Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Friday, August 08, 2008
Calif. marr. amend. backers lose in court
By Staff / Baptist Press
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who won Tuesday's presidential debate?


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (BP)--A California judge handed opponents of a proposed constitutional marriage amendment a victory Aug. 8, refusing to change what conservatives call "prejudicial" ballot language.

Amendment supporters say they will appeal.

The ballot title and summary -- the exact language voters see on the ballot when voting -- was changed recently by California Attorney General Jerry Brown, a Democrat, for what he said were realities in light of the May court decision legalizing "gay marriage."

But amendment supporters charge that the language turned a neutral summary of the amendment into a negative one. The fear is that the amendment, known as Proposition 8, will lose votes based solely on the ballot title and summary.

"he Court is not persuaded that the Attorney General's Title and Summary is false, misleading, argumentative, or likely to create prejudice," Judge Timothy M. Frawley wrote.

Brown changed the title to read, "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry" and the first sentence of the summary to read, "Changes California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry." The new ballot summary also says the amendment's fiscal impact would result in "potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars" to state and local governments over the next few years.

Prior to the California Supreme Court's decision that legalized "gay marriage," the ballot title read, "Limit on Marriage," and the first sentence of the summary read, "Amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

Amendment supporters said they remain convinced the ballot title is not neutral and is intended to "intentionally prejudice" voters.

"The ballot title is argumentative and not impartial," Alliance Defense Fund attorney Joseph Infranco said in a statement. ADF is involved in the lawsuit. "The AG's job is to apply the law in a way that's fair to all Californians, not in a way that influences elections. We will immediately appeal the ruling because the purpose of this amendment is to protect marriage broadly as the union of one man and one woman."

Messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting in June passed a resolution urging Southern Baptists in California to work and vote for the amendment and for all Southern Baptists and other Christians to pray for its passage. The resolution passed nearly unanimously.

Compiled by Michael Foust, an assistant editor for Baptist Press. For information about the amendment, or to donate to the amendment campaign, visit ProtectMarriage.com (out-of-state donations are legal).

Copyright (c) 2008 Southern Baptist Convention, Baptist Press www.BPNews.net

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
Subject: Doing the right thing ...
Considering that ProtectMarriage.com has decided NOT to appeal the ballot language, what chance do you really see for Prop 8 to pass? I just don't see a majority of Californians voting YES on a proposition titled ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY.

Once the churches realize that Prop 8 is an almost guaranteed loser, are they going to do the right thing and let their members know? If not, what happens after Prop 8 loses by 40-60 (or worse), and then the members find out that the church leadership was privy all along to internal polling that predicted a crushing defeat? Do the members get their money back?

Or do they get stuck paying for ads that were run by a campaign that knew it was going to lose but ran them anyway!

The words say it all...
The change in wording is correct. Is it a lie? Is it misleading. NO, it isn't; the fact is that Prop 8 DOES indeed intend to take away a right from a group of people. It correctly states that if passed, a RIGHT is being removed by singling out same sex couples for different treatment.

The original wording though also NOT a lie is certainly misleading and is intended to "sound innocent" when in fact it is NOT innocent.

Removal of rights from a group of people by amending the constitution is anything but "innocent" and violates the very intent of the Constitution.

The court did exactly what they should have done.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.