By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 13, 2008 ( – In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered her explanation for why Californians voted to pass the true marriage ballot measure, Proposition 8: they just didn’t understand what they were voting for.

“Unfortunately, I think people thought they were making a statement about what their view of same-sex marriage was,” said Pelosi. “I don’t know if it was clear that this meant that we are amending the Constitution to diminish freedom in our state.” 

However Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary shot back, labeling Pelosi’s remarks as “ludicrous.”

“If anything,” said Mohler, “the wording of the proposition, controversial in itself, makes the Speaker’s point even more ludicrous.”

The final wording that appeared on the Nov. 4 ballot said that the proposition, “Eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry.  Initiative constitutional amendment.”  This wording had been the subject of a lawsuit by Prop. 8 supporters, after the attorney general changed the wording at the last minute.

Prop. 8 supporters had insisted that the new wording prejudiced voters against the proposition. Originally the wording had indicated that Prop. 8 would define marriage as between a man and a woman, saying nothing of “eliminating” any rights. Despite the last minute change, however, 52% of California voters still chose to support true marriage. 

“Is she seriously suggesting that the voters of her home state cannot be taken seriously when they defend marriage?  It appears so,” responded Mohler. 

Pelosi also voiced her support for San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom, whose push for same-sex “marriage” legalization “whether you like it or not” received much publicity during the campaign over Prop. 8.

“He acted upon his beliefs,” said Pelosi, who also said she believes Newsom’s attitude did not alienate voters from the homosexual agenda.


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.