Domestic partners fight continues

Californians are facing another onslaught of homosexual-marriage “domestic partners” bills at the State Capitol, reports Randy Thomasson of the Campaign for California Families. No less than five “domestic partners” bills have been introduced.

Since the “civil unions” bill is on hold for a year, homosexual activists are chipping away at marriage with a series of “domestic partners” bills. This year’s anti-marriage bills includes:

• SB 1213 (includes three spousal-equivalent rights for homosexual partners of state employees).

• AB 2216 (equates homosexual “domestic partner” with married spouse when a “domestic partner” dies without a will).

• AB 2777 (allows Santa Barbara and Marin counties to spend taxpayer money awarding spousal-equivalent benefits to a homosexual “domestic partner” of a county employee who dies).

• SB 1575 (equates “domestic partners” with marriage in the Probate Code).

• SCA 9 (equates unmarried “cohabitant” to married spouse when property is transferred).

Thomasson noted that each of these bills undermines marriage and completely disrespects the vote of the people of California, who voted overwhelmingly to protect marriage with Proposition 22 in March 2000. He urged people concerned to contact their state Assembly member and state Senator. He said to urge them to oppose all these “domestic partners” bills, which undermine marriage and the people’s vote.

“And make sure you urge Gov. Gray Davis to oppose these anti-marriage bills in this key election year,” he added. The governor can be phoned at (916) 445-2841.

Thomasson also noted that Davis has established a task force to try to bring homosexual marriage to California via Vermont-style “civil unions.” The Bay Area Reporter, a leading homosexual newspaper, reported on March 21 that Davis is taking action only two months after the homosexual-marriage bill, AB 1338, was shelved for this year.

“I am establishing a task force to review what Vermont has done to find out if any of those measures are applicable to California,” Davis told the newspaper’s editorial board in an interview.

“Civil unions” are all the rights of marriage, or homosexual marriage by another name. The ushering in of “civil unions” would completely overturn Proposition 22, the Protection of Marriage Initiative, which was passed overwhelmingly in March 2000 by 61.4 percent of California voters in 52 out of 58 counties. The vote reflected the people’s will that protecting the rights of marriage for only a man and a woman is vitally important for children and society.

“Gray Davis has devised a subversive plan to overturn the people’s vote on marriage,” said Thomasson, executive director of Campaign for California Families, a statewide nonprofit, nonpartisan family issues leadership organization. “It’s outrageous. This is an outright rejection of the voters. The people of California overwhelmingly said they want marriage rights to stay between a man and a woman. In a vain attempt to shore up his liberal base, Gray Davis is willing to overturn marriage and the people’s vote in order to satisfy the radical demands of homosexual activists.”

“Marriage is more popular than Gray Davis,” said Thomasson. “Davis received a lower percentage of votes in 1998 than marriage did on the ballot in 2000. He is apparently taking minority voters for granted, even when Latino, black and Asian voters are overwhelmingly opposed to gay marriage. Gray Davis is willing to offend the majority of Californians in an effort to win reelection with the help of his liberal base.”