Groups fight same-sex marriage ruling

  By a 4-3 decision in May, the California Supreme Court struck down a state ban on same-sex marriage, setting up a November showdown over a voter initiative that would, in turn, nullify the court ruling.
  Pro-family groups asked the high court to stay its decision (postponing the implementation of it) until after a voter referendum on marriage in November.
  But on June 4 the court refused to issue a stay, and instead ordered same-sex marriages to commence by June 17.
  Pro-family groups had anticipated the potential danger of a judicial ruling striking down traditional marriage, and have been preparing for that possibility by trying to get the one man/one woman definition placed into the state constitution. Given the liberal stranglehold on the state legislature, the only option for accomplishing that was to get enough signatures to once again put the issue directly before voters.
  If passed, the November initiative, called the California Marriage Amendment, could change the state’s constitution to “provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
  In order to place a measure on the ballot, at least 694,354 valid petition signatures must be submitted to the California Secretary of State’s office.
  The pro-family coalition ProtectMarriage.com obtained more than 1.1 million signatures, and Secretary of State Debra Bowen said enough signatures have been validated to ensure the initiative’s placement on the ballot.
  In 2000, voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 22, which codified the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.
  In defiance of that vote, in February 2004, Gavin Newsome, then mayor of San Francisco, began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
  The high court halted the weddings a month later, ruling that a mayor did not have the authority to ignore state law.
  Homosexual couples then challenged the law in court, but a state appeals court upheld the one man/one woman definition of marriage. It was this ruling which was overturned by the high court.
  Randy Thomasson, executive director for the California pro-family group Campaign for Children and Families, criticized the Supreme Court’s refusal to issue a stay.
  “The voters are witnessing unprecedented judicial arrogance,” Thomasson said. “This will only make Californians more angry and more determined to overrule the court and pass the California Marriage Amendment this November. Ironically, the judges are pouring fuel on the fire of voter outrage.”