Fruits, Nuts, Flakes,...
HT to PowerBlog! :
Lawsuit to seek halt in 'gay' lobbying inside voting booth
California officials change reference to marriage protection amendment
Posted: July 29, 2008
10:15 pm Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
California Attorney General Jerry Brown
Pro-family leaders in California who organized a drive for more than a million signatures to put a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage on this fall's election ballot say they will seek a court ruling to prevent pro-homosexual lobbying inside the voting booths.
Attorney General Jerry Brown has announced he's changing the official state language describing Proposition 8, which would limit marriage in California to one man and one woman.
"This is an extremely biased description designed to defeat Proposition 8," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.
"The 'right' of homosexuals to marry was created out of thin air just three months ago by an activist court. In that unjust ruling, not only was the people's right to pass laws such as Proposition 22 overturned, the justices arrogantly imposed their radical social agenda on our state," she said.
"Now the Democrat elected officials such as Attorney General Jerry Brown are siding with the anti-Prop 8 campaign and using their power to place every obstacle they can before this crucial proposition. Despite the unscrupulous tactics of our opposition, Californians are committed to restoring the definition of marriage ... and we will certainly reject judicial activism," said England.
The group ProtectMarriage.com told the Los Angeles Times it plans to seek a court order against such voting-booth lobbying.
Protect Marriage spokeswoman Jennifer Kerns said the language is "inherently argumentative" and that it could "prejudice" voters.
Originally the amendment read, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Brown changed the ballot description to reference the "elimination" of homosexual "marriage" rights.
Brown also inserted language alleging the state would lose millions of dollars if homosexual "marriage" is banned.
"Both the summary change and inserting the claim that California will lose millions of dollars if homosexual marriage is banned proves that even our supposedly unbiased elected officials have no desire to protect traditional marriage," said Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Family Impact.
"Over 1 million Californians signed a petition to place on the ballot a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman," Turney said. "This new, biased language does not reflect the Protect Marriage Initiative's intent, and is clearly meant to sway voters' decisions – even in the ballot box."
Homosexual advocates told the Times they applauded the change.
And political analysts told the newspaper they expected the language change alone could impact the results of the statewide vote.
Proposition 8, if passed, effectively would overturn the May 15 California Supreme Court decision striking down the state's ban on same-sex marriage by adding the words "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California" to the state's constitution.
The TrekMedic adds:
Didn't this village idiot used to be governor of California and make it the Granola-Hippie-Tree Hugging State we all know and hate?