Gosh Jerry...an "outright lie"? Maybe an overstatement? But here in California we have it enshrined in our Constitution. Allow me to post it once again. Here she is...the will of the people. Don't you just love democracy?<quoted text>
Well this is an out-and-out lie.
This definition of civil marriage is a prime example of a definition that HAS CHANGED.
The definition you quoted above was added in 2008, and of course subsequently has been ruled unconstitutional by the courts, with further action possible by the US Supreme Court.
Perhaps we should go back to the previous definition of civil marriage in the California Constitution:
California Civil Code §4100 defined marriage as "a personal relation arising out of a civil contract, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary."
Under the language of the statute at the time, gender was irrelevant.
And gender remains irrelevant to civil marriage today.
There remains no rational basis for denying civil marriage due to the gender of the partners. All arguments in opposition are illogical, irrational, or based on ignorance, fear, animus, or religious superstition or myth.
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SEC. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or
recognized in California.
See for yourself: