<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar/11341962?origin\x3dhttp://grwtemp.blogspot.com', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe", messageHandlersFilter: gapi.iframes.CROSS_ORIGIN_IFRAMES_FILTER, messageHandlers: { 'blogger-ping': function() {} } }); } }); </script>

California's Anti-Marriage Initiative Qualifies for November Ballot

An initiative that would again ban marriage between committed same-sex couples in California has qualified for the November ballot, the Secretary of State announced Monday.

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen said a random check of signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed that they had gathered enough names for it to be put to voters.

The measure would amend the state constitution to "provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

Here comes the $25 million fight to November. Please folks - head on over to Equality for All or Equality California's issue PAC and make a donation - even if it is $25 dollars.

Labels: , ,

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2008 at 4:00 PM. Want to discuss? Leave a comment below.

« Home | Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »

By Blogger A Lewis, at 6/3/08, 5:30 PM

Wouldn't you think that the SUPREME Court would have the final say? As they did a few weeks back? I find it quite odd.    



» Post a Comment