California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoes marriage equality bill
You will be automatically re-directed in three seconds. Click the link to go to the new blog now. Use the search function on the new blog to find any story you are looking for on here.
In a brief statement announcing that he had stroked out the bill the governor said he is supportive of same-sex couples and noted that California has the strongest domestic partner law in the country. The statement said that if he had signed the bill it would have simply added "confusion to a constitutional issue." Schwarzenegger went on to say, "If the ban of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional this bill is not necessary. If the ban is constitutional this bill is ineffective." The author of the legislation said the veto puts Schwarzenegger on the wrong side of history. “In vetoing this bill approved by duly elected representatives of the people, the Governor has failed his test of leadership and missed a historic opportunity to stand up for the basic civil rights of all Californians," said Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco). "He cannot claim to support fair and equal treatment of gay people and veto the very bill that would have provided it to them." San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom who brought the marriage issue to the forefront in California when he began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples said he was disappointed but not surprised at Schwarzenegger's veto. "However, no one is more disappointed than the tens of thousands of couples and their families that won't have the same rights and privileges that Maria Shriver and Arnold Schwarzenegger have been afforded," Newsom said in a statement. "This is real. This is about basic, fundamental rights. It's about laying a foundation of equality for everybody, and he missed a golden opportunity to stand on history and to do something that is noble and appropriate. By no means was this a profile in courage. What a wasted moment for his administration."The Governor, however, signed three other bills affecting LGBT people. One bans discrimination of LGBT people in the areas of housing and the delivery of goods and services. Another is a retroactive bill which will allow LGBT persons who retired before January 1, 2005 to take advantage of the domestic partner law. The last makes homes of domectic partners community property under California divorce law. ===== Hey Arty! You can't play for both sides, buddy! You need to choose. Do you support LGBT people, as evidenced by the signing of three LGBT-positive bills, or do you not support them, as evidenced by your decision to veto the marriage bill. You say, "Let the people decide." HELLO! They did... the legislature represents the people, DUH! It would have made more sense saying, "Let the people decide," if the California Supreme Court would have mandated marriage equality, as it happened in Massachusetts. In California, however, the people did decide... through their votes for those sitting in the legislature. The Governor of California will go down in history, along with Bush and all of his cronies, as evil men who denied civil rights to LGBT folk. Their names will be as hated as the Governor of Arkansas or Alabama, South Carolina or Georgia back during the Civil Rights Movement. Thinking about your political career, huh? Maybe it would be better to think about what side you'll end up on in the history books... Defender of the defendless or bigot?
2 Comments:
The laws must change... and I don't give one hoot about whether that change comes from the Legislative, Executive or Judicial branches. Someone must stand up and the time is very nigh; some one, some time will stand up very, very soon.
In fact, people are already standing up... people like you and myself. I hate to put it this way, but... we just need the people "who matter" (elected representatives) to do what we are doing.