Why was this not on the news?
I want to know why this news conference wasn’t shown on the news. It looks to me like the liberal media is trying to stifle free speech. I can’t believe this next video was not show on the national news. It is totally appalling.
Please write the networks to let them know as journalists it is their duty to present all the facts in an unbiased manner.
Marriage has never been a Fundamental right for ANYONE, homosexual or heterosexual
I came across this post. I don’t think I could have said it any better. Please enjoy!
One of the most prevalent arguments I have seen in recent weeks against Proposition 8 is that the amendment is wrong because it would treat people separately but equal. Those who are against Proposition 8 argue that being able to “marry who you love” is a fundamental right, and the “separate but equal” treatment violates that right.
This argument against Proposition 8 not only mischaracterizes the issue, but does so in a way that is calculated to put supporters of traditional marriage on the defensive. The right to marry has never been an unfettered right. Even today, we maintain important restrictions on the right of individuals to marry. (For example, not permitting marriage between close relatives or prohibiting someone from being married to two people at the same time).
There is nothing in the text of either the California or United States Constitution that explicitly provides that same sex marriage is a “fundamental right.” Nor is there anything in our nation’s history or traditions that establish same sex marriage as a “fundamental right.” Only three states, Massachusetts, California, and Connecticut, even allow same sex marriage and all three states only recently “discovered” this right after their Supreme Courts ruled in closely divided decisions (4-3 votes in all three states) that such a right existed.
While, as a society, we may want to add individual rights, those rights are not necessarily “fundamental rights” and, in a democracy, weighty decisions such as creating new rights should be decided by a vote of the people—not judges.
The “separate but equal” argument is also misleading because Proposition 8 does not treat people separately. If Proposition 8 passes, no one will be prevented from marrying. Individuals in California will be free to marry so long as they marry someone of the opposite gender and so long as the marriage does not violate other long-standing regulations governing marriage in California.
Those who persist in arguing for the “fundamental right” to “marry who you love” face an additional hurdle. If everyone has the right to marry who you love, why wouldn’t three women who love each other be allowed to marry? What about polygamous marriage? Shouldn’t consenting adults in these types of relationships have the right to marry?
If same sex marriage is permissible because an individual has the right to marry whomever he or she loves, the only intellectually honest reason for prohibiting these types of extreme alternative marriages is that they are not socially acceptable. But once you accept that society has a right to limit some marriage relationships , you recognize society’s right to also define marriage in a way that benefits society as a whole. That is exactly what Proposition 8 does. That is why I’m voting for it.
SOURCE: http://prop8discussion.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/separate-but-equal/
For more info, you might also be interested in this video from the What is Prop 8? website:
Tolerance?
I don’t know about you but this doesn’t look very tolerant to me.
Some very good videos in support of Prop.8
These videos do an excellent job of explaining Prop.8:
I’m not Catholic but I found this video very inspiring:
Here are a couple of videos I thought were funny, but they do a great job of illistrating their point:
I just like this video:
Is Marriage Really A Civil Right?
This is what I don’t understand, how is marriage a civil right?
To get married you need a license. To get any kind of license you have to meet certain requirements. The two main requirements for have always been: You have to be the appropriate age for the state in which you plan to get married, and you need a husband(man) and a wife(woman). Those who are in a committed same gender relationship, do not meet those requirements. That is why they are not allowed to get married. It is not because they are being discriminated against or their civil rights are being violated. They simply do not meet the requirements. If they did, there would not have been such a mad rush to change the actual marriage license and all the paperwork pertaining to it, when the California supreme court over turned Prop. 22.
Would you argue that a blind person’s civil rights are being violated because they born that way and can not obtain a drivers license? Absolutely not. There are certain requirements for obtaining a drivers license, and I think we all know that being able to see is by far the most important one. But if you apply the same logic to this issue, that gay rights activist apply to marriage, then a blind person MUST be allowed to receive a driver license, because it isn’t his fault that he was born that way. It doesn’t matter how it will affect anyone else, his civil rights are being violated.
These definition was obtained from dictionary.com:
civil rights
pl.n. The rights belonging to an individual by virtue of citizenship, especially the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and by subsequent acts of Congress, including civil liberties, due process, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from discrimination.
Please look at this objectively at this issue. Proposition 8 does not discriminate or take away the rights of anyone. Under California Family code 297.5 is states Very clearly that registered domestic partners have all the same rights and privileges as spouses. Check it out for yourself:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group=00001-01000&file=297-297.5
If we start making accomidations to special interest groups under the guise of civil rights, where do we draw the line?
There is a difference
This whole Prop. 8 thing is really bugging me. I’m tired of people thinking that I am prejudice just because I think marriage should only be between a man and a woman. I think if people would take all the emotions out of it, and look at things logically. They would have to agree that gay marriage just doesn’t make any sense. Here is my attempt at an emotionless, non judgmental argument. There apples and oranges. They are both fruits. They both come from trees. For my argument’s sake, they are nutritionally equal. Sometimes they are bitter. Sometimes they are sweet. They have some common uses. You can make juice with them, you can cook with them, and you can eat them raw. If your shopping for fruit, your decision is based on preference. Now let’s suppose oranges feel they are being treated unequally because throughout history apples have been more prevalent (ex. an apple a day keeps the doctor away; if you want to impress your teacher bring them an apple). Now oranges want to be called apples too. Any logical person would have to agree that oranges couldn’t start calling themselves apples. They are oranges and not apples. It would be confusing. If a recipe called for an apple and you used an orange instead, because it was called an apple, it just wouldn’t be the same. So here’s how I translate my little analogy the apples are marriage and the oranges are domestic partnership. They are both committed relationships. In the eyes of state law they are both equal. Some marriages and domestic partnerships are good (the people involved love and care for each other). Some marriages and domestic partnerships are bad (they are abusive or unfaithful). They do have some things in common, two people love each other, and want to share their lives. The biggest most important issue is that domestic partners can not have children, that are biologically half of each partner. Men and women are designed in such a way that you need one of each to create a family. Sometimes things don’t go as smoothly or work together accordingly. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a plan and that we shouldn’t strive for the ideal.
My experience on constitution day at the local college
I had a very interesting experience today. Today was constitution day at Moorpark College and they had a speaker. I didn’t go so I don’t remember who he is. I think he was some sort of adviser for Richard Nixon. Anyway from 9:00- 12:30 they had tables set up in front of the performing arts center. Their was a libertarian table, an Obama table, a young republicans table, the environmentalists club table, a Prob. 4, a No on Prop. 8 table, and a Yes on Prop. 8 table.
A couple of friends and I sat at the Yes on Prop. 8 table to inform people about the upcoming measure. I’m sorry to say that we have to vote to amend the California constitution to say ” That only a marriage between a man and a woman is legal and valid in the state of California.” What an awful state our society is in that we have to vote to up hold such a basic truth. I never thought that there would ever be any question about this. Reading “The Proclamation on the Family” it only strengthens my testimony of our prophets, knowing that they are truly called of God and that they do really receive revelations for us here on this earth today. What a blessing to have that revealed to us 12 years ago.
Most of the time the people we talked to were supportive of Prop.8 and 5 or 6 people signed up to have signs in there yard. There were a couple of people who just wanted to pick a fight, or trap us in our own words. For example, there were two young girls and an older lady. One of the girls was a journalism major, she was supposed to be collecting information. Instead she was trying to prove that we were wrong. She was wanting to know why we cared what other people did because it didn’t effect us or our children. So I said it actually does effect my kids. That if Prop. 8 doesn’t pass then they will have to teach kindergartners about gay marriage, and I don’t want my kids learning about that in school. The older lady said that if I didn’t want my kids learning about gay marriage in school, I must be a Christian and as a Christian I must also not want my kids to go to school with Jews or Muslims. WHAT?! Are you kidding me? So I told her that I teach my children that everyone is entitled to the own opinions and beliefs, and that they don’t have to agree with them, but they do need to respect them. They wouldn’t leave. So finally Jill said she was a journalist, and as a journalist you are supposed to be objective, and she told the girl she was not. So she stormed off and the old lady followed.
Then a little while later this punky kid came up. I asked ,”Do you have any questions?” I told him that Prop. 8 would return the power back to people because in 2000, 61% of Californians voted that in California only marriage between a man and a woman was legal and would be recognized in the state of California. Then four months ago 4 judges said that this was unconstitutional, so Prop. 8 would amend the California state constitution making it harder for that to happen again. This kid must have just left a political science class, he proceeds to tell me that we are not a true democracy, and then tries to get into a debate with me. I told him I was not there to debate. That I was there to provide information that is all, he could do with it what he wanted. He tried to get me into a debate for at least five minutes. I just kept repeating the same thing, “I’m not here to debate. I’m here to provide information. Your are not going to change my opinion. You are wasting your time.” It became my mantra to keep me from loosing it. Finally the last time I added, ” and please stop wasting my time.” Then I didn’t acknowledge him anymore. Finally he got the hint and left. There were a few other situations, but those are the ones that stick out in my memory the most.
Most of our experiences were positive. The one I remember most was : A young guy coming up to the table and he said, “is this the proposition that is against gay marriage?”. I said yes, and he let out the hugest sigh of relief. You could see the peace and relief fill his countenance. Then he said were do I sign up. In order to get into the plaza area from the rest of the campus , you needed to walk by the No on Prop. 8 area. They had three tables and a ton of people. A few times they sent people over to get our information, and one girl walked behind people we were talking to and said “No on Prop. 8”. It was very interesting to me the contrast of our set ups. We, three moms, were just sitting there with one sign and our information, minding our own business and nonjudgementally answering questions. While the opposition had three tables, a ton of people, a ton of yard signs, and they kept mingling in the crowds, and coming over to our side. Who knows what they were saying! I just hope and pray that the people we talked to could also see and feel the contrast. My prayer is that they see the truth, that they have courage and know that they are not alone if the choose to stand up for the truth. Not once did I say anything negative about homosexuals or gay marriage. I just repeated the facts. “I believe marriage should be between a man and a woman. This proposition restores things to the way they were before the four judges took it upon themselves to over turn the will of the people. It does not take away any rights or privileges already afforded to registered domestic partnerships.” 
This was another disturbing thing I saw today. I couldn’t believe my eyes. The opposition says they are standing up for equality for all. Yet they so freely desecrate our flag. Our nation’s symbol of unity and freedom. Do they not know what our flag stands for? 
Using My Voice 