SACRAMENTO, March 2, 2004 ( – California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, in an interview with TV personality Jay Leno on Monday, said he would be “fine” with the prospect of homosexual “marriage” for the state if the people voted to approve it. He also said that he had “no use” for a constitutional amendment that would seek to bar homosexual “marriage”.  Schwarzenegger at one time told a reporter that “When it comes to sex, I don’t care what your (thing) is,” claiming that the discrimination against homosexuals was similar to the discrimination felt by bodybuilders.  Despite his comments Monday, the Governor plans to respect the law as it stands. San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom has defied California’s Proposition 22 by granting marriage licenses to over 3,000 homosexual couples since February 12. In response, Schwarzenegger said “Californians spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage when they overwhelmingly approved California’s law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. I support that law, and I encourage San Francisco officials to obey that law,” he said. But when asked if he would have a problem if voters decide to change the definition of marriage in California, he told Leno “No, I don’t have a problem.”  Executive director of the Campaign for California Families and one of the leading opponents to the gay marriage effort, Randy Thomasson, told the San Francisco Chronicle that “millions of Californians are depending on Arnold Schwarzenegger to keep his campaign promise to protect marriage for a man and a woman. Four-and-a-half million Californians reaffirmed the unique and important institution of marriage for a man and a woman in 2000, and they haven’t changed their minds about what’s best for the children,” he said.  Thomasson credited Schwarzenegger’s comments on The Tonight Show to an “unfortunate slip of the tongue. Arnold was focusing on Proposition 57 [to sell $15 billion in deficit bonds] more than focusing on his words on marriage, and his was an unfortunate slip of the tongue,” he said.  Thomasson made clear that “State law must reflect natural law, and in this case, people can depend on the law upholding the natural design of man-woman marriage.”  Read related LifeSiteNews.comc coverage at:   Read local coverage at:


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.