Well for the THIRD time an activist Federal Judge has struck down ‘the will of the people’ that was voted in by them. As you read this article, you might also find it interesting and informative to read another article on this blog entitled “ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial Against Arizona” , because the same thing applies to this California case as it did to the Arizona case.
Newt Gingrich: Gay Marriage Ruling ‘Outrageous’
“Judge Walker’s ruling overturning Prop 8 is an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife. In every state of the union from California to Maine to Georgia, where the people have had a chance to vote they’ve affirmed that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Congress now has the responsibility to act immediately to reaffirm marriage as a union of one man and one woman as our national policy.
“Today’s notorious decision also underscores the importance of the Senate vote tomorrow on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court because judges who oppose the American people are a growing threat to our society.”
Prop. 8 ruling will ‘stir a fire’
A pastor and pro-family activist believes the federal judge’s decision to usurp the will of the people of California marks a sad day for the state and for the rest of the country.
On Wednesday, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled in favor of four homosexuals who claimed that voter-approved Proposition 8, which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman, violated their civil rights. (See earlier story)
Jim Garlow, lead pastor of Skyline Wesleyan Church in La Mesa, California, says the judge threw out the principle of “we the people.”
“He simply ripped from the state of California and seven-million voters the chance to articulate the definition of marriage that’s been accepted for over 5,000 years,” Garlow laments.
He notes that because the ruling will affect so many other states that already outlaw same-sex “marriage,” he expects the American people will be angry.
Some other Reactions to the Unconstitutional ruling by the Federal Judge
In March 2000, California voters approved Proposition 22, which specified in state law that only marriages between a man and a woman are valid in California. But in May 2008, the state Supreme Court ruled the law was unconstitutional because it discriminated against gays, and an estimated 18,000 same-sex couples got married in the ensuing months.
Opponents of same-sex marriage quickly got Proposition 8 on the November 2008 ballot to amend the state constitution, and it was approved by a margin of 52.5 percent to 47.5 percent.
The approval of the measure led to statewide protests and lawsuits challenging the legality of Proposition 8.
In May 2009, the California Supreme Court upheld Prop. 8, but also ruled that the unions of roughly 18,000 same-sex couples who were wed in 2008 would remain valid.
Here’s some reactions from San Diego 6’s article:
“Judge Walker has ignored the written words of the Constitution, which he swore to support and defend and be impartially faithful to, and has instead imposed his own homosexual agenda upon the voters, the parents and the children of California,” Thomasson said.
“This is a blatantly unconstitutional ruling because marriage isn’t in the U.S. Constitution,” he said. “The Constitution guarantees that state policies be by the people, not by the judges, and also supports states’ rights, thus making marriage a state jurisdiction.”
Thomasson added that as “a Californian and an American, I am angry that this biased homosexual judge, in step with other judicial activists, has trampled the written Constitution, grossly misused his authority and imposed his own agenda, which the Constitution does not allow and which both the people of California and California state authorities should by no means respect.”
Dr. Jim Garlow from Skyline Wesleyan Church added, “if you did this on the basis of equal protection and a person says I want to tbe married to 3 people or 5 people or I want to be married to my dog, what right does he have not to provide ‘equal protection’?”
Garlow said this could have an effect at the ballot box. “There will be a backlash, a conservative movement, that I think will play an even greater role in November.”
Federal Judge Rules Gay Marriage Ban is Unconstitutional
SAN DIEGO – Marriage equality supporters in San Diego praised a federal judge’s decision Wednesday to strike down Proposition 8, the state’s voter- approved ban on same-sex marriage.
“I am overjoyed that the U.S. District Court overturned Proposition 8,” San Diego City Councilman Todd Gloria said. “I know our fight to secure this right is not over, but I am confident this civil right will be confirmed and marriage equality will be realized.”
The ruling is expected to be appealed to the 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals and eventually the U.S. Supreme Court.
San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker presided over the non-jury trial of a lawsuit alleging the voter-approved 2008 measure violates the equal protection rights of gay and lesbian couples by preventing them from marrying.
In a 136-page ruling, Walker wrote that the proposition “both unconstitutionally burdens the exercise of the fundamental right to marry and creates an irrational classification on the basis of sexual orientation.”
“Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license,” Walker wrote. “Indeed the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples.”
Walker issued an order barring the enforcement of the law, but proponents of Proposition 8 were expected to appeal — likely all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Walker issued a stay on the ruling until at least Friday,meaning same-sex marriages will not immediately resume in the state. Supporters of Prop 8 had asked for a stay, saying allowing couples to marry pending the appeal would create confusion if Walker’s ruling is eventually overturned.
San Diego 6