The latter example is Attorney General Jerry Brown's decision to change Prop 8's original ballot title from "Amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." to "Changes California Constitution to eliminate right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over the next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact to state and local governments."
Talk about bias and blatant efforts to mislead voters.
For one there is no right to homosexual marriage. Marriage is rooted in the created order, in our nature. As the founder's said in the Declaration of Independence, our Creator endows us with rights not the judiciary or legislature.
And the assertion that the fiscal impact of not allowing homosexual marriage means losing tens of millions of dollars is totally unsubstantiated. The opposite is more likely true if people are less likely to visit California, because they sanction homosexual marriage, or people and businesses start leaving the state because of the presence of homosexual marriage.
If the Prop 8 title description isn't reversed then pro-marriage amendment advocates will just have to redouble their efforts. Much more is at stake than simply allowing a few homosexual couples to say they are married. The moral and social welfare of California is at stake.