SB1306 would remove from the state Family Code language that marriage must be "between a man and a woman." It would substitute gender-neutral language, define marriage as a personal relation arising from a civil contract between two persons, and remove limits on the state recognizing the validity of same-sex marriages performed outside of California.
The bill removes "discriminatory language" from the Family Code and brings state law into compliance with federal and state court decisions allowing same-sex marriages, said Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco.
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court left in place a lower court judge's order striking down as unconstitutional a ballot measure known as Proposition 8, the 2008 voter initiative that outlawed same-sex marriages in California. A 5-4 court majority ruled that the ban's sponsors lacked authority to defend the measure on appeal, though the justices did not directly address the ban's constitutionality.
Marriages resumed in late June after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a stay it had imposed on the lower court ruling. The state Supreme Court dismissed a final challenge by the ban's backers in August.
"I cannot bring myself, though, to diminish the words 'husband and wife,' and this clearly does that. Throughout history those words have been widely used and accepted," said Sen. Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber, the only senator to speak in opposition. "They're kind of sacred terms, I would argue, and by this bill we are diminishing those very important words."
The bill was sent to the Assembly on a 25-10 vote, with only Republicans in opposition. Two Republicans, Anthony Cannella of Ceres and Ted Gaines of Roseville, voted in favor.
"All this bill does is bring our Family Code section up to date to comply with those two court decisions," Leno said. He added later: "The sky did not fall, civilization as we know it did not end" when gay marriages began.
Meanwhile our legislators in Jamaica went and are still going the opposite direction, case in point the present Prime Minister when she was in opposition sided with Bruce "Not in my Cabinet" Golding (audio below) in an invented diversionary tactic when no such rights under the then charter of rights debate have been demanded; she said on October 20, 2009 "Mr Speaker when we accepted the final report from the joint select committee that were looking at the bill we were completely satisfied with their recommendation of a provision to restrict marriage and like relationships to one man and one woman within Jamaica and that the provision should be specifically spelt out so that there could be no ambiguity ………. yes one man one woman (laughter in the house) and if you are Jamaican and go overseas the same applies ……….."
Now we see the ever shifting goal post of the suggested conscience vote on buggery and the response from the opposition on a referendum on the issue as clearly the election positioning has begun. Of course this is also alongside the antigay voices in the religious community who are opposed to gay marriage when we can't even get passed just basic tolerance, for e.g. Lawyers' Christian Fellowship's Shirley Richards says lesbian sex should be criminalized as buggery ..........
the present PNP administration seems to want us to forget their own record on buggery and the sideshow to reinforce anti gay sentiments by opposing gay marriage in that statement over the signature of the then justice minister A. J. Nicholson as captured in that cartoon above originally published January 19, 2007 in the Gleaner newspaper, also see "No To Same Sex Marriage" now fast forward to February 2014 here is the man now in his capacity as Foreign Affairs Minister: Foreign Affairs Minister says Govt should be cautious on gay rights issues in Jamaica
Promised (I mean suggested) Conscience vote on Buggery law not a priority right now (yet again) says PM