QUICK LINKS
HB 2661 (Ref. 65) is About Gay Marriage
We have heard the media, the gay activists and the liberal, secularist legislators tell us that HB2661 is not about gay marriage. It is about civil rights. It’s about decency and tolerance. But not about gay marriage. The legislators who approved HB2661 even assured us that they had written into the bill words that said it was not about gay marriage.
But it is. We have been saying that all along. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.
Yesterday, our Field Director, Jon Russell, forwarded an email to me sent out by Equal Rights Washington; the organization that is committed to gay marriage in Washington State. While the email was soliciting testimonials to support gay marriage at the recommendation of “many legislators,” the rest of the message was very telling.
It said, “Thank you to the over 1000 ERW [Equal Rights Washington] advocates who have endorsed the Washington Won’t Discriminate Campaign in the Past 72 Hours.”
Now Washington Won’t Discriminate is the organization that committed to blocking Referendum 65 and the work of Faith & Freedom and others in the faith community. They are supposed to be about civil rights. Equal Rights Washington is about gay marriage.
So, ERW is encouraging its followers to support Washington Won’t Discriminate.
But, wait. There’s more. The solicitation goes on to say, “ERW is committed to making sure that WWD is the strongest campaign possible. We have lent our Political Director, John Vezina, to head the campaign of which we are (sic) a founding and principle member.”
After all the denial by gay activists and secularist legislators alike, we now find that not only is there linkage between the gay marriage people and the Stop Referendum 65 (so-called civil rights) people but the gay marriage people are a “founding and principle member” of the Stop Referendum 65 movement.
House Bill 2661 is an incremental step toward gay marriage. They are using Massachusetts as a model and will not be satisfied until they have redefined marriage and the family and re-written sex education in public schools, normalizing that which is abnormal and perverted.
This battle is real. And it has real consequences. May I ask 1000 of you who oppose gay marriage and support our efforts to go immediately to our Pay Pal account and make the most generous contribution you can make. Or simply mail us a check today. We need your help.
Click here to make a tax-deductible donation to Faith & Freedom.
______________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
P.S. Please send in Ref 65. petition forms following the directions posted on our website. Click here for instructions on Ref. 65
22 Comments:
More rabble-rousing and false statements to try to extort money from individuals. Scaring people must be a productive means to get into the checkbooks of the innocent.
To the post above: Oh my do you mean to tell me that the extremist in the homosexual lobby do not ask for donations for their cause? Where did you take your rhetoric classes? Your leftist scare tactics are so old, so I laugh in your face.
Murray says himself he is advancing the agenda to Homosexual marriage . I wonder how Bi sexuals fit into this , is it not discrimination for them to be held to only one spouse of one sex ?
Bi-sexuals are homosexual. Their is no such thing as a bi-sexual. Your straight or you choose to be gay. So Murray's definition includes so-called "bi-sexuals".
Gary is the one trying to use 'scare tactics' - he is the one trying to link equal rights in the public sector with marriage equality. But it is understandable because such demagoguery is the only way he has any hope of justifying his bigotry. As the Gallop poll released today shows the VAST majority of people support equal rights regardless of sexual orientation.
I mean come on, that the people who want equal access to the contract of marriage also think that equality in the public sector is good too is some sort of revelation? Isn't that just common sense? But the connection is one way, i.e. of course those who want marriage equality want public sector equality, but not all who want public sector equality want marriage equality.
HB2661 is about equality in a narrowly defined set of public areas for people of all sexual orientations and is the same non-discrmination protections that the state gives for marital status, gender, creed, mental or physical disability and more. It states right in it that it cannot be used to justify marriage equality. And the state supreme court has already heard the evidence on the marriage equality issue in any case.
Marriage equality has its own set of issues and supporting arguments that didn't and don't rely on any non-discrimination bill in any regard. Those arguments will succeed or fail on their own - HB2661 is irrelevant.
This is just fear mongering, pure and simple (though it does seem to be a rather desperate plea for money) Don't be fooled by it and save your money for things that help other people, not hurt them.
Bi-sexuals can be happy with a spouse of either sex, that doesn't mean they get one of each gender ;)
Marriage equality is about equal access to a government contract by all citizens. The state doesn't marry a couple, marriage comes from beyond government and would happen if there was no government at all. All the state does is license a contract in support of marriage that allows the married couple to appear as one in many legal situations. A Gallup poll released yesterday showed that people view the marriage contract as more related to a couple building a life together than it is to them having children!
All marriage equality is about is saying that every citizen has a right to 'build a life' with someone else, and that all citizens should have access to the contract that helps them when they do this.
And there is the confusing question - the people are better off married, the state is better off if they are married, and society in general is better off if as many of its adult members are married as possible. What exactly is the scary downside to giving all citizens the ability to license this contract anyway? Are people really saying that their neighbors, state, and society is better off with some citizens rendered permanently 'unmarriable' in the eyes of the law even when they are really married regardless?
Vishanti
Again you mislead people. Same sex marriage cannot take place without HB 2661. That is why Marriage Equality supports it. If the state does not recognize homosexuals as a protected minority group then the State Court cannot justify same sex marriage. This is a stepping stone which has been tried and tested in Massachusetts and being replicated in Washington.
You engage in twisted logic and confusion calling those who defend true marriage "hate mongers."
You are messed up.
sure, homosexual activist groups ask for donations. But they don't ask for donations to try to repress others.
Again you mislead people. Same sex marriage cannot take place without HB 2661.
Of course it can - you are talking about the marriage contract as if it were marriage - its not. Marriage is a state of being between a couple, not slip of government paper and the state doesn't make you married. Most Christians realize this, they think marriage comes from God, I think it is a natural behavior inherent in humans mediate by vasopressin and oxytocin - regardless neither thinks it comes from the state. That's what common-law marriages were - the state just recognizing what the couple already knew themselves - they were married. I've been married for 16 years all I'm lacking is access to the cvil contract and I will continue being married whether I ever get license to it or not.
If the state does not recognize homosexuals as a protected minority group then the State Court cannot justify same sex marriage.
Wrong on several levels. Did you even bother to read the Downing decision? The judge specifically wrote it in non-legal language so that everyone could. It is about a married citizen's equal right to equal access to a totally secular state-issued civil contract and this right of equal access to government exists regardless of anything else. No need for anyone to be 'protected' other than our state constitution's promise to 'protect' all it's citizens equally. Again, HB2661 and marriage equality are unrelated - neither depends on the other for its justification.
This is a stepping stone which has been tried and tested in Massachusetts and being replicated in Washington.
Considering the glaringly obvious that the marriage equality arguments were made at the State Supreme Court before HB2661 was even HB2661 that's a silly statement. Marriage equality is based on our state's constitution's guarantee of equal treatment to all citizens not any civil rights statutes.
You engage in twisted logic and confusion calling those who defend true marriage "hate mongers."
What is being defended against actually? More citizens licensing the civil contract? Are you afraid the state will run out of them our what? ;) Again, that's the 'twisted logic', people clamoring to get married and somehow that is an 'attack'? Married citizens wanting to just license the same contract that their fellow married citizens do is something that has to be 'defended' against?
As to the hate-mongering, denying your fellow citizens access to the totally secular civil contract for their marriages is mean and spiteful even if you don't think it qualifies as hate. Read the cover story of the Seattle Times about the world renowned nursery created by a local couple that just happens to be gay. Their marriage doesn't deserve the same legal protections and attributes that others do? Even though they have merged their life's together the state should pretend they haven't just because some citizens want to have special rights?
Please, you and yours are the ones who are messed up ethically, morally, and spiritually. Quit worrying so much about denying your neighbors something and maybe try and help your neighbors get something they need instead.
LOL, I am being lectured by a secular moral relativist. The reason we will never come to an agreement on this issue is because you believe people are born homosexual. I know that they are not. Homosexuality is a brokenness which stems from life circumstances. It is an outlet of pain. Other outlets include people who take up drinking or drugs, some people have multiple sex partners and so on. I am not interested in rewarding someone rights based on a bad personal choice. Homosexuality is a choice and until we can have a discussion on those terms we will continue to go around and around.
LOL, I am being lectured by a secular moral relativist.
Well secular moralists are the best kind because they have a coherent basis for their morality, as opposed to people just following hearsay.
The reason we will never come to an agreement on this issue is because you believe people are born homosexual. I know that they are not. Homosexuality is a brokenness which stems from life circumstances. It is an outlet of pain. Other outlets include people who take up drinking or drugs, some people have multiple sex partners and so on. I am not interested in rewarding someone rights based on a bad personal choice.
And this is relevant in what way? 'Choice' or birth, once people are a sexual orientation, they rarely change. Dr. Robert Spitzer who found that change is possible in a select few clarified that by saying he found about 3-4% of people have a 'mallable sexual orientation' - the other 96% are stuck with what they are.
Since the state exists to serve it citizens the way they are, not the way you want them to be we come to the $100,000 question:
Is it better for adult citizens (and state and society) to be married or single, regardless of their sexual orientation (which you don't get to choose)?
If its better that they be married, that they be 'building a life' with someone, how can you justify the state only helping some of its citizens to this better life?
In your message today you ask for money to oppose gay marriage and support Ref. 65. How would the money be used? It doesn't seem like there is enough time to use the money for the Ref. Do you know how we're doing on the Ref.? I heard we only have 30K signatures. That doesn't seem very impressive.Is anybody else is working on this? Is that all you were able to generate? It doesn't look like your strategy is working.Before I donate I need to know what you plan to do wit hthe money.
If Tim Eymans number of 30K is correct. (Tim doesn't share numbers by the way, his policy)This Referendum is a different animal. Most referendums have paid signature gatherers this one didn't. It is entirely volunteer based. Over 12 organizations are participating and each of them have been garnering thousands of signatures. In the closing days each of these organizations need money for mailing costs, which get very expensive. Additional charges are racked up with a large volume of phone calls to remind people to send in their petitions. At the end of every campaign, costs always mount up. Your help would be appreciated.
Part of Equal Rights Washington's mission is to support basic human & civil rights for GLBT Washingtonians.
No news here.......
Using your rationale, Faith & Freedom Network is collecting all of their signatures at gun shows.
Does that mean you want to shoot and kill all the homos, or just arm citizens against their decorating genius? Please clarify......
Homosexuality is a brokenness which stems from life circumstances. It is an outlet of pain. Other outlets include people who take up drinking or drugs, some people have multiple sex partners and so on. I am not interested in rewarding someone rights based on a bad personal choice. Homosexuality is a choice and until we can have a discussion on those terms we will continue to go around and around.
Thank you for pointing out a 30 year old or so theory that has been completely discredited. You are correct that until you do some research and learn what impartial experts have proven, you will not be able to have a meaningful discussion.
Be sure to examine the different case studies and the commentary on those case studies too (for example - ex-dr. Cameron, who lost his license for his improper "medical" methods).
Perhaps, though, if you are still convinced it comes life "circumstances" you would like to call my parents and explain to them why they were such bad parents to me (but not my straight brothers). Did you want to tell them that they must have been child molestors too since that is another archaic, disproven theory.
No, the signatures for the petitions for the federal marriage amendment are being collected at the gun shows.
There is some concern that Dick Cheney may be there and not everyone may get a chance to sign before being accidently shot in the face (especially if you have a beak-like nose).
Perhaps, though, if you are still convinced it comes life "circumstances" you would like to call my parents and explain to them why they were such bad parents to me (but not my straight brothers). Did you want to tell them that they must have been child molestors too since that is another archaic, disproven theory.
Yes, since the cause of sexual orientation was just a discussionary red herring I didn't go into it, but Gary does have some bizarre notions. And even so, don't people deserve the best life they can have even if it is a life he wouldn't 'choose' for himself?
Again, boggles the mind that they are telling gay people they don't want them to build a life with someone they love, that their doing so has no benefit to them or society. Couples are happier, healthier both mentally and physically, they take less from society and give more to it and this is regardless of their gender combinations. How can you be 'loving your neighbor' and tell them they shouldn't be living the life that's best for them?
HB2661 covers a very well defined range of civic services and just makes it so any sexual orientation can't be a reason for denying them access. Its for the person who is out at work, doing a good job and then gets a new supervisor that wants to fire him because of their sexual orientation. Shoot one of the last cases in Seattle was a heterosexual woman who was fired from her job as a waitress because the new manager was replacing everyone with young gay men. She won! HB2661 is so people can be secure in their jobs and homes regardless of their sexual orientation no matter what it might be. Anyone who tells you different is either hasn't read the bill, is lying, or is very very confused.
I'm pretty sure that it also protects the right for dogs to marry cats, right?
It is always fascinating to see anonymous supporters of homosexuality posting stuff about getting guns and shooting people and making derogatory comments about people's noses, etc. All the while claiming that all they want for themselves is to be treated with respect and freedom from bigotry, etc.
Regarding Ref 65, the silence from the churches has been deafening, imo. If sufficient signatures are not collected to put this matter to a vote of the people, then the churches have no one to blame other than themselves when they are legally silenced from speaking against this sin. I am praying that God will find 112,500 righteous people in Washington and spare our state.....but perhaps this is a replay of Abraham's pleas that Sodom & Gomorrah be spared if only 10 righteous could be found therein. We shall see.
It is always fascinating to see anonymous supporters of homosexuality posting stuff about getting guns and shooting people and making derogatory comments about people's noses, etc.
Yeah but once you've called peoplesinners, immoral and perverted it wouldn't be realistic to expect positive affirming comments in return.
then the churches have no one to blame other than themselves when they are legally silenced from speaking against this sin.
Not true. Churches are not covered under ANY of Washington's civil rights legislation. Neither are non-profit organizations.
I am praying that God will find 112,500 righteous people in Washington and spare our state
Just wasted money - last Gallup poll shows overwhelming support for non-discrimination - its unlikely the legislation will be invalidated with the difficulty they've had in getting signatures for the referendum.
but perhaps this is a replay of Abraham's pleas that Sodom & Gomorrah be spared if only 10 righteous could be found therein.
Ironic again - Sodom and Gomorrah's was punished for their pride and poor treatment of strangers the supporters of Ref 65 best look out.
For all of you who gave Gary a hard time for asking for money to support his cause. Put this in your pipe and smoke it. Looks like all sides ask for money. My point proven again.
Closer to home, and frankly more of a real threat to LGBT civil rights, the Secretary of State's office has confirmed that Tim Eyman and the religious right have made an appointment at 11 am Monday to deliver their signatures place referendum 65 on the ballot, as they continue their effort to repeal Washington’s anti-discrimination law.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/272476_eyman01ww.html
As we look to the challenges of the coming months, we ask you to dig deep into your pockets and help Equal Rights Washington accomplish its three major goals:
1) Prepare for the decision in Washington’s historic marriage equality lawsuit;
2) Preserve Washington’s anti-discrimination law; and
3) Elect fair minded leaders and justices.
Please use the link below to make a contribution. Any gifts ERW receives before June 15 will be matched by one of our most generous donors. Don't miss this opportunity to double the value of your donation. We need your support now!
Post a Comment
<< Home