Schwarzenegger: Will Veto Gay Marriage Again

[Dos Equis]

No "girly man" marriages in California.   

Saturday, Feb. 17, 2007 8:57 a.m. EST
Schwarzenegger: Will Veto Gay Marriage Again

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he would veto a bill that would legalize gay marriage in California for the second time if state lawmakers pass it again this year.

In June 2005, the California Legislature became the first lawmaking body in the United States to vote in favor of allowing same-sex couples to wed. Schwarzenegger refused to sign the measure, saying it was in conflict with a 2000 voter-approved measure that shored up the state's one man, one woman marriage laws.

Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, reintroduced the gay marriage bill in December, but Schwarzenegger said on Thursday that his thoughts about it have not changed in the last year and a half.

"I wouldn't sign it because the people of California have voted on that issue," Schwarzenegger told a high school student who asked him about the bill at a California YMCA Youth and Government conference.

The governor said voters should make the decision, "but it should not be me or the Legislature."

Geoffrey Kors, executive of the gay rights lobbying group Equality California, said Friday that he hoped Schwarzenegger would take the time to meet with gay and lesbian couples before promising another veto.

"How would the governor feel if his right to marry First Lady Maria Shriver had been put to a popular vote?" Kors said.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/2/17/90058.shtml?s=ic

[240 is Back]

Gay!

Race!

Abortion!

Man, you love to trumpet the divisive issues which affect nearly nobody, but take attention away from issues which affect our earth and our economy and our safety.

Perhaps you can start 25 threats on Anna nicole so we don't notice you're endorsing giving 7000 Iraqi refugees a plane ride to US soil during wartime?

[mightymouse72]

The governor said voters should make the decision, "but it should not be me or the Legislature."

the best thing i've ever heard him say.
hooray for the govenator!

Man, you love to trumpet the divisive issues which affect nearly nobody, but take attention away from issues which affect our earth and our economy and our safety.

i smell some 9/11 hypocrisy.   

[240 is Back]

i smell some 9/11 hypocrisy.   

Gee whiz, let's compare the two for signifigance:

One means two men who live together can't get a piece of paper and some tax benefits.

One means 3000 people were murdered to create a false sense of pretenses to invade 2 soverign nations, kill half a million people, and create instability in the most energy important region in the world.


They're not quite the same, sir.

[chaos]

Gee whiz, let's compare the two for signifigance:

One means two men who live together can't get a piece of paper and some tax benefits.

One means 3000 people were murdered to create a false sense of pretenses to invade 2 soverign nations, kill half a million people, and create instability in the most energy important region in the world.


They're not quite the same, sir.

killing people for their oil is keeping our future supplies well stocked
whereas two men boning is killing our future w/ disease and no more children

[240 is Back]

killing people for their oil is keeping our future supplies well stocked
whereas two men boning is killing our future w/ disease and no more children

He said he smelled hypocracy when i called out the topic as an unimportant distractor.

911 was the catalyst for a new global energy policy for 200 years.
Ahnold's opinion on a bill for the second time is comes up - not so major.

[chaos]

nah I don't think it's major. I live in CA and I think all the crying done by gays for marraige rights is wearing people thin. I don't think it will ever pass.

[mightymouse72]

They're not quite the same, sir.

ok, i agree.  one's true and one isn't     

[tu_holmes]

Well, I personally am in favor of gay marriage...

However, I agree with my Governor on this one... The people here had a vote and the measure did NOT pass.

For him to sign that bill would be going against what the people voted for, and while I may be in favor, the democratic process has ruled that I am in the minority on the issue.

The people voting is what this country is all about... you may not like the outcome, but for a legislative body to simply over rule the will of the people is in my opinion completely disgusting.

I applaud the Governator on this one. (Yes, I admit it... I like him as Governor)

[mightymouse72]

Well, I personally am in favor of gay marriage...

However, I agree with my Governor on this one... The people here had a vote and the measure did NOT pass.

For him to sign that bill would be going against what the people voted for, and while I may be in favor, the democratic process has ruled that I am in the minority on the issue.

The people voting is what this country is all about... you may not like the outcome, but for a legislative body to simply over rule the will of the people is in my opinion completely disgusting.

I applaud the Governator on this one. (Yes, I admit it... I like him as Governor)

although i disagree with you on gay marriage, you are very correct about the voting issue.
once an issue, any issue, is decided on by the people (voters), it should stay closed. 

[tu_holmes]

although i disagree with you on gay marriage, you are very correct about the voting issue.
once an issue, any issue, is decided on by the people (voters), it should stay closed. 

I won't say "stay closed"... because people change their minds.

If you want to bring the vote back up to the people and let them vote again, that's great... see what happens... but you can not just over ride the voters... that's a socialist, not democratic country.

[BayGBM]

Well, I personally am in favor of gay marriage...

However, I agree with my Governor on this one... The people here had a vote and the measure did NOT pass.

For him to sign that bill would be going against what the people voted for, and while I may be in favor, the democratic process has ruled that I am in the minority on the issue.

The people voting is what this country is all about... you may not like the outcome, but for a legislative body to simply over rule the will of the people is in my opinion completely disgusting.

I applaud the Governator on this one. (Yes, I admit it... I like him as Governor)

Not necessarily.  The courts—particularly the Supreme Court—overrule the will of the people all the time.  That is their perogative.  Ideally, the courts are guided by adherence to legal principals that determine things like right/wrong, equality, justice, etc.  The public is not. 

Indeed, large swaths of the public are easily manipulated by things like emotion, religious beliefs, trends, bigotry, manipulated intelligence, and on and on.  Which is why the courts—not the public--should determine things like equal treatment under law.

The history of this country has proven many times that (an easily manipulated) public cannot be depended on to enable justice.

[mightymouse72]

  Which is why the courts—not the public--should determine things like equal treatment under law.

which is why this country is in the shape it's in.   

....of the courts, for the courts, by the courts.   not the country i want to live in.

[Dos Equis]

the best thing i've ever heard him say.
hooray for the govenator!

I agree.  It's up to the voters. 

[Dos Equis]

Not necessarily.  The courts—particularly the Supreme Court—overrule the will of the people all the time.  That is their perogative.  Ideally, the courts are guided by adherence to legal principals that determine things like right/wrong, equality, justice, etc.  The public is not. 

Indeed, large swaths of the public are easily manipulated by things like emotion, religious beliefs, trends, bigotry, manipulated intelligence, and on and on.  Which is why the courts—not the public--should determine things like equal treatment under law.

The history of this country has proven many times that (an easily manipulated) public cannot be depended on to enable justice.

The problem with this is the courts don't view homosexuality the same way they do race and national origin.  That's why this is properly left to the will of the voters.  The courts cannot overrule the will of the people on matters like this. 

Still, I do believe the voting public will eventually allow this to happen.  I'll continue to vote against it, but I'll eventually be on the losing end, and I'll accept the results.  That's how our democracy works.

[Tre]

Marriage is stupid anyway.

Most of America doesn't give a shit about marriage.  Why gays care so much, I don't know.  They should be happy just doing their own thing, since they're the wealthiest demographic anyway.  Don't futz with something that's already working.

[Cap]

It's a fact that homo males would drive the divorce rate up significantly.

Men can't stay faithful and infidelity is a leading cause for divorce.  Why tie up the courts with more divorce proceedings?

If they love each other, why are tax benefits so important?

[Dos Equis]

Marriage is stupid anyway.

Most of America doesn't give a shit about marriage.  Why gays care so much, I don't know.  They should be happy just doing their own thing, since they're the wealthiest demographic anyway.  Don't futz with something that's already working.

Marriage is the highlight of many peoples lives.  Next to buying a home, it is one of the most expensive events in many people lives.  And most of America cares a great deal about traditional marriage, which is why we have the Defense of Marriage Act (passed under a Democrat president) and why homosexual marriage is rejected, usually by a wide margin, every time it comes up for a vote.   

[tu_holmes]

which is why this country is in the shape it's in.   

....of the courts, for the courts, by the courts.   not the country i want to live in.

You have to take the bad with the good... The courts also allow fairness to take place... were it not for "the courts", this country would be in FAR worse shape. I'm not saying that it's a perfect system by any stretch, but without the Judicial arm of the government, there would be much WORSE corruption than we have now.

Things like abortion and gay marriage (The things we're demonizing "The Courts" for are not REAL issues... they are red herrings and that's what people today focus on... Real issues like the economy, education, and our future as a productive nation aren't even touched by the court system (very rarely at least), but they affect all of us...