California judge sparks reactions after rules same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

San Francisco, Calif., Mar 14, 2005 / 22:00 pm

A judge ruled yesterday that California's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

“The idea that marriage-like rights without marriage is adequate smacks of a concept long rejected by the courts — separate but equal," wrote Judge Richard Kramer of San Francisco County's Superior Court. He added that there appears “no rational purpose” for denying same-sex marriage.

"For a single judge to rule there is no conceivable purpose for preserving marriage as one man and one woman is mind-boggling," said Mathew Staver, president of the pro-traditional marriage Liberty Counsel. "This decision will be gasoline on the fire of the pro-marriage movement in California as well as the rest of the country.”

Randy Thomasson, Executive Director of Campaign for California Families, said "this is a crazy ruling by an arrogant San Francisco judge who apparently hates marriage and the voters. Kramer has trashed the people's vote to keep marriage for a man and a woman and violated his oath to uphold the law instead of making new laws out of his own head. This is the worst type of judge. This case will be immediately appealed."

"It's hurtful and insulting to the voters when a judge attacks the voters and destroys the sacred institution of marriage for a man and a woman. This outrageous ruling will inspire average citizens to rise up and fight to protect marriage as it naturally is - for a man and a woman, a husband and wife."

Larry Jacobs, vice president of the Howard Center for Family, Religion and Society, noted the courts reflect a serious disconnect between courts and the public on the crucial matter of marriage. "Threats to family stability from divorce, promiscuity and working parents have never been more serious. This is not the time to be venturing into misguided social experiments with marriage."

"Almost every opinion poll on the subject shows the American people support traditional marriage by lopsided margins. In every state where it's gone to a vote, natural marriage has passed by landslide majorities, including such bastions of liberalism as California and Hawaii," Jacobs disclosed.

"Yet another irrational judge, like his counterparts in Massachusetts, can't find a rational reason for defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman," said Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women of America's Culture & Family Institute.

"That's because these judges are no longer acting rationally, and are imposing their own radical agenda, ignoring the law and the will of the people."

"This trial court ruling will be appealed and reversed unless the appellate courts are content to allow a rogue judge to make a mockery of the state constitution and turn rational basis into a meaningless term," said Jan LaRue, CWA's chief counsel. "Any judge who can't find one rational reason for upholding marriage needs to turn in his robe."

"Californians should remove Kramer from office because of this scandalous ruling. We also need to enact a constitutional amendment, at the state and federal levels, to protect marriage once and for all," said Knight.

The City of San Francisco and a dozen homosexual couples had filed lawsuits a year ago, after the California Supreme Court stopped Mayor Gavin Newsom from performing same-sex marriages.

Nearly 4,000 homosexual couples got married after Newsom instructed the city to issue them marriage licenses last year. The California Supreme Court later declared those marriages void, saying the mayor overstepped his authority.

The Associated Press reported that it could be months or years before the state sanctions same-sex marriage, if ever. Kramer's decision is stayed automatically for 60 days to allow time for appeal.

In fact, two bills now before the California Legislature would put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot.