We'll see, but I suspect that people will have issues with the school issues not being addressed. I also wonder if there's a problem by not insisting the two people not be "adults" and not mentioning consent? Presumably other parts of California law deal with those issues. I like the fact that both sex and gender are included. Bizarre that "ancestry" is chosen over ethnicity.
This amendment would amend an existing section of the California Constitution. Existing language proposed to be deleted is printed instrikeout type. Language proposed to be added is printed in underlined type.
Section 1. To protect religious freedom, no court shall interpret this measure to require any priest, minister, pastor, rabbi, or other person authorized to perform marriages by any religious denomination, church, or other non-profit religious institution to perform any marriage in violation of his or her religious beliefs. The refusal to perform a marriage under this provision shall not be the basis for lawsuit or liability, and shall not affect the tax-exempt status of any religious denomination, church or other religious institution.
Section 2. To provide for fairness in the government’s issuance of marriage licenses, Section 7.5 of Article I of the California Constitution is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 7.5.Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.Marriage is between only two persons and shall not be restricted on the basis of race, color, creed, ancestry, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.
A personal blog by a Black, Gay, Caribbean, Liberal, Progressive, Moderate, Fit, Geeky, Married, College-Educated, NPR-Listening, Tennis-Playing, Feminist, Atheist, Math Professor in Los Angeles, California
▼
Thursday, September 24, 2009
2010 Prop 8 Repeal Proponents Reveal Measure's Text
Accordimg to Rex Wockner, the language of the ballot measure to be submitted to the California Supreme Court shall be:
Presumably, to be submitted to the Secretary of State, not the Supreme Court.
ReplyDelete