Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

Katy Grimes

‘Husband and Wife’ now gender neutral in California Constitution

“I now declare you legal partners,” will be what California judges say at weddings in California. “You may now kiss your gender-neutral partner.”


California’s historic decline is not just limited to bad economic policy; California politicians have been meddling in people’s bedrooms, churches, women’s wombs, classrooms, kitchens, autos, bank accounts, and the courtroom.

In the spirit of this creepy meddling, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill on Monday to do away with California’s legal references to traditional marriage between a husband and wife. SB 1306 by state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, replaces references to “husband and wife” with “gender-neutral” language in California’s marriage code.

This legislation is from the same Sen. Leno who authored a bill in 2012 which would allow a child to have multiple parents… more than two parents, to be exact.

“Under the concept of ‘new families,’ Leno’s bill goes hand-in-hand with other same-sex legislation, only this one redefines the family legally,” I wrote in 2012. “Critics say that since voters would not pass same-sex marriage, now Leno and other gay rights activists are trying another route  to their goals, but this one is through children and the courts.”

Leno has attempted many times to redefine marriage in California.

SB 1140, also from 2012, and also by Sen. Leno, attempted to redefine marriage, and even create new types of legal marriages.

“The bill would stipulate ‘that marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil, and not religious, contract’ and affirms that no clergyman would be required to perform a marriage that conflicts with his beliefs,” I wrote.  “Opponents of SB 1140  pointed out that the bill appears to introduce an inappropriate and perhaps even unconstitutional definition of marriage, and that clergy already have religious liberty guarantees in both the state and the federal constitutions.”

Leno has introduced this same bill four previous times.

Brown signs new marriage bill… and others

“This legislation removes outdated and biased language from state codes and recognizes all married spouses equally, regardless of their gender,” Leno said in a press statement about the just-signed SB 1306.

Leno’s bill was sponsored by California Attorney General Kamala Harris, Equality California, a statewide Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender advocacy organization, and the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

“Although there is no question that same-sex couples can marry in California, the discriminatory language that remains on the statutory books creates confusion about the rights of same-sex couples,” NCLR Executive Director Kate Kendell was quoted in Leno’s news release. “This law makes it clear to everyone that same-sex couples can marry and that all spouses have the exact same rights and responsibilities under the law, regardless of gender.”

“While we have achieved many milestones in the journey towards full equality for LGBT people – including the freedom to marry for same-sex couples – it’s important that we completely erase discrimination from the books,” said Rick Zbur, executive director of Equality California.
School sexual indoctrination bill

Leno also authored SB 48, described as “the worst school sexual indoctrination ever” and requires school children be taught about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual role models, which Gov. Brown signed into law in 2011.

Critics said SB 48 was just an attempt to brainwash students into becoming pro-gay political activists and ensure that government, not parents, has the final word on teaching kids about moral values.

In addition to undermining parental authority in California schools, many parents said SB 48 promotes gender confusion and experimentation, inappropriately classifies LGBT as a cultural ethnic group, and would brainwash children into adopting the LGBT community’s political agenda, rather than just teaching about homosexuals’ historical accomplishments without being forced to discuss their sexual orientation.

The bill language does not allow for teachers to discuss opposition to the LGBT movement or warn against “the negative consequences, that male homosexuality is the largest transmitter of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases.”

SB 48 would require California textbooks to include the historical contributions of LGBT individuals throughout history.

During the 2011 Assembly debate on SB 48, then-Assemblyman Chris Norby, R-Fullerton, reminded Assembly colleagues that he was a former high school history and government teacher. He said the Assembly was “micromanaging” school instruction every time a bill like this was introduced.

“I don’t think this helps the teaching of history,” Norby said. “I think it’s a distraction.” He asked how teachers could ascribe sexual orientation to historic figures after the fact. “Am I supposed to ‘out’ James Buchanan after the fact? Do I identify Milton Friedman as a straight Economist?” Norby asked. “This doesn’t help the teaching of history.”

Then-Assemblywoman Linda Halderman, R-Fresno, said she was not going to speak, but changed her mind when she kept hearing the only reason to oppose the bill was out of “intolerance.” Halderman said that some have referred to her as  a “Jewish doctor” and “that says we are different.” Halderman said that, instead of race or sexual orientation, people’s actions should be considered. The mandated classifications, she said, say “that you should not think first whether someone is honest, has integrity, does good work.”

Halderman objected to one particular class being singled out and instead said she was looking forward to a day when “I tell about who I am as a person.”


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,