify an anti-marriage equality measure for the ballot, conservative organizations are now utilizing paid signature gatherers in another attempt to put this discriminatory constitutional amendment on the November 2008 ballot according to Equality for All, the statewide campaign to defeat such measures. In 2006, California became the first state where an effort to qualify such a discriminatory amendment failed.

Equality for All has confirmed that an out-of-state organization is backing this effort to permanently deny loving and committed California couples the right to marry. Nationformarriage.org and protectmarriage.com are financially supporting this effort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. I am supeiswd
they are trying this I California in a presidential year. You'd think this would be an off year thing when their chances of success would be higher.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
3. If anyone gets an 800 number for these @ssholes, I'd like to have it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. (916) 446-5031
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Thank you. No coffee yet!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. did ya give em hell?
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. No yet, but I will. I'm thinking, peak hours would be the best way to go.
Edited on Thu Feb-21-08 08:55 PM by sfexpat2000
lol

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. Very odd - That's already the law in California
Edited on Thu Feb-21-08 01:13 PM by slackmaster
:shrug:

FAMILY.CODE

SECTION 300-310

300. (a) Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil
contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of the
parties capable of making that contract is necessary. Consent alone
does not constitute marriage. Consent must be followed by the
issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by this
division, except as provided by Section 425 and Part 4 (commencing
with Section 500)....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. A law which a state court could overturn
That is the 'logic' behind amending the State Constitution. There is a similar effort going on here in Florida. It has been certified and will be on the ballot in November. I doubt that it will pass, as it would require 60% support to pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. or, say, the legislature
But its better to blame a liberal judge!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. No.........
.....mega UGH!

I live in Calif....and I sure hope to hell the RW nutcake homophobes are not at it again.

Sheesh!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. I got a robo call like that
asked me if I would circulate a petition. I said yes (one less to worry about). I will send it back empty, postage due.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. that's a great reponse. wish I thought of it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftCoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
14. It's sad that they're bringing this up AGAIN, but the CA repubs are bankrupt
So I'd rather them spend money on another sure-to-fail signature drive when the money would logically be better spent (for them) if they sent it to their state party. Just one more stupid action in the rw conservatives attempt to destroy the CA republican party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. It's mostly funded by out of staters. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftCoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Yeah, but there's only a finite pool of conservative dollars
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Booster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-21-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
19. I will certainly be glad when this election is over. My nephew
talked me into getting caller ID and thank God he did. I'm getting between 15 to 20 calls A DAMN DAY from people wanting contributions for everything under the sun. At the end of each day I delete all of them as they are just hang up calls. I highly recommend caller ID.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC