Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Secretary of State Debra Bowen announced Tuesday that the proponent of a new initiative that would eliminate the law allowing married couples to divorce can start collecting petition signatures for his measure.

The proponent for the measure, John Marcotte, must collect signatures from 694,354 registered voters, the number equal to eight percent of the total votes cast for governor in the 2006 gubernatorial election, in order to qualify it for the ballot. The proponent has 150 days to circulate petitions for the measure, or until Dec. 9.

The measure would amend the state Constitution to eliminate the law allowing married couples to divorce, although Marcotte’s initiative would preserve the ability of married couples to seek an annulment. He contends that the initiative could save the state hundreds of millions of dollars annually for support of the court system due to the elimination of divorce proceedings.

Bowen’s office said the initiative proponent can be reached at info@rescuemarriage.org. No phone number was provided.

Join the Conversation

14 Comments

  1. This will never fly legally. It also won’t get enough support by the voters even if it qualifies to get on the ballot. The state can’t be involved in the creating of marriages but then ban the ending of marriages. The proponent is apparently a religious fanatic, since he proposes to allow an annulment (a procedure by a church that pretends the marriage never occurred) but not a divorce. That was the philosophy of the Catholic church eons ago. Banning divorce or pretending that it doesn’t exist will not keep married people together when the marriage has effectively ended. If the state is going to get out of the business of handling divorces, then it would have to also get out of the business of handling marriage. The latter will never happen, and neither will the former.

  2. This is actually quite the opposite of being driven by religious fanaticism. It’s ultimate source is actually the gay community. They’re pissed over prop 8 and they’ll do anything to teach us a lesson. And so, they’ll try to take away our freedoms as they feel they’ve had their liberties taken. One of the biggest arguments against gay marriage is that it’s bad for the kids, which is absolutely true when it comes to two dads, not so much for two moms, because women are the natural caretakers of children. Anyway, so the gays are now gonna throw that all back in our face by saying “divorce is bad for kids, so you can’t get a divorce.” Check out John Marcotte’s interview on cockeyed. Type in keywords “John marcotte,” and it will be the first link. You will see that he obviously doesnt believe in this petition. It’s an act of spite against the average Californian who voted for prop 8. He constantly talks about forcing us to stay in a loveless marriage and a number of other phrases that make it patently obvious that he believes not in this cause, but has an ulterior motive. He also explains that it is indeed related to prop 8, and if you have any critical thinking capability, and ability to read between lines, you’ll see that John Marcotte is a gay activist furious and ready for vengeance on the average Californian who dared take away the right for two dudes to marry and raise Nancy boys

  3. I agree with the proposal and would sign it if it comes my way. Divorce and women in the workforce with children at home are two of the larger negative impacts to our society.

  5. Those “Packers” will do anything to try and justify their sick, immoral, and deviant lifestyle. They should be exterminated.

  6. Five (5) comments in and already the derogatory comments begin? Unbelievable!! I personally am against Gay Marriage because of my religious beliefs and the sanctity of marriage and family. I do not, however, feel that it’s okay to spew hatred. And with that, I also do not believe that this proponent will get off the ground to be put on the ballot. Even if it does, it won’t pass.

    If nothing else, those of us who believe that marriage is a special union between a man and a woman should take more time when entering into marriage, invest more time in the marriage and our spouse. Let’s see this as a wake-up call, people, not another opportunity to expose homophobic feelings.

  8. I love the motivation behind this. Pass an initiative that prohibits gays from marrying under the guise that it destroys what a marriage is “supposed” to represent – well, then by all means we should focus on eliminating things that actually destroy marriage. I’ll support it.

Leave a comment