California Fails to Uphold Institution of Marriage

4 09 2007

Filed under:Marriage, Homosexuality, Same-sex Marriage, Liberalism, California

California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General, Jerry Brown both swore to champion the sacred institution of marriage – it is state law. The two leaders not only failed to defend marriage, they both argued in their briefs ( 1 pdf, 2 pdf) on August 17 to the California Supreme Court that the legislature is free to eradicate marriage and any rights associated with marriage.

In response, Liberty Counsel, representing the Campaign for California Families, filed a reply brief at the California Supreme Court.

The brief argues that the fundamental constitutional right to marry includes rights and obligations that cannot be eliminated because they come from the inherent nature of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, rather than from a state-sanctioned union of any two people who love each other.

Liberals recognize the only way to achieve marriage rights is to pressure the state into forcing them on the rest of the citizens. If God intended for same-sex marriages to share the same status as heterosexual marriage, it would not be such an undertaking in America, of all countries. But since it is, and same-sex marriage proponents discern their challenge, they know a vote would be surely lost, which leaves state-mandated laws as their only option.

Their only problem with this option is that it assumes no one will call them on it. Or, if they do, they certainly won’t want a fight. Goliath – meet David.

Liberty Counsel’s brief points out that the Governor, the Attorney General and the plaintiffs who challenged the marriage laws failed to recognize that marriage is a significant constitutional right that cannot be renamed, limited, or eliminated by the legislature.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, who argued the case before the state appeals court and is scheduled to argue the case before the California Supreme Court, commented: “I am disappointed that the Attorney General’s defense of California’s marriage laws is tepid at best. The Attorney General is tasked with the duty to defend the express will of the people, and the people’s will is unequivocally that marriage is between one man and one woman. If the Attorney General cannot perform his sworn duty, he ought to step aside and let someone do the job for him. The lack of aggressive defense by the Attorney General underscores the necessity of our defense of the marriage laws.”

Until a majority of Californians vote to approve a desire to create special laws for same-sex marriages, the will of the people will be expropriated when Attorney Generals ignore their duties and pander to the pressure of liberal minorities.




Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: