 Immoral AND illegal
Part of
our prosperity lies in the deeply ingrained idea of procreation
By Slater Bakhtavar
April 28, 2004
iranian.com
On February 10, 2004 newly-elected Mayor of San Francisco, Gavin
Newsom, broke with tradition as old as the foundations of Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam by writing a letter to San Francisco County
Clerk, Nancy Alfaro, instructing her to issue marriage licenses
to same-sex couples.
According to this directive, such action was
proper pursuant to Article I, Section 7, subdivision (a) of the
California Constitution which provides "a person may not
be ... denied equal protection of the laws." In spite of
contrary California statutes reserving the right of marriage to
one man and one woman, thousands of licenses to same-sex couples
were subsequently issued.
Currently, the California Family Code Section 300
reads "marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract
between
a man and a woman, to which the consent of the parties capable
of making the contract is necessary ... Consent must be followed
by the issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by
this division ..."
Further, the California Family Code
Section 301 regulates the capability of consent to "an unmarried
"male" of the age of 18 years or older, and an unmarried "female"
of
the age of 18 years or older..." Proposition 22 [Family
Code Section 308.5], a widely supported initiative further backs
the state's position. The Proposition reads "only marriage
between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
In addition to well-established California statutes,
few can deny that the institution of marriage between man and woman
has been
a core part of the American value system and a deeply ingrained
part of the Nation's tradition. The institution of marriage
is inseparable from the well-established foundations that have
made America and the world prosper to what it is today.
Part of
our prosperity lies in the deeply ingrained idea of procreation.
One could reliably conclude that the Mayor's directive legalizing
same-sex marriage would break the chains of one of the original
foundations that have brought America and the world such prosperity
today.
It's fundamental to note that California marriage
laws are concise and clear; marriage is regulated to one "man"
and
one "woman." California Family Codes are explicit and
unequivocal, and Mayor Gavin Newsom knew or should have known that
the Directive and any actions implementing the Directive were in
blatant violation of California law.
Furthermore, based on the
California Family Code, Mayor Newsom knew or should have known
that he was without authority to alter the marriage laws in the
State of California. It's essential for a dignified nation
based on the foundations of morality, dignity, God and prosperity
to rule that Mayor Newsom's directive violated clearly established
California Law.
However, even if the Court decided to address
the constitutional questions raised in this decision, nevertheless,
the Court should uphold the law because California has a "legitimate
interest" in endorsing procreation, and the state statutes
do not violate the equal protection or due process clause.
We, as a society must confront judicial activists
and ask them to do what's right, what's legit, but most importantly
what's just.
.................... Say
goodbye to spam!
*
*
|
