Thursday, October 30, 2008
La Familia Es Sagrada Proteja al Matrimonio y a los Niños de California
Some videos en espanol (Link goes to Protect Marriage Official Site)
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Yes on 8 Campaign Slams New 'No' Ad with Jack O'Connell
Full Article>
To: STATE EDITORS
Contact: Chip White of ProtectMarriage.com, +1-916-446-2956
O'Connell's New Ad is only 96% a Lie
SACRAMENTO, Calif., Oct. 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The ProtectMarriage.com -- Yes on 8 campaign today criticized the "No on 8" campaign's new television ad, released yesterday, which features California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell.
The ad raises a new standard for using a small, cleverly worded kernel of truth to foster the Big Lie.
Specifically, they discussed whether schools are "required" to teach anything about marriage, and states that they are not.
By this logic, presumably, they would argue that no one in California is required to have a drivers' license, only the people who want to drive cars are.
The real fact, as stated clearly in the "Yes on 8" ads, are that, whether it is technically "required" or not, that virtually all schools in California do teach marriage now, and if gay marriage is legal, they will be REQUIRED to teach about gay marriage as well, because that will be the definition of marriage.
"O'Connell's cleverly worded denials try to trick voters [...]
To: STATE EDITORS
Contact: Chip White of ProtectMarriage.com, +1-916-446-2956
O'Connell's New Ad is only 96% a Lie
SACRAMENTO, Calif., Oct. 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The ProtectMarriage.com -- Yes on 8 campaign today criticized the "No on 8" campaign's new television ad, released yesterday, which features California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell.
The ad raises a new standard for using a small, cleverly worded kernel of truth to foster the Big Lie.
Specifically, they discussed whether schools are "required" to teach anything about marriage, and states that they are not.
By this logic, presumably, they would argue that no one in California is required to have a drivers' license, only the people who want to drive cars are.
The real fact, as stated clearly in the "Yes on 8" ads, are that, whether it is technically "required" or not, that virtually all schools in California do teach marriage now, and if gay marriage is legal, they will be REQUIRED to teach about gay marriage as well, because that will be the definition of marriage.
"O'Connell's cleverly worded denials try to trick voters [...]
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Article in LA Times
LA Times Article: Proposition 8 supporters plead for more advertising funds
(link is to original location but full article is pasted below)
(for those who want to donate or volunteer)
Outspent by the opposition, the 'Yes' campaign's e-mail appeal has netted generous donations by backers of the measure to ban same-sex marriage.
By Dan Morain
October 26, 2008
Backers of California's Proposition 8 invoked a higher authority as they ramped up their television advertising by an additional $1 million and asked for more money.
In an e-mail appeal for more cash, campaign strategist Frank Schubert says foes of the initiative on the Nov. 4 ballot to ban same-sex marriage continue to outspend them.
Schubert had warned last week that supporters would lose unless they could raise millions more in the campaign's closing days. The missive apparently is having its intended effect, given the new ad buys.
Still, high-dollar donations to both campaigns reflect the money disparity.
In a 72-hour period ending Friday, Proposition 8 opponents disclosed raising $3.6 million in donations of $1,000 or more. Supporters, primarily Mormons, Catholics and conservative Christians, raised $661,000.
Proposition 8 would ban same-sex marriage by amending the state Constitution to define marriage as between only a man and a woman.
Schubert noted that foes raised almost $4 million at a gala Tuesday at billionaire Ron Burkle's Green Acres estate that, the e-mail says, was attended by "Hollywood liberals." Schubert is seeking another $2 million to compete with the opposition, and offered this plea:
"Through the grace of God, one of our most fervent supporters has agreed to make a sacrificial gift to match, dollar for dollar, whatever you and others can donate, up to a total of $1 million. That means that every dollar you give will buy two dollars in advertising time.
"Please help us buy more advertising time now. And if you can make a sacrificial gift yourself, we ask you to prayerfully consider doing so immediately. The institution of marriage which we so dearly love depends on what we do together over the next few days."
Schubert didn't identify the big donor. But Howard Ahmanson Jr. gave another $150,000 this week to the Yes-on-8 campaign.
Ahmanson is the wealthy Orange County philanthropist who has funded numerous conservative candidates and Christian causes over the years. He now has given $1.145 million to Proposition 8 backers, making him the measure's largest individual donor.
On the opposition's side, San Franciscan James Hormel, who was the Clinton administration's ambassador to Luxembourg, gave another $100,000, pushing his total to $350,000.
David Maltz, a Cleveland philanthropist who funds numerous gay-rights and other organizations, also gave an extra $100,000, pushing his total to $1.1 million.
Morain is a Times staff writer.
(link is to original location but full article is pasted below)
(for those who want to donate or volunteer)
Outspent by the opposition, the 'Yes' campaign's e-mail appeal has netted generous donations by backers of the measure to ban same-sex marriage.
By Dan Morain
October 26, 2008
Backers of California's Proposition 8 invoked a higher authority as they ramped up their television advertising by an additional $1 million and asked for more money.
In an e-mail appeal for more cash, campaign strategist Frank Schubert says foes of the initiative on the Nov. 4 ballot to ban same-sex marriage continue to outspend them.
Schubert had warned last week that supporters would lose unless they could raise millions more in the campaign's closing days. The missive apparently is having its intended effect, given the new ad buys.
Still, high-dollar donations to both campaigns reflect the money disparity.
In a 72-hour period ending Friday, Proposition 8 opponents disclosed raising $3.6 million in donations of $1,000 or more. Supporters, primarily Mormons, Catholics and conservative Christians, raised $661,000.
Proposition 8 would ban same-sex marriage by amending the state Constitution to define marriage as between only a man and a woman.
Schubert noted that foes raised almost $4 million at a gala Tuesday at billionaire Ron Burkle's Green Acres estate that, the e-mail says, was attended by "Hollywood liberals." Schubert is seeking another $2 million to compete with the opposition, and offered this plea:
"Through the grace of God, one of our most fervent supporters has agreed to make a sacrificial gift to match, dollar for dollar, whatever you and others can donate, up to a total of $1 million. That means that every dollar you give will buy two dollars in advertising time.
"Please help us buy more advertising time now. And if you can make a sacrificial gift yourself, we ask you to prayerfully consider doing so immediately. The institution of marriage which we so dearly love depends on what we do together over the next few days."
Schubert didn't identify the big donor. But Howard Ahmanson Jr. gave another $150,000 this week to the Yes-on-8 campaign.
Ahmanson is the wealthy Orange County philanthropist who has funded numerous conservative candidates and Christian causes over the years. He now has given $1.145 million to Proposition 8 backers, making him the measure's largest individual donor.
On the opposition's side, San Franciscan James Hormel, who was the Clinton administration's ambassador to Luxembourg, gave another $100,000, pushing his total to $350,000.
David Maltz, a Cleveland philanthropist who funds numerous gay-rights and other organizations, also gave an extra $100,000, pushing his total to $1.1 million.
Morain is a Times staff writer.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
Let San Diego City Officials Know Your Voice!
UPDATED!
WHAT: San Diego City Council meeting where a vote will be taken to try to get the city to "officially" oppose prop 8
WHEN: MONDAY Oct 27th, 2pm until ??
WHERE: 202 C Street, 12th floor, downtown San Diego
This is a PUBLIC meeting! Let's show up and BE HEARD!
Directions to City Hall
Agenda comment form
This Monday, October 27 at its 2pm meeting, the San Diego City Council will vote on a Resolution which states that the City of San Diego officially opposes Proposition 8. This implies to other Cities and States, that you, as a citizen of San Diego, do not support Proposition 8: that you oppose traditional marriage. This Resolution by the San Diego City Council will attempt to be passed without any public polling, rather, the Resolution will be based on the unilateral opinion and decision of the San Diego City Council.
What can you do?
TODAY!! Call or email the City Council members listed below and tell them that you support Proposition 8. Remind them that they are ELECTED officials, elected to represent the WILL of the people, and not make unilateral statements on behalf of its citizens without proper polling! Urge them to drop the City Resolution on Proposition 8 entirely and not make a statement at all regarding Proposition 8. Tell them that, with regards to Proposition 8, they do not speak for you!!
Please do not hesitate, your call and/or email is urgently needed, please do this now!!
We must all bond together in one loud voice to ensure this Resolution is not passed.
Mayor Jerry Sanders:
Email: JerrySanders@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6330
Fax: (619) 236-7228
District 1 / City Council President Scott Peters
E-mail: scottpeters@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6611
From North County (858) 484-3808
Fax: (619) 236-6999
Chief of Staff email: mpintar@sandiego.gov
District 2 Councilmember Kevin Faulconer
E-mail: kevinfaulconer@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6622
Fax: (619) 236-6996
Chief of Staff: johnrivera@sandiego.gov
District 3 Councilmember Toni Atkins
E-mail: toniatkins@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6633
Fax: (619) 595-1481
Chief of Staff: dzprice@sandiego.gov
District 4 Councilmember Tony Young
E-mail: anthonyyoung@sandiego.gov
Phone: (619) 236-6644
Fax: (619) 236-7273
Chief of Staff: jslack@sandiego.gov
District 5 Councilmember Brian Maienschein
E-mail: bmaienschein@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6655
From North County: (858) 673-5304
Fax: (619) 238-0915
Chief of Staff: lwitmondt@sandiego.gov
District 6 Councilmember Donna Frye
E-mail: donnafrye@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6616
Fax: (619) 236-7329
Chief of Staff: shadley@sandiego.gov
District 7 Council President Pro Tem Jim Madaffer
E-mail: jmadaffer@sandiego.gov
Phone: (619) 236-6677
Fax: (619) 238-1360
Chief of Staff: afaucett@sandiego.gov
Consultant to Rules Committee: elowe@sandiego.gov
District 8 Councilmember Ben Hueso
E-mail: benhueso@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6688
Fax: (619) 231-7918
WHAT: San Diego City Council meeting where a vote will be taken to try to get the city to "officially" oppose prop 8
WHEN: MONDAY Oct 27th, 2pm until ??
WHERE: 202 C Street, 12th floor, downtown San Diego
This is a PUBLIC meeting! Let's show up and BE HEARD!
Directions to City Hall
Agenda comment form
This Monday, October 27 at its 2pm meeting, the San Diego City Council will vote on a Resolution which states that the City of San Diego officially opposes Proposition 8. This implies to other Cities and States, that you, as a citizen of San Diego, do not support Proposition 8: that you oppose traditional marriage. This Resolution by the San Diego City Council will attempt to be passed without any public polling, rather, the Resolution will be based on the unilateral opinion and decision of the San Diego City Council.
What can you do?
TODAY!! Call or email the City Council members listed below and tell them that you support Proposition 8. Remind them that they are ELECTED officials, elected to represent the WILL of the people, and not make unilateral statements on behalf of its citizens without proper polling! Urge them to drop the City Resolution on Proposition 8 entirely and not make a statement at all regarding Proposition 8. Tell them that, with regards to Proposition 8, they do not speak for you!!
Please do not hesitate, your call and/or email is urgently needed, please do this now!!
We must all bond together in one loud voice to ensure this Resolution is not passed.
Mayor Jerry Sanders:
Email: JerrySanders@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6330
Fax: (619) 236-7228
District 1 / City Council President Scott Peters
E-mail: scottpeters@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6611
From North County (858) 484-3808
Fax: (619) 236-6999
Chief of Staff email: mpintar@sandiego.gov
District 2 Councilmember Kevin Faulconer
E-mail: kevinfaulconer@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6622
Fax: (619) 236-6996
Chief of Staff: johnrivera@sandiego.gov
District 3 Councilmember Toni Atkins
E-mail: toniatkins@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6633
Fax: (619) 595-1481
Chief of Staff: dzprice@sandiego.gov
District 4 Councilmember Tony Young
E-mail: anthonyyoung@sandiego.gov
Phone: (619) 236-6644
Fax: (619) 236-7273
Chief of Staff: jslack@sandiego.gov
District 5 Councilmember Brian Maienschein
E-mail: bmaienschein@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6655
From North County: (858) 673-5304
Fax: (619) 238-0915
Chief of Staff: lwitmondt@sandiego.gov
District 6 Councilmember Donna Frye
E-mail: donnafrye@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6616
Fax: (619) 236-7329
Chief of Staff: shadley@sandiego.gov
District 7 Council President Pro Tem Jim Madaffer
E-mail: jmadaffer@sandiego.gov
Phone: (619) 236-6677
Fax: (619) 238-1360
Chief of Staff: afaucett@sandiego.gov
Consultant to Rules Committee: elowe@sandiego.gov
District 8 Councilmember Ben Hueso
E-mail: benhueso@sandiego.gov
Telephone: (619) 236-6688
Fax: (619) 231-7918
What same-sex "marriage" has done to Massachusetts
It's far worse than most people realize
October 20, 2008
by Brian Camenker
Anyone who thinks that same-sex "marriage" is a benign eccentricity which won't affect the average person should consider what it has done in Massachusetts. It's become a hammer to force the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality on everyone. And this train is moving fast. What has happened so far is only the beginning.
On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court announced its Goodridge opinion, ruling that it was unconstitutional not to allow same-sex "marriage." Six months later, homosexual marriages began to be performed.
The public schools
The homosexual "marriage" onslaught in public schools across the state started soon after the November 2003, court decision.
* At my own children's high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex "marriage" in early December, 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be "marrying" their same-sex partners and starting families either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of society – was handed out to the students.
* Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September, 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, MA, told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the floodgates for teaching homosexuality. "In my mind, I know that, `OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, `Give me a break. It's legal now,'" she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.
* By the following year it was in elementary school curricula. Kindergartners were given picture books telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, like their own parents. In 2005, when David Parker of Lexington, MA – a parent of a kindergartner – strongly insisted on being notified when teachers were discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and put in jail overnight.
* Second graders at the same school were read a book, "King and King", about two men who have a romance and marry each other, with a picture of them kissing. When parents Rob and Robin Wirthlin complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify them or allow them to opt-out their child.
* In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt-out their children! Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship!
* Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is "legal", a federal judge has ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!
* In 2006, in the elementary school where my daughter went to Kindergarten, the parents of a third-grader were forced to take their child out of school because a man undergoing a sex-change operation and cross-dressing was being brought into class to teach the children that there are now "different kinds of families." School officials told the mother that her complaints to the principal were considered "inappropriate behavior."
* Libraries have also radically changed. School libraries across the state, from elementary school to high school, now have shelves of books to normalize homosexual behavior and the lifestyle in the minds of kids, some of them quite explicit and even pornographic. Parents complaints are ignored or met with hostility.
* Over the past year, homosexual groups have been using taxpayer money to distribute a large, slick hardcover book celebrating homosexual marriage titled "Courting Equality" into every school library in the state.
* It's become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for teachers to prominently display photos of their same-sex "spouses" and occasionally bring them to school functions. Both high schools in my own town now have principals who are "married" to their same-sex partners, whom they bring to school and introduce to the students.
* "Gay days" in schools are considered necessary to fight "intolerance" which may exist against same-sex relationships. Hundreds of high schools and even middle schools across the state now hold "gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender appreciation days". They "celebrate" homosexual marriage and move forward to other behaviors such as cross-dressing and transsexuality. In my own town, a school committee member recently announced that combating "homophobia" is now a top priority.
* Once homosexuality has been normalized, all boundaries will come down. The schools are already moving on to normalizing transgenderism (including cross-dressing and sex changes). The state-funded Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth includes leaders who are transsexuals.
Public health
* The Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is "married" to another man. In 2007 he told a crowd of kids at a state-sponsored youth event that it's "wonderful being gay" and he wants to make sure there's enough HIV testing available for all of them.
* Since homosexual marriage became "legal" the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000.
* Citing "the right to marry" as one of the "important challenges" in a place where "it's a great time to be gay", the Massachusetts Department of Public Health helped produce The Little Black Book, Queer in the 21st Century, a hideous work of obscene pornography which was given to kids at Brookline High School on April 30, 2005. Among other things, it gives "tips" to boys on how to perform oral sex on other males, masturbate other males, and how to "safely" have someone urinate on you for sexual pleasure. It also included a directory of bars in Boston where young men meet for anonymous sex.
Domestic violence
* Given the extreme dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more money every year to deal with skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence. This year $350,000 was budgeted, up $100,000 from last year.
Business
* All insurance in Massachusetts must now recognize same-sex "married" couples in their coverage. This includes auto insurance, health insurance, life insurance, etc.
* Businesses must recognize same-sex "married" couples in all their benefits, activities, etc., regarding both employees and customers.
* The wedding industry is required serve the homosexual community if requested. Wedding photographers, halls, caterers, etc., must do same-sex marriages or be arrested for discrimination.
* Businesses are often "tested" for tolerance by homosexual activists. Groups of homosexual activists often go into restaurants or bars and publicly kiss and fondle each other to test whether the establishment demonstrates sufficient "equality" now that homosexual marriage is "legal". In fact, more and more overt displays of homosexual affection are seen in public places across the state to reinforce "marriage equality".
Legal profession
* The Massachusetts Bar Exam now tests lawyers on their knowledge of same-sex "marriage" issues. In 2007, a Boston man, Stephen Dunne, failed the Massachusetts bar exam because he refused to answer the questions in it about homosexual marriage.
* Issues regarding homosexual "families" are now firmly entrenched in the Massachusetts legal system. In many firms, lawyers in Massachusetts practicing family law must now attend seminars on homosexual "marriage". There are also now several homosexual judges overseeing the Massachusetts family courts.
Adoption of children to homosexual "married" couples
* Homosexual "married" couples can now demand to be able to adopt children the same as normal couples. Catholic Charities decided to abandon handling adoptions rather submit to regulations requiring them to allow homosexuals to adopt the children in their care.
* In 2006 the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) honored two men "married" to each other as their "Parents of the Year". The men already adopted a baby through DSS (against the wishes of the baby's birth parents). According to news reports, the day after that adoption was final DSS approached the men about adopting a second child. Homosexuals now appear to be put in line for adopting children ahead of heterosexual parents by state agencies in Massachusetts.
Government mandates
* In 2004, the Governor ordered Justices of the Peace to perform homosexual marriages when requested or be fired. At least one Justice of the Peace decided to resign.
* Also marriage licenses in Massachusetts now have "Party A and Party B" instead of "husband and wife."
* Since homosexual relationships are now officially "normal", the Legislature now gives enormous tax money to homosexual activist groups. In particular, the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth is made up of the most radical and militant homosexual groups which target children in the schools. This year they are getting $700,000 of taxpayer money to go into the public schools.
* In 2008 Massachusetts changed the state Medicare laws to include homosexual "married" couples in the coverage.
The public square
* Since gay "marriage", annual gay pride parades have become more prominent. There are more politicians and corporations participating, and even police organizations take part. And the envelope gets pushed further and further. There is now a profane "Dyke March" through downtown Boston, and recently a "transgender" parade in Northampton that included bare-chested women who have had their breasts surgically removed so they could "become" men.
The media
* Boston media, particularly the Boston Globe newspaper, regularly does feature stories and news stories portraying homosexual "married" couples where regular married couples would normally be used. It's "equal", they insist, so there must be no difference in the coverage. Also, the newspaper advice columns now deal with homosexual "marriage" issues, and how to properly accept it.
* A growing number of news reporters and TV anchors are openly "married" homosexuals who march in the "gay pride" parades.
Is gay marriage actually legal in Massachusetts?
Like everywhere else in America, the imposition of same-sex marriage on the people of Massachusetts was a combination of radical, arrogant judges and pitifully cowardly politicians.
The Goodridge ruling resulted in a complete cave-in by politicians of both parties on this issue. Same-sex "marriage" is still illegal in Massachusetts. On November 18, 2003 the court merely ruled that it was unconstitutional not to allow it, and gave the Legislature six months to "take such action as it may deem appropriate." Note that the Massachusetts Constitution strongly denies courts the power to make or change laws, or from ordering the other branches to take any action. The constitution effectively bans "judicial review" – a court changing or nullifying a law. Thus, the court did not order anything to happen; it simply rendered an opinion on that specific case. And the Legislature did nothing. The marriage statutes were never changed. Technically, same-sex marriages are still illegal in Massachusetts.
Nevertheless, we are having to live with it. And furthermore, this abdication of their proper constitutional roles by the Legislature and Governor has caused a domino effect as "copycat" rulings have been issued in California and Connecticut, with other states fearful it will happen there.
In conclusion
Homosexual "marriage" hangs over society like a hammer with the force of law. And it's only just begun.
It's pretty clear that the homosexual movement's obsession with marriage is not because large numbers of them actually want to marry each other. Research shows that homosexual relationships are fundamentally dysfunctional on many levels, and "marriage" as we know it isn't something they can achieve, or even desire. (In fact, over the last three months, the Sunday Boston Globe's marriage section hasn't had any photos of homosexual marriages. In the beginning it was full of them.) This is about putting the legal stamp of approval on homosexuality and imposing it with force throughout the various social and political institutions of a society that would never accept it otherwise. To the rest of America: You've been forewarned.
October 20, 2008
by Brian Camenker
Anyone who thinks that same-sex "marriage" is a benign eccentricity which won't affect the average person should consider what it has done in Massachusetts. It's become a hammer to force the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality on everyone. And this train is moving fast. What has happened so far is only the beginning.
On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court announced its Goodridge opinion, ruling that it was unconstitutional not to allow same-sex "marriage." Six months later, homosexual marriages began to be performed.
The public schools
The homosexual "marriage" onslaught in public schools across the state started soon after the November 2003, court decision.
* At my own children's high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex "marriage" in early December, 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be "marrying" their same-sex partners and starting families either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of society – was handed out to the students.
* Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September, 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, MA, told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the floodgates for teaching homosexuality. "In my mind, I know that, `OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, `Give me a break. It's legal now,'" she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.
* By the following year it was in elementary school curricula. Kindergartners were given picture books telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, like their own parents. In 2005, when David Parker of Lexington, MA – a parent of a kindergartner – strongly insisted on being notified when teachers were discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and put in jail overnight.
* Second graders at the same school were read a book, "King and King", about two men who have a romance and marry each other, with a picture of them kissing. When parents Rob and Robin Wirthlin complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify them or allow them to opt-out their child.
* In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt-out their children! Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship!
* Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is "legal", a federal judge has ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!
* In 2006, in the elementary school where my daughter went to Kindergarten, the parents of a third-grader were forced to take their child out of school because a man undergoing a sex-change operation and cross-dressing was being brought into class to teach the children that there are now "different kinds of families." School officials told the mother that her complaints to the principal were considered "inappropriate behavior."
* Libraries have also radically changed. School libraries across the state, from elementary school to high school, now have shelves of books to normalize homosexual behavior and the lifestyle in the minds of kids, some of them quite explicit and even pornographic. Parents complaints are ignored or met with hostility.
* Over the past year, homosexual groups have been using taxpayer money to distribute a large, slick hardcover book celebrating homosexual marriage titled "Courting Equality" into every school library in the state.
* It's become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for teachers to prominently display photos of their same-sex "spouses" and occasionally bring them to school functions. Both high schools in my own town now have principals who are "married" to their same-sex partners, whom they bring to school and introduce to the students.
* "Gay days" in schools are considered necessary to fight "intolerance" which may exist against same-sex relationships. Hundreds of high schools and even middle schools across the state now hold "gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender appreciation days". They "celebrate" homosexual marriage and move forward to other behaviors such as cross-dressing and transsexuality. In my own town, a school committee member recently announced that combating "homophobia" is now a top priority.
* Once homosexuality has been normalized, all boundaries will come down. The schools are already moving on to normalizing transgenderism (including cross-dressing and sex changes). The state-funded Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth includes leaders who are transsexuals.
Public health
* The Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is "married" to another man. In 2007 he told a crowd of kids at a state-sponsored youth event that it's "wonderful being gay" and he wants to make sure there's enough HIV testing available for all of them.
* Since homosexual marriage became "legal" the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000.
* Citing "the right to marry" as one of the "important challenges" in a place where "it's a great time to be gay", the Massachusetts Department of Public Health helped produce The Little Black Book, Queer in the 21st Century, a hideous work of obscene pornography which was given to kids at Brookline High School on April 30, 2005. Among other things, it gives "tips" to boys on how to perform oral sex on other males, masturbate other males, and how to "safely" have someone urinate on you for sexual pleasure. It also included a directory of bars in Boston where young men meet for anonymous sex.
Domestic violence
* Given the extreme dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more money every year to deal with skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence. This year $350,000 was budgeted, up $100,000 from last year.
Business
* All insurance in Massachusetts must now recognize same-sex "married" couples in their coverage. This includes auto insurance, health insurance, life insurance, etc.
* Businesses must recognize same-sex "married" couples in all their benefits, activities, etc., regarding both employees and customers.
* The wedding industry is required serve the homosexual community if requested. Wedding photographers, halls, caterers, etc., must do same-sex marriages or be arrested for discrimination.
* Businesses are often "tested" for tolerance by homosexual activists. Groups of homosexual activists often go into restaurants or bars and publicly kiss and fondle each other to test whether the establishment demonstrates sufficient "equality" now that homosexual marriage is "legal". In fact, more and more overt displays of homosexual affection are seen in public places across the state to reinforce "marriage equality".
Legal profession
* The Massachusetts Bar Exam now tests lawyers on their knowledge of same-sex "marriage" issues. In 2007, a Boston man, Stephen Dunne, failed the Massachusetts bar exam because he refused to answer the questions in it about homosexual marriage.
* Issues regarding homosexual "families" are now firmly entrenched in the Massachusetts legal system. In many firms, lawyers in Massachusetts practicing family law must now attend seminars on homosexual "marriage". There are also now several homosexual judges overseeing the Massachusetts family courts.
Adoption of children to homosexual "married" couples
* Homosexual "married" couples can now demand to be able to adopt children the same as normal couples. Catholic Charities decided to abandon handling adoptions rather submit to regulations requiring them to allow homosexuals to adopt the children in their care.
* In 2006 the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) honored two men "married" to each other as their "Parents of the Year". The men already adopted a baby through DSS (against the wishes of the baby's birth parents). According to news reports, the day after that adoption was final DSS approached the men about adopting a second child. Homosexuals now appear to be put in line for adopting children ahead of heterosexual parents by state agencies in Massachusetts.
Government mandates
* In 2004, the Governor ordered Justices of the Peace to perform homosexual marriages when requested or be fired. At least one Justice of the Peace decided to resign.
* Also marriage licenses in Massachusetts now have "Party A and Party B" instead of "husband and wife."
* Since homosexual relationships are now officially "normal", the Legislature now gives enormous tax money to homosexual activist groups. In particular, the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth is made up of the most radical and militant homosexual groups which target children in the schools. This year they are getting $700,000 of taxpayer money to go into the public schools.
* In 2008 Massachusetts changed the state Medicare laws to include homosexual "married" couples in the coverage.
The public square
* Since gay "marriage", annual gay pride parades have become more prominent. There are more politicians and corporations participating, and even police organizations take part. And the envelope gets pushed further and further. There is now a profane "Dyke March" through downtown Boston, and recently a "transgender" parade in Northampton that included bare-chested women who have had their breasts surgically removed so they could "become" men.
The media
* Boston media, particularly the Boston Globe newspaper, regularly does feature stories and news stories portraying homosexual "married" couples where regular married couples would normally be used. It's "equal", they insist, so there must be no difference in the coverage. Also, the newspaper advice columns now deal with homosexual "marriage" issues, and how to properly accept it.
* A growing number of news reporters and TV anchors are openly "married" homosexuals who march in the "gay pride" parades.
Is gay marriage actually legal in Massachusetts?
Like everywhere else in America, the imposition of same-sex marriage on the people of Massachusetts was a combination of radical, arrogant judges and pitifully cowardly politicians.
The Goodridge ruling resulted in a complete cave-in by politicians of both parties on this issue. Same-sex "marriage" is still illegal in Massachusetts. On November 18, 2003 the court merely ruled that it was unconstitutional not to allow it, and gave the Legislature six months to "take such action as it may deem appropriate." Note that the Massachusetts Constitution strongly denies courts the power to make or change laws, or from ordering the other branches to take any action. The constitution effectively bans "judicial review" – a court changing or nullifying a law. Thus, the court did not order anything to happen; it simply rendered an opinion on that specific case. And the Legislature did nothing. The marriage statutes were never changed. Technically, same-sex marriages are still illegal in Massachusetts.
Nevertheless, we are having to live with it. And furthermore, this abdication of their proper constitutional roles by the Legislature and Governor has caused a domino effect as "copycat" rulings have been issued in California and Connecticut, with other states fearful it will happen there.
In conclusion
Homosexual "marriage" hangs over society like a hammer with the force of law. And it's only just begun.
It's pretty clear that the homosexual movement's obsession with marriage is not because large numbers of them actually want to marry each other. Research shows that homosexual relationships are fundamentally dysfunctional on many levels, and "marriage" as we know it isn't something they can achieve, or even desire. (In fact, over the last three months, the Sunday Boston Globe's marriage section hasn't had any photos of homosexual marriages. In the beginning it was full of them.) This is about putting the legal stamp of approval on homosexuality and imposing it with force throughout the various social and political institutions of a society that would never accept it otherwise. To the rest of America: You've been forewarned.
Rebuttal to Thurston's "Commentary" on 6 Consequences...if Proposition 8 Fails
"When an issue is as important as marriage, the discourse can easily become emotional, then irrational, and sometimes it goes downhill from there. There is much information being circulated against Proposition 8 that is misleading, erroneous, and downright deceptive. One example is ...[more at Keeping Marriage True]"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
