California’s at it again…Dream Act, Same-Sex Marriage

Although the state continues with its exception of maintaining a huge debt, on the verge of bankruptcy, and catering and pandering to most special interest groups. Now, for those of you who have never been to the extremely liberal and “live in the moment state” where hedonism (pleasure oriented society) is at a premium and any form of religiosity, albeit from the yoga mats to Catholics and everything in between is sanctioned, even glorified, as long as there doesn’t exist a man named Jesus.

Please remember that this is the state where the population went out and expressed their democratic-republic rights through our voting process and told the state’s legislature, special interest groups, and governor both incumbent and governor-elect that they did not want same-sex marriage. [Sidebar]

For several weeks in 2004, the mayor of San Francisco issued marriage licenses regardless of applicants’ gender (oh why not!?). The consolidated lawsuits which resulted eventually reached the Supreme Court of California. On May 15, 2008, it overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage with the ruling In re Marriage Cases. (This is referred to as ‘legislating from the bench’.)

The four-to-three decision took effect on June 16, 2008. Two weeks earlier, the initiative to override this result of the court decision qualified for the November election ballot as Proposition 8. The Court declined to stay its decision until after the November elections. Some reports suggested that out-of-state same-sex couples would marry in California prior to the 2008 elections because California does not require the marriage to be valid in the couple’s home state.

The ballot initiative, Proposition 8, a state constitutional amendment titled Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Act, appeared on the California general election ballot in November 2008 and passed with a 52% majority. The California Supreme Court heard several challenges to Proposition 8 in March 2009, but ultimately upheld the amendment.

In accepting a mandate that California students be taught the accomplishments of gays and lesbians, Brown said that “history should be honest.” The bill, he said in a statement, “revises existing laws that prohibit discrimination in education and ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books.”

Let’s get confidential here…isn’t this abusing the Equal Protection Clause nestled neatly within the 14th amendment? Unless there exists a situation whereby in the California textbooks and other curriculum the bill is actually about “History” rather than sexual orientation, no?

Therefore basically you are hearing it here first — that is what kind of bruhaha is going to come down now? Terrible leadership and mismanagement have a way of clogging up the entire process.