Uploaded by signab43 on Jan 10, 2010
Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,
In July of 2007 I wrote to you to ask you to sign AB 43, the bill that was heading to your desk that would have ended the segregation of same-sex and opposite-sex marriages in our state. When you vetoed it, you gave a bunch of excuses, especially saying that you had to veto it, or you would be sued.
Well, now you're being sued. Perry v. Schwarzenegger is hearing arguments tomorrow - broadcast to all the world - about whether you can enforce a law that breaks generations of a most sacred traditional value: that every citizen is entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
You refused to step in to stop the Opponents of Equality from redefining equality in our state. You failed to protect me and my children from the tyranny of the majority. And you were a poor steward of the Constitution that generations of Californians used to define fairness and equality, from those that would take it away.
So we went over your head. Now the Federal courts will decide if you can reach into the population and carve out a group of people, and assign them different rights because of the way they were born or what they believe.
It is sad that it has come to this: it is much more important to have the majority of Californians support marriage equality than to have a law about it. You could have helped, but now you're being sued. Hurray for justice.
Sincerely,
Category:
Tags:
- veto
- fairness
- federal
- san francisco
- television
- celebrity
- supreme court
- proposition 8
- AB 43
- California Senate
- California Supreme Court
- people
- letters
License:
Standard YouTube License
-
4 likes, 0 dislikes
Link to this comment:
Uploader Comments (signab43)
All Comments (13)
-
Someone back there missed a critical principle of American national formation, that while they *might* (might!) be able to claim that the Constitution of the United States does not guarantee "the pursuit of happiness," the FOUNDING and FORMATIONAL document of this nation, our Declaration of Independence, DOES. The Founding Fathers stated so, quite literally and quite emphatically. Why, they even had the chutzpah to say that such right is INALIENABLE to all, and that this is SELF-EVIDENT TRUTH!
bimboblacky 1 year ago
-
There's a KKK member two cubes over. There's a Jew two cubes the other way. Both has a job. Get over yourself.
If you hate people that much, you shouldn't be in a workplace, you should be a Catholic Priest and out of the way of honest, respectful people.
It's a shame we have to have laws to make that happen, but apparently we do.
signab43 2 years ago
-
the same way members of KKK, or those who oppose interracial marriages, lose their jobs.
sammy1251980 2 years ago
-
well, if that were true, I can only say "better you than me."
But of course, it's just another lie by the Opponents of Equality. How in the world would you "lose your job," unless you're one of the selfish wingnuts who is profiting from this whole battle?
signab43 2 years ago
-
not yet, but if perry wins, meaning we will have a law stating that homosexual marriage is a civil right, I will be punished by losing my job, or not being able to get jobs with good security and benefits. I will be put on the same board as racists by the society, and I don't want this to happen.
That's why Perry case makes me worry.
sammy1251980 2 years ago
-
How, pray tell, is my happy marriage punishing you?
signab43 2 years ago
-
Our Constitution, does not guarantee the pursuit of happiness, it guarantees everybody's freedom to life, liberty, and property. But people like you, want to silence people like me, thus take away my liberties.
Nowhere in Constution it says that people should be punished for criticizing any kinds of behavior, including homosexual sex. Yet, you are trying to create laws that would punish me for speaking my mind. That does not make sense.
sammy1251980 2 years ago
-
oh, you poor misfortunate soul, being harassed because of your beliefs. You didn't like that, did you? Then why would you do it to other people?
Remember that bit about "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The Constitution does not intend to protect anyone's freedom, it intends to protect everyone's freedom.
If you were spreading lies like this in college, and refused to even read the documents you were 'believing,' then you probably deserved to be attacked by your professors.
signab43 2 years ago
38:53
Prop 8 Trial Decision, Part 2, Pages 16-37.by MarriageTrial528 views
7:26
Perry V. Schwarzeneggerby SaylaMarz1,467 views
4:32
Prop 8 (Perry v. Schwarzenegger) Trial Notesby kd1s334 views
7:11
Paul Nathanson Deposition in Perry v. Schwarzenegger (Excerpt)by PerryVSchwarzenegger4,193 views
7:42
Nuclear Tipping Point Long Trailerby webmasternti20101,559 views
0:37
On Radio, Perry Touts Letter He Wrote In Support Of TARPby PerryReality3,546 views
2:05
OURSCENETV: VIDEO: NO H8 CAMPAIGN PROTESTS PROP 8by OURsceneTV17,460 views
1:04
Celebrity endorses Yes on Prop 8 or No on Prop 8by sayah646,283 views
5:58
Contact Schwarzenegger Todayby HerbaliciousCA904 views
10:00
WEHO PROP 8 CELEBRITY INTERVIEWS with KURT EVANSby raulkurte4,136 views
3:57
YES WE CAN, YES WE DID! (Express Yourself)by Pepearte10,950 views
3:12
Golden Globes Drew Barrymoreby AwardsShowNetwork6,435 views
10:33
Interview with Federal Prop 8 Case Attorneys David Boies and Ted Olson - TOWLEROAD.COMby TowleroadTV6,602 views
3:19
Bill Moyers Journalby MarriageTrial3,583 views
5:24
Prop. 8 supporter Luke Otterstad at Federal Buildingby RaymondHng551 views
3:58
Haiti Earthquake live footage from supermarketby ComeToTruth50,727 views
29:02
CSULB - California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Speaksby AMPCENTER137,516 views
8:28
CRP Pt1 w/ Arnold Schwarzenegger, Charlie Crist, Rick Perryby CRPTV1,279 views
4:29
Beginner Salsa Dance Turns and Spinsby apersaud199,789 views
1:12:38
Prop 8 Trial Re-enactment, Day 1 Chapter 2by MarriageTrial30,443 views
- Loading more suggestions...
When the California Governor vetoed the marriage equality bill, he said at the time that either the people OR the courts should make the decision. He publicly APPLAUDED the court for its decision to allow same sex marriage, saying he stood by it. And he very publicly came out AGAINST Prop 8, and has refused, along with the Att. General, to defend the state in this lawsuit. SO let's get the story straight.
plinfesty 2 years ago
I don't dispute the facts. However Governor Schwarzenegger could have signed AB 43, and he certainly could have (and still can) furiously denounce the parts of the Republican Party that still somehow thinks that it is appropriate to have the extermination of same-sex families featured in its official party platform.
signab43 2 years ago