Everyone's favorite little bigot Randy Thomasson and friends are circulating a measure for signature that would ban gay marriage. Yeah, you're right if you're thinking "wait, didn't they do that already." They did, with Prop. 22 - but that was a statutory amendment. This latest proposal would amend the California Constitution, kicking a leg - the leg - out from under gay marriage supporters' strongest legal argument: that disallowing marriage for some violates our state guaranteed equal rights.
The proposal would also alter domestic rights currently guaranteed in statute, according to the Attorney General's summary - a characterization that Thomasson argues is political posturing on the AG's part. Thomasson's argument in the Chron article is that Lockyer ignores "the chief points . . . the whole issue is the protection of marriage."
See, Milton isn't being fired, they're just fixing the glitch.
Lockyer's title changes the proponent's working title from "The Voters' Right to Protect Marriage Initiative" to "Marriage. Elimination of Domestic Partnership Rights."
To be fair, it is a fairly political name. To be fairer, I'd challenge anyone to come up with a title and summary that wouldn't be political.
And from the Gone But Not Forgotten Files - Pete Knight's widow has submitted a competing amendment that would not only ban gay marriage in California, but would forbid the state from recognizing gay marriages in anyway. Because that whole United States thing was overrated anyway . . . .
In case you forgot, by the way, Pete Knight's son is gay. Paging Dr. Phil, you're needed in studio 22, Dr. Phil to studio 22.
This second proposal came about because its proponents thought Thomasson's was too soft - leaving room for godless sodomite legislators to "confer legal and economic rights to same-sex couples as long as they aren't already reserved for marriage."
To paraphrase the Bible: Jesus weeps. Over this kind of blind hate.
You can check out proposed initiatives on the AG's website here. Here is the text of the "Elimination of Domestic Partnership Rights" proposal (pdf). The second measure is not yet available on the state site.
(Cross-posted at Metroblogging San Francisco.)