(09-07) 18:16 PDT SACRAMENTO, (AP) --
For Assemblyman Simon Salinas — a moderate, middle-ground hugging Democrat — deciding how to vote on the gay marriage bill was a stark proposition.
"On the one hand, the people have voted for Prop. 22, they've said that marriage is between a man and a woman," Salinas, who is eyeing a run for higher office, said Wednesday. "On the other, I've always been a strong supporter of civil rights. Sometimes you just have to make unpopular decision. I just figured it was time."
Why do I get the feeling that someobody's pulling my leg, here?
Umberg, D-Anaheim, is running for Senate in Orange County and said he came to his decision after being turned off by the overblown rhetoric on both sides.
A Catholic, Umberg said he felt pressure from his church and was urged by Orange County Auxiliary Bishop Jaime Soto to oppose the bill.
Good for Bishop Soto!
"He said that the majority of my constituents do not support gay marriage, and he hoped that I would not succumb to the more extreme elements who were supporting the bill," Umberg said.
Uh...okay, Excellency, but did you tell him that it was also against Catholic teaching? What does the "majority of constituents" have to do with it?
(Although to be fair, the AP story is quoting only Umberg...not Bishop Soto.)
Ah, but here we have the real influence...
In the end, it was his 22-year-old daughter, a senior at Stanford, who made the most persuasive argument.
"She told me to think of what it meant in terms of history," he said. "It was a personal decision."
Of course! Whenever one is confronted between right and wrong, one must think of one's decision "in terms of history!"
Where in (you should forgive the term) heaven's name did I get the notion that one should think of salvation???
Give that 22-year-old Stanford student a Gold Star!
