California Marriage Decision a Major Victory for Democratic Process
Inside the Issues with Alan Sears
Alan Sears, Esquire
President, CEO, & Legal Counsel
June 9, 2009
The good thing about last week's crucial decision by the California Supreme Court to uphold a state constitutional amendment affirming marriage as the union of one man and one woman is that the judges did the right thing by respecting hundreds of years of legal precedent and the wishes of more than seven million voters.
The bad thing is that there's been so much suspense, these many months, over whether the court would do just that.
The affirmation of marriage should be a given, and the democratic process established by the California Constitution should be irreproachable. That it took so much longer, and that the results were so unpredictable, evidences how far those pressing the homosexual legal agenda have advanced their influence and elevated their sense of legal entitlement over the law and political processes of California – and, by extension, of the entire United States.
Advocates for same-sex "marriage" didn't just campaign for their agenda last November – they moved aggressively to silence any opposition, and many of them violently bullied citizens and groups that promoted Proposition 8. In what should have been a peaceful election, churches across the state were vandalized, personal property was destroyed, businesses were shut down, and individuals were assaulted…all under the banner of a call for greater "tolerance."
And yet, despite all the threats and attacks and the staggering sums invested in opposition to the state marriage amendment before the election, the people found their voice. They spoke, and the court has protected their courageous exercise of their political rights.
"In America, we respect the results of fair elections," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks. "The California Supreme Court arrived at the correct conclusion: the people of California have a fundamental right to amend their own constitution. This is the second time California has voted to protect marriage. Once again, the people affirmed that marriage means one man and one woman. All 30 states that have voted on whether to affirm marriage as one man and one woman in their state constitutions have done so."
Unfortunately – and confusingly – the court also allowed the existing licenses issued to same-sex partners to stand.
"By allowing the previously-issued same-sex 'marriage' licenses to remain valid, the court is perpetuating the problem that it itself created," Nimocks said. "And it's doing this despite the clear vote of the people that marriage means one man and one woman and that anything outside of that is not marriage."
ADF lawyers helped defend Proposition 8 from attack prior to last year's election and defended California's Defense of Marriage Act, Proposition 22, before it was struck down by the state Supreme Court in May 2008. Now, we are moving to protect Proposition 8 again, as advocates of homosexual behavior have brought suit against the amendment—which is no longer a proposition but an official part of the California Constitution—in federal court.
Please join me in giving thanks for God's great blessing on our efforts so far and in praying for His continued intervention in the nationwide battle to defend marriage and in the lives of those trapped in self-destructive homosexual behavior.