by David Young

Created on: October 09, 2008

Should an initiative defining legal marriage as a union between one man and one woman be on the ballot in California? The question is better framed as; why shouldn't it? A grass roots initiative, the California Marriage Protection Act has been proffered recently by concerned citizens, expanded through the legal process, and put forward for a vote. Californians have the right to have their voices heard and counted. But opponents are challenging its inclusion through various legal maneuvers and a disingenuous "human rights" campaign.

If some are troubled by CMPA, they have the option to vote against it. But let the citizens decide. The very same legal machinations that got CMPA on the ballot apply to any and all initiatives, petitions and amendments to the state constitution. That is how ordinary citizens get things done. It is called democracy.

The California Marriage Protection Act which will appear on the ballot of the general election November 4, 2008, is responsive to a ruling by the California Supreme Court which overturned an earlier proposition (proposition 22), passed overwhelmingly by voters which also defined marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman.

Factions from the homosexual lobby and out of state activists successfully challenged prop 22 in an action that was selective, elitist, underhanded and un-American. They argued for an extremely narrow legal interpretation in the wording of the initiative which became law as a statute rather an amendment. The vast majority of the funding for this challenge originated from out of state, thereby disenfranchising the legal voters of California.
Judicial shopping is common practice among such groups who select cases to bring in front of judges they believe will help further their agenda. However, the overwhelming majority of American's find these tactics abhorrent. And this time, when the current initiative (CMPA) passes as expected; it becomes an amendment to the state constitution, not a statute and thereby exempt from challenges from activist judges or legislators and can only be trumped in Federal Court.

As with any amendment proposal, the California Marriage Protection Act met the stringent legal requirements to get on the November ballot. Proponents gathered 1.1 million signatures in a 90 day period, well within the requisite standard of 694,354 signatures in 150 days. When passed, it will become law and the wishes of the people of California
will be recognized. Unfortunately, the homosexual crowd promises to take their case all the way to the United States Supreme Court if they don't get their way.
What a selfish grandstand, what a waste of resources.

It is evident that the real issue here is about one small minority attempting to force unpopular mores on a huge majority. Next they will demand nationwide legal recognition of same sex marriages, and then who knows what? This agenda driven cartel wishes to compel enlightened human beings to discard universal truths and traditions that have been the cornerstone of civilization since the beginning of time. Sacred marriage of one man and one woman is the backbone of all human social arrangements, cultures and societies and the inertia that makes the world go round.

Learn more about this author, David Young.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.