---

California Mayor "Outraged" at Proposal to Exempt Civil Servants from Gay Marriage for Conscience Reasons

By Peter J. Smith

SAN FRANCISCO, May 26, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has blasted a proposal that would allow San Diego county clerks to decline to perform same-sex "marriages" on conscience grounds saying he is both "shocked" and "outraged" according to Reuters news service.
 
Newsom was responding to an idea tabled on Wednesday by San Diego County to exempt clerks who had moral or religious objections to gay "marriage" from officiating at those civil ceremonies.
"I was pretty shocked about all that, candidly, and pretty outraged," said Newsom in a Reuters interview.

"This is a civil marriage that civil servants have a responsibility to provide, so for civil servants on religious grounds to start passing judgments, they, I think, are breaking the core tenet of what civil service is all about."

Reuters reported that Newsom also suggested that clerks who refuse to perform same-sex "weddings" in California should lose their jobs if they do.

"If that is their job and they are going to be able to pick and choose based on their morality, then all of a sudden they are not doing their jobs," continued Newsom.

"If you don't want to provide a marriage certificate and you've got a job that does that, then you should think twice about why you got the job in the first place and maybe you should get a new job," he added. "Talk about a slippery slope, Mr. County Clerk down in San Diego."

Newsom's newfound outrage, however, belies the ironical fact that Newsom's own peculiar morality motivated his choice to violate California law in 2004, when he mandated city clerks to give marriage licenses to homosexual couples. Newsom dismissed existing marriage statutes as "codified discrimination" and the city of San Francisco performed over 4000 illegal "marriages" until the California Supreme Court intervened and nullified them.

Newsom's actions would later lead to the successful challenge of Proposition 22, a super-statute passed in 2000 by 61% of California voters, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman, and was thrown out by the Republican-controlled state Supreme Court in a narrow 4-3 decision. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08051502.html

The San Diego Union Tribune reports that County Assessor-Recorder-Clerk Greg Smith said he made the decision to allow clerks to voice any conscientious objections, so he could prepare for a flood of homosexual couples to the scenic harbor-city. Smith said he had received no objections so far.

"I don't want anybody to be embarrassed. I want everybody to be treated courteously," Smith said. "I expect most people will do their jobs as they are assigned to do. I expect this to be much to-do about nothing."

California will have the marriage licenses changed and new directives written to county clerks before June 16, when the California Supreme Court's ruling goes into effect. California's marriage license currently asks for the name of the bride and groom, but these names are being excised in favor of gender-neutral contract language.  Suggestions have been put forth for "Applicant A" and "Applicant B," a slight variation of Massachusetts' "Party A," "Party B" forms.

See Related LifeSite coverage:

San Francisco Mayor to Issue Marriage License to Homosexual Couples
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/feb/04021105.html

San Francisco Mayor Advocated Gay Agenda After Sexual Affair That Damaged a Marriage
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/feb/07020106.html

California Supreme Court Imposes Homosexual 'Marriage' on State
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08051502.html

California Supreme Court Asked to Stay "Gay Marriage" Order until November Public Ballot
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08051602.html

 Back to Top

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.