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.
Reflections on the passage of Prop 8 by Jennifer Roback Morse
What does this victory mean?
The people of California want to wrest control of the legal definition of marriage from the judiciary.
The people of California are deeply troubled by the idea of small children being taught about homosexuality in the schools without their parents’ knowledge or consent.
The people of California do not want dissenters from the gay-marriage ideology to be treated as if they were racists.
The people of California want religious groups to be free to operate within their own value systems. People don’t want to unleash discrimination suits and other forms of legal harassment against religious bodies which hold that marriage is between a man and a woman.
It doesn’t mean:
Over five million Californians are bigots.
Gay couples will have their homes raided, (contra the outrageous anti-Mormon advertisement.)
Gay couples will lose their domestic partnership benefits.
Gays are second-class citizens.
Why does the victory of Proposition 8 matter?
A coalition of ordinary people pushed back against the gay lobby and its allies. Those allies include all the major newspapers, Hollywood, the judiciary, the governor, the attorney general, and academia. These allies did not hesitate to abuse their power. For instance, Attorney General Jerry Brown rewrote the title of the proposition in a way that cost us 5 to 10 percentage points in the polls.
But Proposition 8 proponents got more than it bargained for: ordinary citizens are sick of being pushed around. They aren’t going to take it any more.
The coalition of religious groups who worked for Prop 8 will not dissolve the day after tomorrow. Passing Proposition 8 required an unprecedented level of interfaith cooperation. Evangelicals, Catholics, Mormons, and Jews all worked together. I could feel mistrust melting away as we worked together to protect natural marriage. The solidarity we created will continue long after this particular election.
Interracial solidarity was strong on the marriage issue. Blacks and Hispanics voted overwhelmingly for Prop 8. Los Angeles County voted for Prop 8. That wasn’t Hollywood and Beverly Hills talking: it was the urban minority communities. They don’t seem to feel the need to be politically correct. Pro-marriage advocates of all races met and worked together, and will continue to do so.
The public is much more aware of the promotion of homosexuality in the schools. People will be monitoring the content of school curriculum in a way they had not done before. And since they now have the experience of being successful cooperating with others and promoting their views in the public square, they are much less likely to back down. If the gay lobby could have contained itself and lain low for a little longer, they might have been able to slip a lot of things past the public. Those days are over.
The public was disgusted by the grotesque bullying tactics of the No on 8 coalition. Although the anti-Mormon ad was produced by an “independent” group, no one from the official campaign condemned the ad. The media gave very little attention to the vandalism against Yes, but publicized the few isolated incidents of vandalism against No. But this media spin can’t work when the incidents are happening in your own neighborhood, under your own noses, to people you know. The No campaign should have distanced itself from people who were keying cars, egging houses and spray painting graffiti on churches. But it didn’t.
In short, the success of Proposition 8 is the success of a broad-based coalition of citizen activists who cared passionately about the meaning and future of marriage. The Protect Marriage campaign had literally a hundred thousand volunteers and over 70,000 donors. What Proposition 13 meant to the cause of citizen-generated tax reduction measures, Proposition 8 may mean to the cause of defending and defining marriage.
The judges who created same-sex marriage awakened a sleeping giant. And we won’t be going back to sleep any time soon.
— Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D. is the founder and president of the Ruth Institute.
Her Website is great, packed full of information and facts. I hightly recommend checking this out.
Food for thought
I have a question. When did sex refer to sexual preference?
The civil rights act prohibits discrimination on basis of “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”
It is my understanding that sex is in reference to gender- male or female, and as far as I know there are only two genders.
If homosexuals are given the right to marry under the guise of discrimination, aren’t we then creating special sub-genders? Thus discriminating against everyone else who does not fit into that special sub-gender.
Please stop the insanity. If you look at this logically, the only logical thing to do is Vote YES on prop.8
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:
Who’s Really Lying?
A little while ago, I saw the new No on Prop 8 commericial with Jack O’ Connell the California superintendent. In this ad, he said that the “Yes on Prop 8″ campaign is lying. ” Proposition 8 will not effect children in schools. That teaching about marriage in schools is voluntary.” He is telling the truth, but only a small portion of the truth. Here is the rest of the truth from the California Department Of Education’s website :
HIV/AIDS prevention education and sex education are nearly universally
taught in California today. Ninety-four percent of surveyed schools
provide HIV/AIDS prevention education, as is mandated by law, and an
even larger number, 96%, provide sex education despite having no
requirement to do so.
(Sex Education in California Public Schools (PB Consulting and ACLU Northern California, 2003).)
http://www.aclunc.org/docs/reproductive_rights/sex_ed_in_ca_public_schools_2003_full_report.pdf?ht
Education Code (EC) 51933 specifies that school districts are not required
to provide comprehensive sexual health education, but if they choose to
do so, they shall comply with all of the requirements listed below.
… Instruction shall encourage communication between students and their
families and shall teach respect for marriage and committed
relationships.
(http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/he/se/sexeducation.asp).
the CDE’s Checklist for Comprehensive Sexual Health Education, described in the
document as a tool for school districts “to help guide your review of material for compliance with Education
Code (EC) 51933,” also states that to be in legal compliance the school must ensure that “Instruction and
materials teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.”
Then Thursday evening I came across this lovely little gem:
WorldNetDaily
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Some parents are shocked to find their children are learning to be homosexual allies and will participate in “Coming Out Day” at a public elementary school tomorrow – and they claim the school failed to notify parents.
One mother of a kindergartner who attends Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science, a K-8 charter school in Hayward, Calif., said she asked her 5-year-old daughter what she was learning at school.
The little girl replied, “We’re learning to be allies.”
The mother also said a Gay Straight Alliance club regularly meets in the kindergarten classroom during lunch.
According to a Pacific Justice Institute report, Faith Ringgold opted not to inform the parents of its pro-homosexual activities beforehand. The school is celebrating “Gay and Lesbian History Month” and is in the process of observing “Ally Week,” a pro-“gay” occasion usually geared toward high school students.
The school is scheduled to host discussions about families and has posted fliers on school grounds portraying only homosexuals. According to the report, a “TransAction Gender-Bender Read-Aloud” will take place Nov. 20. Students will listen to traditional stories with “gay” or transgender twists, to include “Jane and the Beanstalk.”
Some parents only recently noticed posters promoting the school’s “Coming Out Day” tomorrow – celebrated 12 days after the national “Coming Out Day” usually observed on Oct. 11. When WND contacted the school to confirm the event, a female representative replied, “Yes, it is scheduled on our calendar.”
When asked if the school made any efforts to inform parents, she refused to answer and said Hayward Unified School District would have to respond to additional questions. However, the district did not answer its phones or e-mails, and a voicemail recording would not take messages. “Coming Out Day” is not listed on the district’s online school calendar.
(Story continues below)
Some of the parents contacted Pacific Justice Institute for representation when they learned the school was pushing pro-“gay” events for young children without warning.
Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, said opponents of California’s proposed ban on same-sex marriage, or Proposition 8, often say the measure would not have an effect on public schools – but this is one of many recent developments that prove otherwise.
“Do we need any further proof that gay activists will target children as early as possible?” he asked. “Opponents of traditional marriage keep telling us that Prop. 8 has nothing to do with education. In reality, they want to push the gay lifestyle on kindergartners, and we can only imagine how much worse it will be if Prop. 8 is defeated. This is not a scenario most Californians want replayed in their elementary schools.”
Concerned individuals may contact Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science by calling (510) 889-7399. The Hayward Unified School District can be reached at (510)784-2600 or by filling out the district contact form.
Please don’t be misled by the “no on prop 8” movement they are misrepresenting the facts. Please don’t be fooled check the facts yourself. Vote Yes on Prop. 8 to restore things to the way they were before Gavin Newsom decided to take the law into his own hands, and four activist decided to overturn what 61% of Californians voted on in 2000. YES on Proposition 8. Show them that we will not be taken advantage of.
Tolerance?
I don’t know about you but this doesn’t look very tolerant to me.
What civil rights really mean
I found a great blog post that explains very plainly why same sex marriage is not a civil rights issue. This post also uses facts to back it up. Kudos to you Cudweeds!
Here is an excerpt to get you interested:
……..This movement would like us to believe their agenda is a Civil Rights issue. Many buy into this because they are uneducated about what Civil Rights really mean.
According to the Supreme Court, three things must happen to qualify a class for Civil Rights protection.
1) History of discrimination evidenced by a lack of ability to obtain economic mean income, adequate education or cultural opportunity. Evidence shows us this is clearly not the case. What do the facts say?
a. Homosexuals have an average annual income of $55,430, over $20,000 more than the general populous.
b. More than 3 times as many homosexuals as average Americans are college graduates.c. 3 times as many homosexuals as average Americans hold professional or managerial positions
2) Protected classes should exhibit obvious, immutable or distinguishing characteristics, like race, color, gender, that define them as a discrete group. This is obviously not the case with homosexuals.
3) Protected classes should clearly demonstrate political powerlessness. All we have to do is watch the news or view the current debates in the halls of Congress to find this criteria is not met either.
It is clear that none of this criterion is met! So what then do we find to be the truth if we peer beyond this smoke screen? The issue is really one of the attempt to legitimize and normalizing their BEHAVIOR through public law! ……..
Here’s the link:
http://cudweeds.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/lesbian-gay-day-of-silence-are-you-kidding-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:
Using My Voice 