SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for the ‘Prop. 8’ Category

Can Prop. 8 be saved?

Tuesday, April 26, 2011, 7:21 pm |

For some time now, I’ve been asking whether California and the United States of America are still a republic and a democracy.

We already know that U.S. Judge Vaughn Walker last year violated his oath of office and attempted to craft a “new” U.S. Constitution when he ruled homosexual “marriages” were a constitutional right. That was a hot August day when I tried to hold the judge to account.

If you follow the news, you also know that Walker, now retired, recently announced he has been living the homosexual lifestyle for 10 years with another man. Now the Prop. 8 campaign has filed papers asking the federal appellate court to “vacate” (erase) Walker’s August 2010 ruling.

Of course it should be wiped out. Walker has proven he had a self-interest, which is why he should have recused himself. Walker had reason to seek and obtain a “same-sex marriage license” as a result of his biased ruling.

Good judges on a constitution-honoring court would vacate the anti-Prop. 8 ruling. But two of the three judges on the 9th Circuit panel, where the Prop. 8 case currently resides, are liberal appointees of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Sadly, I think it’s likely that this second court will “strike down” marriage licenses for “only a man and a woman.” Then the question would go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Here, I can see a 5-4 decision, with Justice Anthony Kennedy the deciding vote.  See my earlier blog, “Will Prop. 8 die on a technicality?”

Why should the U.S. Supreme Court overturn Walker’s awful ruling? To review, Walker violated his oath of office in multiple ways:

1.    He had sworn to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” meaning the specific, written words and original meaning of those words contained in the Constitution. Yet America’s preeminent document doesn’t even contain the word “marriage.” Walker should have thrown out the challenge to Prop. 8, instead of taking the case.

2.    He violated the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reads, The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Marriage is not in the U.S. Constitution, and is therefore the jurisdiction of the states — in this case, in the hands of the People of California, who have sole power to amend the California Constitution.

3.    He violated Article 4 of the actual Constitution, which reads, “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government…” A republican form of government means states must act like a republic, not a dictatorship. A republic is a government based on written laws, such as Prop. 8. Here’s the applicable dictionary definition of a republic: “a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.”

“Cherish therefore the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention…If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, judges and governors shall all become wolves.”
Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States


Meet California’s legal anarchist Kamala Harris

Tuesday, March 1, 2011, 7:06 pm |

California’s new Democratic Attorney General, Kamala Harris is urging the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to interrupt its process and permit homosexual “marriages” now.

Kamala Harris is the former District Attorney of San Francisco who refused to pursue the death penalty for cop killers. Over the years, she rode in several homosexual-bisexual-transsexual “pride” parades.  She has been a longtime supporter of homosexual “marriages” — even on national TV.

In her action Tuesday and in her earlier refusal to defend Prop. 8 in court, Harris obviously doesn’t believe that California is a republic — a state of laws, not a regime or a monarchy — or a democracy — where the people make the laws.  She took an oath to be opposite of an anarchist. Not! And the children are watching.

See what else I told the media in our new release.

The Valentine’s Day assault on real marriage

Tuesday, February 15, 2011, 8:07 pm |

It’s wrong and sad that homosexual activists claim to be victims all the time ,when they’re busying squashing everyone else’s rights and values, and interrupting even special days that celebrate the romantic bond between a man and a woman. 

On Monday, homosexual activists in California protested against defining marriage as between a man and a woman in acts of civil disobedience at county clerk’s offices, in San Diego, Los Angeles, Modesto, Fresno, Sacramento, San Jose, San Francisco, Martinez, Woodland, and Arcata. This came as the California Supreme Court prepares to opine on whether Prop. 8 proponents can defend the vote of the People when California Gov. Jerry Brown would not.

VIDEO: Homosexuals hijack Valentine’s Day
READ: KGO-TV reports: Randy Thomasson is one of the main critics of same-sex marriage. He is President of an organization called Save California. He tells ABC7, “If you don’t have marriage between a man and a woman, you just don’t have marriage.”

February 14, 2011
Randy Thomasson on Valentine’s Day assault on marriage
“If you don’t have a man and a woman, you just don’t have marriage”
Sacramento, California – SaveCalifornia.com President Randy Thomasson today issued the following statement regarding homosexual activists in California demanding marriage licenses in protest of natural man-woman marriage:

“Some people misunderstand what marriage really is. If marriage can mean anything, marriage will ultimately mean nothing. The beautiful creation of marriage is designed exclusively for a man and a woman, biologically, sexually, and reproductively. No relationship can be equated with or compared to marriage. For if you don’t have a man and a woman, you just don’t have marriage. This is why the people of California have consistently voted to protect marriage licenses for only a man and a woman. And it’s why the courts should respect what the California Constitution clearly states, that ‘all political power is inherent in the people.'”
Read our Prop. 8 federal appellate court amicus brief