Original sentence: "  This change restored the definition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, and eliminated homosexual couples' supposed "right" to marry." Religionists supported the amendment in order to defend the sanctitiy of marriage and the family unit, and to preserve the morals of the constitution.Opponents argued that "the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society," that the California constitution "should guarantee the same freedom and rights to everyone" and that the proposition "mandates one set of rules for gay and lesbian couples and another set for everyone else.homosexual couples and government entities filed numerous lawsuits with the California Supreme Court challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered homosexual marriages
Edited sentence: "  This change restored the definition of marriage to opposite-sex couples, and eliminated homosexual couples' "right" to marry, thereby overriding portions of the ruling of In re Marriage Cases by "carving out an exception to the preexisting scope of the privacy and due process clauses" of the state constitution." Opponents argued that "the freedom to marry is fundamental to our society," that the California constitution "should guarantee the same freedom and rights to everyone" and that the proposition "mandates one set of rules for gay and lesbian couples and another set for everyone else.Same-sex couples and government entities filed numerous lawsuits with the California Supreme Court challenging the proposition's validity and effect on previously administered same-sex marriages.The proposition did not affect the existing domestic partnerships registry