I Left My Heart in San Francisco but I’m Taking It Back     2/17/2004
By Jan LaRue, Chief Counsel

Homosexual marriages performed in ‘Baghdad-by-the-Bay.’

If you’ve ever driven south on Highway 101 into San Francisco, you never forget it. As you round the last curve, the view takes your breath away. The awesome Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco Bay on your left, the blue Pacific on your right and the city with all of its white buildings come into view. And you hear Tony and start singing.

But then the depravity that’s tolerated and, in many instances, sanctioned by government officials brings to mind “whited sepulchers full of dead men’s bones.” The idyllic scene is shattered by the reality of a city with a corrupt heart.

On February 12, 2004, its corruption waxed full.

The newly elected, youngest mayor in its history, Gavin Newsom, ordered San Francisco officials to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples. The licenses changed “bride” and “groom” to “Applicant 1” and “Applicant 2.” Doesn’t that warm your heart. By end of day, public officials issued about 95 “marriage” licenses and 87 “marriages” were performed on the spot. By end of day February 16, San Francisco officials had issued more than 2,600 of the licenses.

The Campaign for California Families, represented by Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel, intended to be in court last Friday to stop the issuance of illegal marriage licenses; however, the courts were closed in observance of Lincoln’s birthday. Do we smell a conspiracy to violate the law here? The Alliance Defense Fund has joined in the challenge to stop the city from issuing the licenses and performing ceremonies.

According to CNN, “San Francisco officials tried to keep the first marriage—between longtime lesbian activists Phyllis Lyon, 79, and Del Martin, 83—confidential so they could complete it before any court intervention. The pair, who will celebrate 51 years together on Valentine's Day, were wed by San Francisco Assessor Mabel Teng at 11:10 a.m. in a closed-door ceremony.”

“Even people who are anti-gay marriage might shift their thinking now and realize it’s most harmful to take something away when someone already has it,” said Virginia Garcia, 40, after wedding Sheila Sernovitz, 50, her partner of 14 years. (Bank robbers are warming up to that argument.)

San Francisco officials have acknowledged they’re in for a legal battle, but claim that the licenses are legally binding, and that “they would immediately confer new benefits in areas ranging from health coverage to funeral arrangements.”

In 2000, 62 percent of California voters reaffirmed that marriage is limited to a man and a woman. “Proposition 22,” which is codified in California Family Code § 308.5, states: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The homosexual “marriages” are invalid and can’t be recognized. Is that sufficient to redress yesterday’s grievance? Hardly.

The mayor, who swore an oath to uphold the California Constitution and state laws, has said that California’s marriage law violates the state’s civil rights statute and the Constitution. Nonsense. Like the four rogue judges in Massachusetts, Newsom has violated his oath and defied the people who enacted Proposition 22. The public officials who perform homosexual “nuptials” are committing a criminal offense. California Penal Code § 359 states:

Every person authorized to solemnize marriage, who willfully and knowingly solemnizes any incestuous or other marriage forbidden by law, is punishable by fine of not less than one hundred nor more than one thousand dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail not less than three months nor more than one year, or by both.

Whether or not Newsom officiates at any of the ceremonies, he can be charged with a conspiracy to violate the law, which may be prosecuted as a felony under Cal. Penal Code § 182.

CNN also reported last Friday:

[O]ther state officials, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, shied away from commenting on the events. Attorney General Bill Lockyer said through a spokeswoman he hasn't been asked to issue an opinion on the legality of same-sex marriages under California law. But Lockyer has asked his civil rights enforcement section to review how Massachusetts' legal debate might apply to California law. “California's Constitution provides broader equal protection rights than other states,” spokeswoman Hallye Jordan said.

No matter where you live, you need to come to grips with the likelihood of that what’s happening in San Francisco may be played out in your state. Politicians willing to violate the public trust and valid laws are not a “left-coast” anomaly. Don’t forget Vermont and Massachusetts.

Take action: Call the offices of the California governor and attorney general and urge them to fulfill their duty to enforce California’s marriage laws and prosecute those who violate them.

“Americans are free, in short, to disagree with the law but not to disobey it.”

--President John F. Kennedy

The White House

September 30, 1962

Printer Friendly Version

Recent Articles

Controversial Professor Places Christian College in an Unflattering Light

Girls Scouts Under Fire for Planned Parenthood Sex Guide

Vacation Surprise: Men Allowed in Women’s Restrooms

Statement on D.C. Same-Sex 'Marriage'

A Pro-Life and Pro-Taxpayer Win in Sycamore Township, Ohio

CWA of Virginia Stands in the Gap for Lisa and Isabella Miller

Entering the Age of Elegance

Biased Judge on California’s Proposition 8 Marriage Case

CWA Applauds New Proof that Abstinence Works

Help a Family, Help a Child