The California Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday on the constitutionality of the state's marriage-protection law, Proposition 22, which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. More than 60 percent of Californians voted in favor of Proposition 22 in 2000.
"Californians know this is the foundation for strong families," said Glen Lavy, senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. "But certain special-interest groups are trying to bypass the democratic process by asking the court to redefine marriage.”
ProtectMarriage.com, a coalition of national, state and local groups, has organized a petition drive to let the people of California vote on a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. The coalition has until April to collect more than 1 million signatures.
“The folks who want to redefine marriage will not give up, and they will continue to push,” said Andrew Pugno, chief counsel for the Proposition 22 legal defense fund. “The only way to protect marriage permanently is to amend the state constitution so that (it) is not subject to the whims of judges.”
Twenty-seven states already have amended their constitutions to protect marriage.
“A victory for traditional marriage in California will throw a big, wet blanket on the nationwide push for same-sex 'marriage,' " Pugno said.
After the three-hour hearing, the court will have 90 days to rule. If the court rules against traditional marriage, the amendment petition drive can still move forward.
SIGN A PETITION
If you live in California, visit ProtectMarriage.com to request a petition. You can request extra copies for friends and family. Distribution centers also are available around the state.
Send completed petitions to: P.O. Box 162657, Sacramento, CA 95816.
Paid for by ProtectMarriage.com committee P.O. Box 20012, Riverside, California 92516-0012 with major funding provided by Focus on the Family, 8605 Explorer Drive, Colorado Springs, CO 80920
(NOTE: Referral to Web sites not produced by Focus on the Family is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
