HERE'S WHAT MOST PROP 8 SUPPORTERS DID TO CAMPAIGN:
-Made phone calls
-Held signs at street corners
-Knocked on doors (As in knocked on doors, waited for someone to respond, and then left after talking to them. Not barging into houses & ripping up marriage licenses.)
-Blogging
PROP 8 OPPOSERS DID MANY OF THE ABOVE ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING CAMPAIGNING EFFORTS:
-Punching out elderly people or a man innocently standing on the sidewalk with Yes on Prop 8 signs
-Trespassing private property to steal signs
-Throwing rocks
-Created a hypocritical "No on 8" ad that singled out & attacked a church group, (coincidentally, my own), that supported the proposition in a hypocritical effort to ostracize & divide supporters of Prop 8
-Defaced & keyed cars that had Yes on 8 bumper stickers
-Bully, patronize, mock, & other such immature & foul behavior
WHAT IF PROP 8 DIDN'T PASS? HOW WOULD I FEEL?
-I would be disappointed; but I would move on.
-I would understand why others voted "no" even though I disagree.
-I would prepare myself for an increasing amount of people wrongly accusing me of being a homophobe, a hater, discriminatory, a bigot, and receiving all sorts of foul language & treatment.
SO HOW DID THE OPPOSERS OF PROP 8 REACT? HERE ARE SOME DIRECT QUOTES:
-"I've got a big list of names of mormons and catholics that were big supporters of Prop 8. … As far as mormons and catholics … I warn them to watch their backs."
-"I hope they all rot in hell, those servants of a lying, corrupt devil! BAN RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM"
-"I have never considered being a violent radical extremist for our equal rights. But now I think maybe I should consider becoming one."
-"Can someone in CA please go burn down the Mormon temples there, PLEASE. I mean seriously. DO IT."
-"I'm going to give them something to be f---ing scared of. … I'm a radical who is now on a mission to make them all pay for what they've done."
TOLERANCE: a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, RELIGION, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry
BIGOTRY: stubborn and complete intolerance of ANY creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own
I know that opposers would react to this by saying that we are the intolerant ones because we legislated our beliefs. If Prop 8 did not pass, the same could be said that the opposing side legislated THEIR beliefs. A majority of Prop 8 supporters are religious, however, the word "marriage" being defined as solely between a man and a woman is not only a Judeo-Christian ideal. It has been around with MANY cultures & religions since the beginning of time. To those who compare this with the Civil Rights movement, here is a FACT: a whopping 70% of African-Americans voted YES on Prop 8.
If you want to call me intolerant, you go right on ahead. Just make sure that you get your facts straight as to WHAT exactly it is of which I am intolerant.
Here is what I tolerate: people believing how they choose, loving, spending their lives with, and making personal commitments to whomever they choose.
Here is what I am intolerant of: being wrongfully accused of hatred, bigotry, and homophobia. Being threatened.
In all of my time writing my thoughts about Prop 8 I have been opinionated. I have defended & taught what I believed. I have also been NOTHING but understanding, respectful, patient and tolerant. I am now past walking on eggshells & padding my words because I don't want anyone to be offended. If you want to play hardball & throw me a fast one, I will still keep my dignity & grace. But when people have the NERVE to hypocritcally threaten burning buildings that are most sacred to myself and 13 million other people in the world, I'm ready to step up to the plate with a bat.
More of my own thoughts to follow . . .
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Prop 8 Passed!
The fight is not over, in fact, it is just beginning! But thank you and a big congratulations to everyone who worked so hard to see that this proposition was passed.
Monday, November 3, 2008
CLAIMS BY NO ON PROP 8 GROW MORE DESPERATE AS POLLING NUMBERS SINK
SACRAMENTO— Polls continue to slide for No on Prop 8 Equity for All, as reports leak out that the campaign’s management structure is in utter disarray. A series of orchestrated, factually false press statements have been issued alleging the sky will fall if Proposition 8 passes on Tuesday.
“Clearly, this is nothing more than a floundering campaign grasping at straws to save its effort,” said Chip White, Protectmarriage.com – Yes on 8 campaign spokesman. “It’s quite sad because those who are hurt most are voters. We invited the No on Prop 8 campaign to debate Proposition 8 this weekend in a live, televised format, but it declined our invitation. If the No campaign is so confident in its arguments, why refuse the debate?”
Claims reporting Proposition 8 has nothing to do with schools, to Proposition 8 will cause a high-tech brain drain, are being passed off as fact. These claims are nothing but noisy rhetoric and last minute campaign stunts aimed at confusing voters instead of educating them.
Claim One: Proposition 8 has nothing to do with schools.
Truth: A few weeks ago children in a 1st grade class attended their teacher’s gay wedding in San Francisco on a school-organized field trip. The principal called it a “teachable moment.” That sure sounds like same-sex marriage instruction in schools.
This week kindergartners at Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, CA, were asked to sign pledge cards saying they would not use anti-LGBT language. Parents who felt their children were far too young for such a discussion, most at an average age of 5 who are just learning the basics of reading and writing, were not permitted to opt-out, but instead had to keep their children home from school.
As we have clearly demonstrated, California Education Code Section 51933 states schools “shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.” According to the California Department of Education website, 96% of schools teach this curriculum. And under the Supreme Court’s ruling, current California law means teaching about marriage includes instruction on gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is already part of the curriculum. Perhaps because of these simple facts, Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell refuses to debate..
Claim Two: Proposition 8 would have no effect on a church’s tax-exempt status.
Truth: The No on 8 campaign used a classic lawyer trick, rolled out a group of lawyers yesterday to falsely state our concern about the impact of same sex marriage on religious freedoms, and then saying our concerns are false. For the record, the Yes on 8 campaign has never said that churches, acting as churches, would be forced to perform gay marriages. However, it is clear that where churches interact with the public square, in providing social services or even conducting business, their tax exempt status is at risk.
In one well publicized case, Catholic Charities in Boston ran adoption facilities that managed 700 cases since 1987, most involving children with special needs. Catholic Charities placed such children into parents in traditional marriages, according to their faith. After gay marriage was legalized in Massachusetts, the state told Catholic Charities it had to place children with gay marriage couples as well. Faced with such a decision, Catholic Charities reluctantly decided to stop providing adoption services.
Another religious non-profit, Ocean Grove Campground in New Jersey, lost a portion of its tax-exempt status on a rental pavilion because it refused to rent the facility to a lesbian couple for a civil commitment ceremony.
Claim Three: Proposition 8 discriminates against gays and lesbians.
Truth: Under California’s current domestic partnership law, (Family Code Section 297), gay couples are awarded the same legal rights and privileges as married couples. California has the strongest civil union/domestic partnership law in the nation, and Proposition 8 does not take away any of those rights.
Claim Four: If Proposition 8 passes there will be a brain drain to gay-friendly Massachusetts.
Truth: Gay marriage has been legal in Massachusetts for five years and California still remains the epicenter of technology, biomed and other science-based industries. If a “gay brain-drain” was going to happen, shouldn’t it have started 5 years ago?
“The claims being disseminated by the No on 8 campaign are preposterous,” said White, “and have no basis in fact. We realize the No on 8 has a new team that has to justify their hiring, but cheap campaign stunts and false claims do not serve the public.”
“Clearly, this is nothing more than a floundering campaign grasping at straws to save its effort,” said Chip White, Protectmarriage.com – Yes on 8 campaign spokesman. “It’s quite sad because those who are hurt most are voters. We invited the No on Prop 8 campaign to debate Proposition 8 this weekend in a live, televised format, but it declined our invitation. If the No campaign is so confident in its arguments, why refuse the debate?”
Claims reporting Proposition 8 has nothing to do with schools, to Proposition 8 will cause a high-tech brain drain, are being passed off as fact. These claims are nothing but noisy rhetoric and last minute campaign stunts aimed at confusing voters instead of educating them.
Claim One: Proposition 8 has nothing to do with schools.
Truth: A few weeks ago children in a 1st grade class attended their teacher’s gay wedding in San Francisco on a school-organized field trip. The principal called it a “teachable moment.” That sure sounds like same-sex marriage instruction in schools.
This week kindergartners at Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, CA, were asked to sign pledge cards saying they would not use anti-LGBT language. Parents who felt their children were far too young for such a discussion, most at an average age of 5 who are just learning the basics of reading and writing, were not permitted to opt-out, but instead had to keep their children home from school.
As we have clearly demonstrated, California Education Code Section 51933 states schools “shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.” According to the California Department of Education website, 96% of schools teach this curriculum. And under the Supreme Court’s ruling, current California law means teaching about marriage includes instruction on gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is already part of the curriculum. Perhaps because of these simple facts, Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell refuses to debate..
Claim Two: Proposition 8 would have no effect on a church’s tax-exempt status.
Truth: The No on 8 campaign used a classic lawyer trick, rolled out a group of lawyers yesterday to falsely state our concern about the impact of same sex marriage on religious freedoms, and then saying our concerns are false. For the record, the Yes on 8 campaign has never said that churches, acting as churches, would be forced to perform gay marriages. However, it is clear that where churches interact with the public square, in providing social services or even conducting business, their tax exempt status is at risk.
In one well publicized case, Catholic Charities in Boston ran adoption facilities that managed 700 cases since 1987, most involving children with special needs. Catholic Charities placed such children into parents in traditional marriages, according to their faith. After gay marriage was legalized in Massachusetts, the state told Catholic Charities it had to place children with gay marriage couples as well. Faced with such a decision, Catholic Charities reluctantly decided to stop providing adoption services.
Another religious non-profit, Ocean Grove Campground in New Jersey, lost a portion of its tax-exempt status on a rental pavilion because it refused to rent the facility to a lesbian couple for a civil commitment ceremony.
Claim Three: Proposition 8 discriminates against gays and lesbians.
Truth: Under California’s current domestic partnership law, (Family Code Section 297), gay couples are awarded the same legal rights and privileges as married couples. California has the strongest civil union/domestic partnership law in the nation, and Proposition 8 does not take away any of those rights.
Claim Four: If Proposition 8 passes there will be a brain drain to gay-friendly Massachusetts.
Truth: Gay marriage has been legal in Massachusetts for five years and California still remains the epicenter of technology, biomed and other science-based industries. If a “gay brain-drain” was going to happen, shouldn’t it have started 5 years ago?
“The claims being disseminated by the No on 8 campaign are preposterous,” said White, “and have no basis in fact. We realize the No on 8 has a new team that has to justify their hiring, but cheap campaign stunts and false claims do not serve the public.”
Friday, October 24, 2008
Education Codes
There are many who claimed that there is nothing in the CA education code about teaching marriage, and here is my response.
"I'm sure most of you, myself included, appreciate real, factual sources rather than, "I heard it from Auntie Mae's neighbor's cousin..." or better yet, sources that aren't for or against the issue. (It would be easier for me if there were more of those resources on McCain & Obama...but that's another topic.) Here is the exact text from the education codes that are being referred to with the OFFICIAL source so you can see them yourself.
http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lr/cl/
Section 51933 (a) 'School districts may provide comprehensive sexual health education, consisting of age-appropriate instruction, in any kindergarten to grade 12, inclusive, using instructors trained in the appropriate courses.'
So sexual health education is taught to all; appropriate to their age group. Here is the code DEFINING health education; (in addition to maintaining reproductive health, preventing diseases & unwanted pregnancy):
51930 (a) 2.) 'To encourage a pupil to develop healthy attitudes concerning adolescent growth and development, body image, gender roles, sexual orientation, dating, marriage, and family.'
So, sexual orientation, gender roles, marriage, and family are included in the state code on health education for ALL ages."
"I'm sure most of you, myself included, appreciate real, factual sources rather than, "I heard it from Auntie Mae's neighbor's cousin..." or better yet, sources that aren't for or against the issue. (It would be easier for me if there were more of those resources on McCain & Obama...but that's another topic.) Here is the exact text from the education codes that are being referred to with the OFFICIAL source so you can see them yourself.
http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lr/cl/
Section 51933 (a) 'School districts may provide comprehensive sexual health education, consisting of age-appropriate instruction, in any kindergarten to grade 12, inclusive, using instructors trained in the appropriate courses.'
So sexual health education is taught to all; appropriate to their age group. Here is the code DEFINING health education; (in addition to maintaining reproductive health, preventing diseases & unwanted pregnancy):
51930 (a) 2.) 'To encourage a pupil to develop healthy attitudes concerning adolescent growth and development, body image, gender roles, sexual orientation, dating, marriage, and family.'
So, sexual orientation, gender roles, marriage, and family are included in the state code on health education for ALL ages."
Sunday Night Broadcast Notes: Part 1
I copied & pasted this from a Facebook note . . . also my response to others who oppose Prop 8 about there being no consequences for others. I know that most that oppose Prop 8 say, "Live and let live...their marriage does not make yours any less important...just get over it...etc." This sounds like a nice ideal, and I wish it were true, but unfortunately it isn't. Supporters of Prop 8 have been criticized for hypothetical arguments, as Jake mentioned above. I went to a broadcast that opened my eyes to the fact that lawsuits & such are not hypothetical, they are already happening! The following are not just stories I heard from someone, these people came to the meeting I watched to tell their story in person:
*Elaine Huguenin - New Mexico - declined photographing a lesbian wedding because it is against her beliefs. They seemed understanding. She then received a phone call saying she had an option of apologizing & paying a fee or getting an attorney. She paid almost $7,000 in attorney fees.
*Four firefighters - San Diego - ordered to walk in the gay rights parade. They witnessed nudity, anti-religious comments & many sexually harassing comments directed at them specifically. When they filed a harassment lawsuit, they had 8 votes instead of 9, so they did not prevail.
*Scott Hoffman - Ocean Grove, NJ - Director of Camp Association - beautiful grounds where marriages are often performed. He was asked by a lesbian couple to perform their marriage, but sat them down & explained that he would not do so. They seemed disappointed, but understanding. He then found that he was being investigated on charges of discrimination. His tax-exempt status was removed without a thorough investigation.
Many say that gay people should have the right to marry, but how can we justify that when it infringes on the rights of others? Do we favor the rights of gays because it is a more forward rather than traditional way of thinking?
*Elaine Huguenin - New Mexico - declined photographing a lesbian wedding because it is against her beliefs. They seemed understanding. She then received a phone call saying she had an option of apologizing & paying a fee or getting an attorney. She paid almost $7,000 in attorney fees.
*Four firefighters - San Diego - ordered to walk in the gay rights parade. They witnessed nudity, anti-religious comments & many sexually harassing comments directed at them specifically. When they filed a harassment lawsuit, they had 8 votes instead of 9, so they did not prevail.
*Scott Hoffman - Ocean Grove, NJ - Director of Camp Association - beautiful grounds where marriages are often performed. He was asked by a lesbian couple to perform their marriage, but sat them down & explained that he would not do so. They seemed disappointed, but understanding. He then found that he was being investigated on charges of discrimination. His tax-exempt status was removed without a thorough investigation.
Many say that gay people should have the right to marry, but how can we justify that when it infringes on the rights of others? Do we favor the rights of gays because it is a more forward rather than traditional way of thinking?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Prop 8 Thoughts - Why am I supporting this so strongly? Part I
I'm going to get pretty vulnerable and honest here. Supporting this proposition as openly as I have has really stretched me. I am quite a sensitive person and I have opened myself up for all kinds of ridicule and false accusations. I understand that this is the risk I take in blogging, Facebook notes, etc. I am finally working on a post for my blog that it is just a bunch of bullet points of why I support Prop 8 and some of my response to opposers. I wanted to put out this post before I do so.
I know full well I will not convince most to vote yes on Prop 8; especially not with my limited writing ability. My main purpose in writing about it as much as I have is to simply promote UNDERSTANDING. There is a difference between agreeing and understanding. I have communicated with many people that are against Prop 8. Some have made presumptuous or hurtful remarks to respond to my opinions. Again, I understand that this is the risk that I take in opening myself up online, but it does not make it any less hurtful. There have been some, interestingly enough mostly those that actually ARE homosexual, that have been very respectful and understanding as we have shared our views with each other. One gay guy in particular that I have been communicating with online I wish I could just reach through the computer and hug because he has been SO sweet about genuinely asking why I feel the way I do and LISTENING to my answers as I listen to his view. Is he going to vote yes on Prop 8? No! But he now has a more clear view of why some ARE voting yes & I am more understanding of his perspective. Opinions should be formed from carefully weighing different perspectives and then changed ONLY if there is new information that causes he or she that holds the opinion to re-evaluate; not because they are bullied into changing their opinion.
I have been doing a lot of research & reading from both sides about this topic. I have felt very inadequate to explain myself, mainly because I feel like others wouldn't take the time to listen. I feel like I've been keeping more of an "open mind" than many may think. True, I have not changed my position, but I after reading what some opposers have had to say I find more and more that there are arguments, (only from those that articulate themselves well without getting hateful,) that I say, "Touche" to. Frankly, if I didn't have some of the beliefs that I do I probably would be voting no!
Those that know me personally know that hatred is not even in my language; I don't think I even have it in me to hate. I feel that there are many secular arguments for this proposition, but to be honest, I DO know that many of my reasons for supporting this ARE religious. I completely understand why some people are in opposition to it; particularly those that are homo-sexual. I UNDERSTAND that despite how many times we have are told that their CIVIL RIGHTS do NOT change, that they still feel like they are not being treated equally. While I understand that many will not agree with my personal convictions I hope that I can somehow make my intentions behind my support clear.
To be continued . . .
I know full well I will not convince most to vote yes on Prop 8; especially not with my limited writing ability. My main purpose in writing about it as much as I have is to simply promote UNDERSTANDING. There is a difference between agreeing and understanding. I have communicated with many people that are against Prop 8. Some have made presumptuous or hurtful remarks to respond to my opinions. Again, I understand that this is the risk that I take in opening myself up online, but it does not make it any less hurtful. There have been some, interestingly enough mostly those that actually ARE homosexual, that have been very respectful and understanding as we have shared our views with each other. One gay guy in particular that I have been communicating with online I wish I could just reach through the computer and hug because he has been SO sweet about genuinely asking why I feel the way I do and LISTENING to my answers as I listen to his view. Is he going to vote yes on Prop 8? No! But he now has a more clear view of why some ARE voting yes & I am more understanding of his perspective. Opinions should be formed from carefully weighing different perspectives and then changed ONLY if there is new information that causes he or she that holds the opinion to re-evaluate; not because they are bullied into changing their opinion.
I have been doing a lot of research & reading from both sides about this topic. I have felt very inadequate to explain myself, mainly because I feel like others wouldn't take the time to listen. I feel like I've been keeping more of an "open mind" than many may think. True, I have not changed my position, but I after reading what some opposers have had to say I find more and more that there are arguments, (only from those that articulate themselves well without getting hateful,) that I say, "Touche" to. Frankly, if I didn't have some of the beliefs that I do I probably would be voting no!
Those that know me personally know that hatred is not even in my language; I don't think I even have it in me to hate. I feel that there are many secular arguments for this proposition, but to be honest, I DO know that many of my reasons for supporting this ARE religious. I completely understand why some people are in opposition to it; particularly those that are homo-sexual. I UNDERSTAND that despite how many times we have are told that their CIVIL RIGHTS do NOT change, that they still feel like they are not being treated equally. While I understand that many will not agree with my personal convictions I hope that I can somehow make my intentions behind my support clear.
To be continued . . .
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Same-Sex Marriage - Same as Civil Rights?
The following video features a series of African-American men express their discontent at Prop 8 being compared with the Civil Rights movement.
Harry Jackson - "There is no way to compare the Civil Rights movement and the gay rights movement. We live in a society in which no one wants to be a called a bigot . . . therefore there's been an attempt to hijack the Civil Rights movement & to make it look like this is the same kind of thing (gay marriage) that we are dealing with when the blacks were sitting in the back of the bus. But I am offended by times by that comparison because I had no choice but to be black."
Dwight McKissic - "Homosexuality is a choice and skin color is not a choice and therefore there is no comparison of the two. . . I've met former homo-sexuals but I've never met a former black person."
Wellington Boone - "A person can change their mind about what sexual preference they have out of a conviction and all of a sudden they're heterosexual & they like the opposite sex. Well, I can't change my mind about my race. That's an issue of creation. I'm going to always be black."
Harry Jackson - "There is no way to compare the Civil Rights movement and the gay rights movement. We live in a society in which no one wants to be a called a bigot . . . therefore there's been an attempt to hijack the Civil Rights movement & to make it look like this is the same kind of thing (gay marriage) that we are dealing with when the blacks were sitting in the back of the bus. But I am offended by times by that comparison because I had no choice but to be black."
Dwight McKissic - "Homosexuality is a choice and skin color is not a choice and therefore there is no comparison of the two. . . I've met former homo-sexuals but I've never met a former black person."
Wellington Boone - "A person can change their mind about what sexual preference they have out of a conviction and all of a sudden they're heterosexual & they like the opposite sex. Well, I can't change my mind about my race. That's an issue of creation. I'm going to always be black."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
