A man and woman have had to go to court in California because they
want to be recognized as married after officials rejected their
marriage license because it listed "bride" and "groom" instead of
"Party A" and "Party B."

After the state Supreme Court in May expanded the rights enumerated in
the state constitution and found same-sex couples couldn't be denied
marriage rights, "Many thought we couldn't go any lower," said Brad
Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute, which is working on the case.
"We discovered actually we can."

Gideon Codding and Rachel Bird recently were married in Placer County,
near Sacramento. However, surprised by new marriage license forms
created by state bureaucrats with "Party A" and "Party B," they jotted
an explanatory "Groom" and "Bride' next to "party" designations.

The couple soon discovered the strength of the pro-homosexual lobby in
the state: The application was returned to Pastor Doug Bird, who
officiated, with a form letter stating the license "does not comply
with California State registration laws."

The couple now is filing a lawsuit in Placer County asking the court
to order county officials to process the license, since without the
form's registration, "the Coddings are not legally married and have
been prevented from accessing the many benefits available to married
couples."

"Being labeled by the state as 'Party A' and 'Party B" is demeaning,"
said PJI Chief Counsel Kevin Snider. "It's shocking that we have to
litigate over whether newlyweds can call themselves a bride and
groom."

Said Dacus, "Already, we are seeing the negative effects of gay
marriage in California, as the state is changing centuries-old
traditions to accommodate homosexuals. Unless the Protect Marriage
Initiative, Proposition 8, is approved in November, we expect a tidal
wave of new restraints and limitations to be imposed on people of
faith."

Dacus told WND the right for a one-man, one-woman couple to be married
"was in no way invalidated by the state Supreme Court's ruling
respecting homosexual marriage."

"This is an outright act of hostility towards the established rights
of people to be married as husband and wife, bride and groom," he
said.

"It's one thing for the state Supreme Court to cram homosexual
marriage down the throats of people who voted for Proposition 22, it's
quite another for the state of California then to go so far as to make
it impossible for a man and woman to be married as husband and wife in
the state of California," Dacus continued.

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=76833
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to