Success! Defenders Holding the Line against Same-Sex “Marriage”—Activists Discouraged By Week’s Events

marriagesupporter10x10_apparel

News from the Trenches Good as Citizens Rally Against Nationwide Assault on Marriage:

The gay activists’ stated “6 by 12″ strategy has hit major roadblocks this week as citizens rallied nationwide to protect marriage.  In state after state, efforts to marginalize marriage lost steam and in some states, the issue seems to have reached critical mass.  Thank you to the People!

Vermont: Same-sex “Marriage” Legislation (S.115) faces Veto:

Governor Jim Douglas (R) has said he would veto any ssm bills that come to his desk.  Opposition to the anti-marriage legislation has been stiff and proponents are no longer sure they have the votes to override the promised veto.  Thank You Jim!

New Hampshire: Same-sex “Marriage” Legislation (HB 436) faces Veto:

In New Hampshire, Democrat leaders were shocked by the degree and intensity of public outcry.  Their slam dunk has turned into a hard-fought battle such that the Democratic governor of the state, John Lynch, has promised to veto the bill, and along with Vermont’s governor is urging legislators to get back to the people’s business.

Maine: Same-sex “Marriage” Legislation Coming Up:

In Maine, a bill to legalize gay marriage has nearly 60 co-sponsors in the Legislature. Gov. John Baldacci, who opposes gay marriage, says he hasn’t taken a position on the measure.

Hawaii: Civil Union Law (HB 444) Stalled Indefinitely:

The bill that threatened to legalize civil unions in Hawaii is stuck in the Senate Committee and appears to be dead after committee members voted this week against sending it to the Senate floor for a vote.  After weeks of protests and outcry from the citizens of Hawaii in support of traditional marriage, the votes in the legislature dwindled and supporters of the bill say there is not enough momentum for it to pass. Read the story here.

Iowa: Waiting for the State Supreme Court:

Iowans are anxiously awaiting the decision of their State Supreme Court on the marriage issue.  Stay tuned on this one.  The decision could come any day.

California: Opposition Taking Aim at Prop 8:

As Californians wait for the official decision of the State Supreme Court on the constitutionality of proposition 8,  two proposed amendments have been filed to try to overturn Prop 8.  One proposes to actually abolish marriage itself. Meanwhile TWO California polls show increasing support for proposition 8 and traditional marriage.  Gay activists have vilified, persecuted, and threatened marriage supporters, and the newest polls are reflecting the public’s response:

Pestered Prop 8 Donors File Suit
Washington Times
March 23, 2009

“Anybody who’s in California knows that it’s very widespread,” said Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, one of the biggest contributors to Proposition 8 and a joint plaintiff in the lawsuit. “Every donor has a story. I talked to a $100 donor the other day who had a note in his mailbox that said, ‘I know where you live and you’re going to pay.’

“These are just hardworking people who believe marriage is a union of a man and a woman and who never expected to be threatened in their homes,” Mr. Brown said. Read More >>

Marriage is a unique bond between a husband and wife. No politician or judge should try to interfere in that union, and no intimidation tactics will sway us.  Our children, grandchildren and families depend on the stability of Marriage.  This is the fight of our generation.

The outlook is looking up this week thanks to the voices of thousands who called their reps, phoned, blogged, wrote letters and rallied in their states!  Thank you all!  The outpouring has been tremendous.  There are still many battles coming up, including the fight to protect the DOMA, a national law supporting families that Obama has said he will try to repeal.

I read recently on a popular opposition blog that they just can’t understand where we got all the support so quickly……

Where Did Everybody Go?
Pam’s House Blend
March 21, 2009

We’re holding our third Action Fair tomorrow, the first in Central Jersey. The turnout for the first two was respectable. Having at least 50 participants at the second gathering, this early in the game, I considered a “success”. Yet after receiving updates on Maggie Gallagher’s efforts from the National Organization for Marriage headquartered in Princeton, it appears that the opposition, once again, is more organized and has recently motivated their supporters to call their legislators every day.
Read More >>

We’re out there and we’re making a difference!  Keep up the good fight! Don’t forget to support the groups who are out there fighting the good fight in the states under siege.  Pro-Family groups will be running ads in the hardest hit states this next week to support marriage and continue the momentum.  Every little bit helps! They can’t do it without us!

—Beetle Blogger

Vermont: Citizens can vote on the Lottery, but not on marriage | S. 115

s. 115, vermont, gay marriage

Senate Bill 115: “Marriage” = legally recognized union of two people.

Email the VT Governor: ask him to veto S. 115.

Find your representatives here: ask them to vote “No”

Senate email list & Representative email list

Friday, the Vermont Senate Judiciary Committee voted 5-0 to pass S. 115 onto the Senate floor.

The committee was made up of 4 democrats and 1 republican. Although the lone Republican, Kevin Mullin, at one point, proposed an amendment to the bill that asked for a statewide referendum— he abandoned his constituents and voted in support of the bill that literally crosses out the meaning of gender in marriage.

The bill is expected to pass both the House and the Senate, making Vermont the first state to force marriage redefinition on its citizens through the legislature.

So even though the state of Vermont allowed a lottery referendum, they won’t let the citizens decide (or even discuss?*) how marriage will be defined.

Perhaps the Republican Governor will veto, but he refuses to tell anyone his plans.

Baptist News quotes Steve Cable, president of Vermont Renewal and spokesperson for the Vermont Marriage Advisory Council:

I think [Vermont legislative leaders] realize that with California, Arizona and Florida this last election, and with secular social science [supporting traditional marriage] … they had better do it now because they really don’t have any arguments for gay marriage since we already have civil unions. Civil unions provide — according to every legal expert that’s testified to this committee — every legal benefit and protection that Vermont can provide. The only thing they can get out of this is the social status of marriage."

The BP article also points out that in April 2008, the Vermont Commission on Family Recognition and Protection** issued a report that fell short of legalizing gay “marriage” because they found four areas that needed more research and review. Two of these questions included:

  • What is the best science available today on the different impacts on children raised in different family structures?
  • What has been the experience of the Massachusetts lesbian and gay couples who have married under MA law?

Even though the Senate Judiciary spent a whole week discussing the bill. There was no attempt to answer these questions raised by the democrat commission. (Read full article here)

<>Ruby Eliot

——————-

*Oh wait, they did allow citizens to speak for one hour during a public hearing.

**The commission was made up of democrat leaders in the VT legislature.

 

——-

Public Hearing 3/18 | Vermont legislature forces Neutered Marriage Bill on Citizens

vermont S. 115 civil marriage

Vermont Crosses Out Marriage

All this week, Vermont is considering a bill (S. 115: An Act Relating to Civil Marriage) which would legalize the neutering of marriage. They are planning on passing it by the end of the week.

Even though according to this article, the number of civil unions in Vermont has gone from 1,876 in 2001 to 262 in 2008.

Vermont was the first state to recognize civil unions, but Rep. Tom Little says that same-sex marriage legislation is "a better course" for Vermont because the terminology (civil union v. marriage) is unfair.

The situation in Vermont is an excellent example of how civil unions work. They are a stepping stone to marriage access—which people openly hope will grant the homosexual lifestyle more social acceptance. However, in the mean time, it literally strips marriage of its core meaning: the unification of opposite genders for the benefit of society.

As a society, we do not give benefits to citizens because of their love, sexual orientation, or for social acceptance. Opine-Editorials has an excellent discussion of this topic here and here.

If you live in Vermont:

1. Check out this Facebook group.

2. Call, email, or write the legislators at the Vermont State House and tell them "No" to gay marriage. And contact Governor Jim Douglas and encourage him to not sign a gay marriage bill if it passes and comes to his desk.
The State of Vermont Legislature
Gov. Jim Douglas (R-VT)

3. If you can, attend the the public hearing on Wednesday night. Bring written comments, or prepare talking points if you want to testify (written comments will be accepted).

If you don’t live in Vermont:

1. Email this to your friends who do live there. Post on facebook/blog/twitter. Get the word out.

–Ruby Eliot

It’s not just about love

It’s not just about love

As I watch the ads go by, one way and another, I’m forced to ask myself, do we really know what sorts of consequences will come from altering the traditional definition of marriage?

If we allow the gay lobby to define the gay marriage moral issue as a civil rights issue, those fundamental social changes that came with other civil rights will inevitably follow. Will those of us with differing opinions on marriage now be discriminated against? Are we so naïve as to think that once something is deemed a “civil right” that it will have a lesser effect on society than any other civil right?

My sister Christina, recently stood up as a private citizen in support of traditional marriage and was immediately targeted by activists in the gay community.  She got hate mail at her house, that for weeks has continued.  Who would do that?  It’s unfathomable to me, but that’s not the worst of it.  They looked up her name and her husband’s name online and found her photography business information.  Her business was inundated with requests to perform her photography services at gay weddings in direct opposition to her beliefs, with the threat of discrimination lawsuits if she refused. This new “civil right” protection trumps her right to religion and free speech in the law.

Personally, I don’t see Proposition 8 taking anything away from civil unions or partner laws. I see Proposition 8 as separate from the gay issue. It’s more about legal protection for those of us who would rather have private matters be private and who wish to preserve our own free speech and freedom of religion rights. To see the issue as just an issue of “love” ignores the legal behemoth that attends it.

www.iprotectmarriage.com

Teacher’s Association Backlash

Oppose the CTA!  Oppose Same Sex Marriage in Our Schools!

Write!  Donate!  Vote Yes on 8!

TEACHERS—New information from a fellow blogger, check it out:  If you are a teacher and don’t want your CTA monies going to political campaigns, download form directly here:  Click here for opt-out-form

By teachers filling out this form:

  1. No school funding is effected
  2. Monies donated by teachers cannot be used in political campaigns. (Even if only 100 teachers fill out this form, that is at least $20,000- $30,000 taken out of their political funds!)
  3. Teachers do not lose benefits and protections CTA can provide.

Once you get the form, forward the form to other CA teachers you know, send CTA a message that will really effect them!

PARENTS: Many parents of public school children are going to try to counter CTA’s meddlesome donation on Tuesday, October 21, 2008, by DONATING $35, $50 OR $100 TO Protect Marriage here: https://www.icontribute.us/protectmarriage/initiative/main .   Make sure to put “CTA” in the referral box!

EVERYONE: CTA President David Sanchez donated over 1 million dollars of our teacher’s money to the No on 8 campaign.  These people fought to take away parent’s right to be notified of gay marriage indoctrination in their schools.  Get the facts!  Write and let them know your opposition!

David A. Sanchez, President of the CTA

David A. Sanchez, President of the CTA

Contact David A. Sanchez

California Teachers Association
P.O. Box 921
1705 Murchison Drive
Burlingame, CA 94011-0921
Phone: (650) 552-5305
E-mail: dsanchez@cta.org

The Activist’s Agenda

policecar_jumped

The Homosexual Agenda

Author: Alan Sears, Craig Osten

Q. Craig, with the recent Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas, and an expected decision from the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts that could create gay “marriage” on American shores, the whole idea of same-sex marriage has come front-and-center in American life. But isn’t same-sex “marriage” just one part of the homosexual agenda?

A. Yes it is. The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior.

It is an agenda that they basically set in the late 1980s, in a book called “After the Ball,” where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior — in a decade-long time frame.

Q. Now, wait a minute. We hear all the time from gay activists that “there is no such thing” as a gay agenda. They snicker at the very idea.

A. But there is an agenda. They admit it privately, but they will not say that publicly. In their private publications, homosexual activists make it very clear that there is an agenda. The six-point agenda that they laid out in 1989 was explicit:

1. “Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible.” That was aimed at making people so tired of the issue they would want to give them anything they want to make them shut up.

2. “Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers.” That’s why they exploited things like the tragic murder of Matthew Shepard. It was a tragic murder, yet they have used that and spun that to demonize people like Dr. James Dobson and other Christian leaders who have taken a biblical stand on homosexual behavior — people who have love and compassion for those trapped in that behavior.

3. “Give homosexual protectors a just cause.” That was designed to tap into and exploit the almost innate sense of fairness that Americans have; to the sympathy that we have — especially liberals have — for those who seem to be disenfranchised.

4. “Make gays look good.” That’s what they’ve done through media campaigns, through television programs, like “Will and Grace” and others, where homosexuals are portrayed as the most normal, stable people in America.

5. “Make the victimizers look bad.” They portray people of faith — people who have legitimate and biblical reasons to oppose homosexual behavior — as homophobes and bigots. They also try to “muddy the moral waters” by getting liberal churches, many of which have thrown out a great deal of the Bible, to say that homosexual behavior is just fine from a theological perspective.

6. “Get funds from corporate America.” In fact, they have. They have gotten corporate America to sign on to their agenda, and it is very interesting how they have done that. It’s based on fudging the truth — and outright lies.

By the way, the authors of “After the Ball” admit that the use of lies is perfectly fine in their struggle. Their main thing is to get people to believe them. That is all that is important.

What’s interesting is that gay activists go to corporations and say, “We are an aggrieved class; we are discriminated against.” Then, on the other hand, they go to corporate America and say, “Look how much money we have. We make double what a traditional family makes. We are a market that you want to advertise to and cater to.”

Corporate America signs on — whether for domestic partner benefits, or whatever — because they don’t want to alienate that market.

Q. You mentioned lies. Isn’t one of the lies that homosexuals really want marriage?

A. That’s one of the biggest lies. Actually, what they have said at conferences — including one international conference in London in 1999 — is that they really don’t want marriage, they want the destruction of marriage. Basically, once they get marriage, they want to redefine it — they call the concept “monogamy without fidelity.” In other words, marriage would mean that you could be with a person but say, “I can go ahead and have sex with anybody else I want, but my spouse and I live together.”

One homosexual activist said, “We can now dethrone the (traditional) family based on blood relationships, in favor of the families that we choose.”

This article can be found in entirety here.

Political Slactivism

A word about online petitions…now, I have to admit that I actually signed this one before I looked into it, so count me among the penitent, but if you want to see the blisters on my feet acquired since then, I’ve got the goods to prove my sincerity.

A while back I got this petition in the email, “please sign!  forward to all your friends!”  ok, so I go to the site at Focus Petitions:

The Petition

As a California resident, I am signing this Citizen Petition opposing Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E) open advocacy of homosexual marriage and opposition of Prop. 8. As a utility that is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission and is commissioned to serve all Californians within its jurisdiction, PG&E should not take sides in such hotly contested cultural and political debates….

Now I agree with that wording 110%, a public company has no business taking sides in political or moral issues….so click the box right?  NO!   Well, actually, it doesn’t matter what you do with the box.

As far as I can tell from what I’ve read, online petitions have no teeth because they can’t verify signatures.  It looks like a feel good sort of thing that gets lots of new hits to the focus on the family organization that runs the petition site.  They get money from advertising.  It’s a cynical view, but it’s a crazy world.  It’s all just pretty, dressed up, slactivism.  Sit in your chair and click a mouse and assuage your guilt in one fell swoop.  You don’t have to get up, don’t have to write a letter, certainly not talk to anyone…that would be scary!  Unfortunately, the amount of effort required is linked to the amount of weight it carries on the other side.

If people really think there is something wrong with what PG&E did, they should write a handwritten letter and sign it!  Better yet, get three people to sign it with you before you put the stamp on, triple the effect for the same cost!  People weigh actual letters far more heavily than a thousand questionable petitioners.

PG&E Update:

October 23, 2008

Dear Brian,

As you know, PG&E has joined homosexual activists in trying to destroy traditional marriage. PG&E donated $250,000 to defeat CA Prop 8. Thousands of pro-marriage customers complained, but PG&E simply laughed. Well, PG&E is not laughing now.

The response to our previous action alert was so overwhelming that alternative gas suppliers were caught off guard. But that problem has been solved. Join with others and send PG&E a real message by switching suppliers. And save money, too!

According to Brad Dacus, President of Pacific Justice Institute, California law allows residential and non-residential consumers to choose an alternative natural gas provider. Research shows that alternative providers, year over year, have reported saving their customers up to 15% off their natural gas bill compared to PG&E.

“There is no reason why pro-marriage homes, small businesses, corporations, apartment owners, schools or churches should continue to support companies actively opposed to traditional marriage,” said Dacus.

For more information, here’s how to switch from PG&E to another provider. If you are not a PG&E customer, please forward this to your family and friends who may be PG&E customers.

Sincerely,

Don

Donald E. Wildmon,
Founder and Chairman
American Family Association

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.