Governor Moonbeam Makes the Use of the Words Husband and Wife Illegal in CA

[Dos Equis]

And the indoctrination of American society continues. 

Governor Moonbeam Makes the Use of the Words Husband and Wife Illegal in California
July 13, 2014
By Jennifer Burke

In the state of California, heterosexual married couples can no longer be referred to as husbands and wives. Democrat Governor Jerry Brown has signed a bill into law that not only redefines marriage, but eliminates any reference to husband and wife, replacing each with the generic term of spouse.
 
SB 1306 was sponsored by Democrat Mark Leno from San Francisco. Christian News Network reports on the content of said bill.

“Under existing law, a reference to ‘husband’ and ‘wife,’ ‘spouses,’ or ‘married persons,’ or a comparable term, includes persons who are lawfully married to each other and persons who were previously lawfully married to each other, as is appropriate under the circumstances of the particular case,” it reads. “The bill would delete references to ‘husband’ or ‘wife’ in the Family Code and would instead refer to a ‘spouse,’ and would make other related changes.”

Leno sponsored the bill after Proposition 8, in which California voters said no to same-sex marriage, was declared unconstitutional by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court refused to overturn it. State Rep. Leno said of his legislation,”This legislation removes outdated and biased language from state codes and recognizes all married spouses equally, regardless of their gender.”

In response to Governor Brown striking the term husband and wife from all family code, attorney Matthew Reynolds addressed his actions as a ‘raw exercise of power.”

“This bill continues the pattern we’ve been seeing the last few years of politicians ignoring the people to advance the agenda of marriage redefinition,” Matthew McReynolds, attorney with the Pacific Justice Institute in California, told Christian News Network. “What these politicians don’t want people to know is that their actions are illegitimate. Contary to media myths, Prop. 8 has not been invalidated on a statewide basis. Instead, these politicians are exercising raw power, ignoring the Constitution and counting on the people and the courts not to hold them accountable.”

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/07/13/governor-moonbeam-makes-the-use-of-the-words-husband-and-wife-illegal-in-california/

[avxo]

Good grief, this is bordering on the ridiculous.

[RRKore]

Hey BB, I'm a little confused by Prop 8 info in this excerpt.  Maybe you know a little more?

It seems to first say that Prop 8 was overturned by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals after which the Supreme Court refused to overturn that ruling.  I think I understand that but then, confusingly (for me), the excerpt then goes on to quote an attorney from the Pacific Justice Institute in California (Matthew McReynolds) who says “Contrary to media myths, Prop. 8 has not been invalidated on a statewide basis."

Does that mean that Prop 8 is still in effect in some places in CA?  

BTW, is it really a big deal if they change the words "husband" and "wife" to "spouse"?  Taking the gender out of common terms seems to have been a thing since way before gay marriage.  And to my ear, "spouse" sounds a lot better than "lay-person".  

On a non-serious note, it could have been worse, ya know;  The LGBT camp probably lobbied to change "husband" and "wife" to "top" and "bottom", lol.

[Dos Equis]

Hey BB, I'm a little confused by Prop 8 info in this excerpt.  Maybe you know a little more?

It seems to first say that Prop 8 was overturned by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals after which the Supreme Court refused to overturn that ruling.  I think I understand that but then, confusingly (for me), the excerpt then goes on to quote an attorney from the Pacific Justice Institute in California (Matthew McReynolds) who says “Contrary to media myths, Prop. 8 has not been invalidated on a statewide basis."

Does that mean that Prop 8 is still in effect in some places in CA?  

BTW, is it really a big deal if they change the words "husband" and "wife" to "spouse"?  Taking the gender out of common terms seems to have been a thing since way before gay marriage.  And to my ear, "spouse" sounds a lot better than "lay-person".  

On a non-serious note, it could have been worse, ya know;  The LGBT camp probably lobbied to change "husband" and "wife" to "top" and "bottom", lol.

Have not been following prop 8 so I don't know what the current status is.

Regarding the prohibition on husband and wife, it wouldn't be as big a deal if not for all the other attempts to indoctrinate people.  It's also completely unnecessary. 

[RRKore]

Have not been following prop 8 so I don't know what the current status is.

Regarding the prohibition on husband and wife, it wouldn't be as big a deal if not for all the other attempts to indoctrinate people.  It's also completely unnecessary. 

Not a big deal, imo.  That it's some kind of law instead of just a policy is the only thing that grates to me. 

Smacks of a conscious effort to keep LGBT concerns at the forefront of the day's issues purely for political reasons:  I'm guessing that if Dems thought that LGBT policies backed by the Tea Party News Network, The Christian News Network, The Pacific Justice Institute (which the Southern Poverty Law Center designated as a "hate group" in 2014) and the right in general were more popular, then they wouldn't be talking about LGBT issues so much.

[TheGrinch]

time for me to do some

DDP Yoga!!

ddpyoga.com

[Straw Man]

Hey BB, I'm a little confused by Prop 8 info in this excerpt.  Maybe you know a little more?

It seems to first say that Prop 8 was overturned by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals after which the Supreme Court refused to overturn that ruling.  I think I understand that but then, confusingly (for me), the excerpt then goes on to quote an attorney from the Pacific Justice Institute in California (Matthew McReynolds) who says “Contrary to media myths, Prop. 8 has not been invalidated on a statewide basis."

Does that mean that Prop 8 is still in effect in some places in CA?  

BTW, is it really a big deal if they change the words "husband" and "wife" to "spouse"?  Taking the gender out of common terms seems to have been a thing since way before gay marriage.  And to my ear, "spouse" sounds a lot better than "lay-person".  

On a non-serious note, it could have been worse, ya know;  The LGBT camp probably lobbied to change "husband" and "wife" to "top" and "bottom", lol.

the only confusion is with the so called attorney from the Pacific Justice Institute (which the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated as a hate group - for whatever that is worth).

this change to the Family Code of CA just makes the language consistent with the legal definition of marriage in CA.

No one is "prohibited" from referring to man and woman or husband and wife. 

BTW - I had to go through almost 2 pages of google search results to find a story about this that wasn't from a christian or right wing site.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2014/05/01/california-may-remove-man-and-woman-state-law-2/

[Dos Equis]

Not a big deal, imo.  That it's some kind of law instead of just a policy is the only thing that grates to me. 

Smacks of a conscious effort to keep LGBT concerns at the forefront of the day's issues purely for political reasons:  I'm guessing that if Dems thought that LGBT policies backed by the Tea Party News Network, The Christian News Network, The Pacific Justice Institute (which the Southern Poverty Law Center designated as a "hate group" in 2014) and the right in general were more popular, then they wouldn't be talking about LGBT issues so much.

The Southern Poverty Law Center calls any group that supports traditional marriage a "hate group."  Pretty asinine. 

[RRKore]

The Southern Poverty Law Center calls any group that supports traditional marriage a "hate group."  Pretty asinine. 

Says the getbig Political Issues Board "hate mod".

[Dos Equis]

Says the getbig Political Issues Board "hate mod".

O Rly?  Proof?

[Straw Man]

The Southern Poverty Law Center calls any group that supports traditional marriage a "hate group."  Pretty asinine.  

They've only designated 39 "christian identity" groups as hate groups and surely there are many more christian groups (and others) who support "traditional marriage" so that is obviously not the only criteria and likely not even a criteria at all

But I'm sure facts won't in any way change your belief

[RRKore]

O Rly?  Proof?

Proof?  What does proof have to do with it?

Look, some are born hate-mods, some achieve the role of hate-mod, and others have being a hate-mod thrust upon them.

And getbig hit the trifecta with you, BB.

In truth, I'm completely joking and would hope you'd wear the faux hate-mod title with pleasure. 

Like when some woman I was arguing with on another site called me a "Petulant Man-child".  Holy shit, I love that one so much I'm gonna use if for a screen-name on the next forum I join.

[Dos Equis]

Proof?  What does proof have to do with it?

Look, some are born hate-mods, some achieve the role of hate-mod, and others have being a hate-mod thrust upon them.

And getbig hit the trifecta with you, BB.

In truth, I'm completely joking and would hope you'd wear the faux hate-mod title with pleasure. 

Like when some woman I was arguing with on another site called me a "Petulant Man-child".  Holy shit, I love that one so much I'm gonna use if for a screen-name on the next forum I join.

Is the part where I laugh out loud?  I need a laugh cue card. 

[RRKore]

Is the part where I laugh out loud?  I need a laugh cue card. 

Well, duh. 

Of course the hate-mod needs a cue card to know when to laugh. 

(The other internet's other hate-mods are now being shown cue cards directing them to laugh at you for being a newb, I think.)