QUICK LINKS
Domestic Partnerships: More Important Than Children
It is amazing but true that the Washington Legislature is more interested in "Domestic Partnerships" than in protecting our children -- or at least that is what their actions are telling us.
SB 5336 (Domestic Partnerships) will probably come up for vote this week because the majority party has made it a priority and are committed to getting it passed.
They are also committed to taking us down the road to gay marriage in Washington State. This bill gives State approval to homosexual relationships, provides them with special benefits and puts us on course for same-sex marriage through the courts.
While using the strength of their majority and pushing through the gay rights agenda, they are refusing to sign on or even, so far, allow solid, bi-partisan bills that will protect society -- especially our children, to even advance through the system.
It is not only disgusting, it is alarming.
As far as we can see, we do not have the votes to defeat or even block this bill.
Please join Christian across the state as we pray for God's help and intervention in this matter.
Please contact the sponsors of this bill and your Washington legislators and express your opposition to this bill.
Sponsors of SB 5336: Senators Murray, Kohl-Welles, Fairley, Prentice, Regala, Oemig, Tom, Kline, Hobbs, Pridemore, Keiser, Berkey, Franklin, Brown, Weinstein, Rockefeller, Poulsen, Fraser, Jacobsen, Spanel, McAuliffe
See the list of bills that Faith & Freedom support.
____________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.
18 Comments:
To Gary 'carpet-bagger' Randall,
Domestic Partnerships ARE about families...some of us homos are raising happy and healthy children. While our families don't look like yours, that's okay! But if my partner gets hit by a bus, this bill will allow me to hold her hand in the hospital while her life hangs in the balance. This bill would allow me to support her in recovery... or hold her hand as her soul leaves this world. Why do you need to try to deny me such basic rights, dignity and respect?
What is your problem Gary? For cheese-steak, keep your fear-mongering advocacy against our families in your home State of Oregon.
TOCBG
MSNBC is carrying an article today (2/12/07) saying that Adoptive Parents are generally more "invested" in their children's lives.
Of course, the real reason this is "news" is that the study supposedly "proves" that the arguments against same-sex adoption and gay-"marriage" is now found to be false. And they blatantly admit to that being the whole purpose of the study!!!
You can read the article at:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17119478/
The article also points out the fact that Adoptive Parents tend to spend more money on their children. Could that be due to the fact that most Adoptive Parents need to be wealthy just to adopt (especially Caucasian Babies)? I'd be curious to see if any of the families that went through Antioch Adoptions (A 501c3 ministry of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond) were included in this study since they do not charge the adopting families anything to complete the adoption process.
-Just a thought...
Hopefully people will research for themselves, using they Washington Votes (thank you Mick) website 'children' category and having gone through a couple pages of them I'm finding it hard to find one that ISN'T being sponsored by Democrats. The bills seem to be being read, moved on to committees and everything as one would expect.
This couldn't be just more demagogic rhetoric could it?
This line of attack was just as bogus when attempted three days ago by your attack poodle on the lobbying site. He chose to highlight the attempts to use the bill to repeal the current 2/3rds majority required to pass school levies; of course a little bit of research shows that while FFN "doesn't oppose" that bill, they actively oppose domestic partnerships. Seems a more headline for your post would be FFN more concerned about Domestic Partnerships than Children
Eric, what are you whining about? The article you cite, quotes an anti-gay bigot from FRC with no counter position from a pro-gay group.
As for Antioch Adoptions, the idea that a sick, hate-filled, twisted bigot like Hutcherson could have anything to do with an adoption agency is indeed frightening.
Anon asks what it is that I'm 'whining' about. Here's a further explanation about my 'whine':
I find it quite annoying that the liberal media is passing off a study that is clearly meant to further the gay agenda as "news" and supposedly a good "scientific" study. (While the study itself may indeed have been scientific, I cannot see how their "findings" are in any way supported scientifically.)
As to the fact that Anon admits he/she is 'frightened' that Hutch has some part in adoptions at all, I personally wonder why. Could it be that he helped change the way that parents are charged for the adoption process here in this state? Could it be that he is exposing the fact that adoption agencies don't amount to much more than slave traders selling kids to the highest bidder? Or is it the fact that he is working to ensure that all black foster kids are no longer designated as "Special Needs" simply because of their skin color (regardless of their actual mental/physical capabilities)?
One final questions to Anon and friends: Why is it that whenever someone opposes your opinions do you feel the need to resort to name-calling?
I didn't come out here slinging muck, Hutch doesn't either and yet almost everyone who oposes opinions held by Hutch or myself seem to enjoy belittling us whenever they get the chance. This happened while I was working for the World's Biggest Software Company and took a stance while employed there and it continues to this day.
Study after study reports that those in the LGBT Community are generally well educated and tend to earn high salaries, yet their tactic always seems to include childish antics.
Just my 4 cents worth...
I find it quite annoying that the liberal media is passing off a study that is clearly meant to further the gay agenda as "news" and supposedly a good "scientific" study. (While the study itself may indeed have been scientific, I cannot see how their "findings" are in any way supported scientifically.)
Oh please! Even more annoying is someone who tries to dismiss a study without having bothered to find out the facts.
As the article you linked to states this is 'metastudy' of the data collected through the government sponsored ECLS. Just like you can go through census data to evaluate for specific traits this one went through the 13,000 households in the ECLS to find out how adoptive parents compared with others.
The findings can be supported 'scientifically' because they are just a statistical analysis of already existing data. They are also the very easiest to peer review since all the existing data is open to anyone to check the findings.
Oh and as your article points out they did adjust for wealth but even then adopted parents were par or better.
All this study shows is that the old canard of the vast superiority of chromosome donating parented families is just that. They have their pluses, but other kinds of families have theirs. The different groups have more in common than they have different with none of them being absolutely better than the other. Big yawn as far as revelations.
And as far as 'anonymous' he's a very schizophrenic poster and supports and doesn't every issue ever presented on this board. And why do you assume that anonymous is part of the LGBT community at all?
And of course your first note had nothing to do with the blog entry it was responding to.
aw, poor poor Eric, did Microsoft make you treat your gay and lesbian coworkers with respect?
The title of the article is "Adoptive Parents, Adaptive Parents: Evaluating the Importance of Biological Ties for Parental Investment"
motherlode! The study itself is here as a pdf
A genuine, Biblical marriage is "that which God has joined together" (Mk 10). Jesus teaching regarding a genuine, godly marriage excludes any reference to the state. Therefore, the effort by Evangelicals to make state sanctioned rights (call them what you will) as synonymous with marriage results in the degradation of true, Godly marriage to nothing but a mere artificial creation of the state with state (vs. God) provided rights/responsibilities.
I find this, at best, distasteful and uniquely disparaging to both the institution of God as well as the humanity involved in the arrangement. To degrade marriage in the manner that it appears that FNF and Evangelical/Roman Catholics have done is really a slap in the face to God and the arrangement He created.
Therefore, the real issue is whether disciples of Jesus Christ will work to maintain the high view of marriage as put forth by Jesus Christ or the degraded view of marriage as proposed by Evangelicals and Roman Catholics. Genuine disciples will reject the states involvement in their marriages since their "yes must be yes" and their "nos must be no". Our integrity and honesty before man and God will be the glue of that holds us together.
I welcome Biblically based comment on what I believe is the key issue rather than the on-going meddling in the affairs of the world (and the related dissimulation which is constantly manifest in doing so) which God has specifically relegated to Himself alone (ICor5:12,13; "my kingdom is NOT of this world" - Jesus Christ; "Our battle is NOT against flesh and blood but principalities and powers" - Paul).
Sincerely,
In Christ,
Human
Two obvious problems here:
a) It is amazing but true that the Washington Legislature is more interested in "Domestic Partnerships" than in protecting our children -- or at least that is what their actions are telling us.
This first sentence is spin - because it appears to state a horrific fact - then sort of backs off - how can it be "true" but then talk of "at least that what it seems".
This is why I call Gary on the carpet (without the bag) before the Lord - he is spinning the facts of the situation. "Spin" is simple dishonesty. Last time I looked, dishonest was NOT a J-C value - The LORD hates a false weight and Gary's statement is a fast weight.
b)"...they are refusing to sign on or even, so far, allow solid, bi-partisan bills that will protect society -- especially our children, to even advance through the system."
This sentence is so rife with irrationality we could probably spend the night on it. First, if "they" (the Democrats) are refusing how could the bills be "bi-partisan"?? If the bills are bi-partisan, then some Democrats are NOT refusing. Again, then we see dishonesty in the presentation. Gary is a professional and would not miss. Too bad he won't maintain J-C values which is to present the facts accurately (being right is not the same as being accurate).
Another issue is - what are these bills??? Another issue is why aren't they passing through?? This is so shallow and contrived that it is literally nauseating.
Sincerely,
In Christ,
Human
Eric,
If you are as sincere as you claim, then I request that you follow up on my first post here.
I believe you are probably quite sincere and I would not be surprised if you were not fairly young in the faith. However, I assure you that you have been duped my individuals that have become essentially pawns of an anti-Christ spirit. This is easily identified by the fact that they are focused on the kingdom of this world and trying to convert it by imposing their ethics via legislation rather than the Kingdom of Christ which He plainly teachs is NOT OF THIS WORLD!!
There is much more to be said on this deception (Satan pulling a third of the stars, etc.) but one step at a time.
Sincerely,
In Christ,
Human
Too bad he won't maintain J-C values which is to present the facts accurately (being right is not the same as being accurate).
True as far as my Sunday School education told me - a half-truth is the same as a lie to a Christian and no Christian every 'spins' facts to their advantage.
But then my childhood understanding of Christianity is very different than that often expressed here. I know which one I think is closer to Jesus' point of view.
oh and just noticed that now you can leave attributed comments with just a Google account, no need to sign up for Blogger anymore.
Everyone should want a Google 'gmail' account if only for the convenience - free, 2 gigs of storage, AND POP access by your mail program is free (in contrast to say Yahoo).
Just go to here and create an account good for all Google services.
I am a little worried about domestic partnership Marriage should be about the Nuturing and caring of children Children with a mother and father, I think domestic partnership often leads to civil unions of Marriage is about children and children Need a Mother and a father which children do better with a mother and father raise by two parents today than it is about the nuturing of children for those who do not have kids often help in the raising of their neices and nephews if one should pass on therefore marriage is still about children it would assume to mean that people would not want a bill like this to protect the needs of children in todays society.
Gods blessings
T&T
Domestic partnership should be vetoed
why it should be vetoed is that Marriage isn't about Adults but it isi about the Nuturing and care of children Adults seem to want the rights of domestic partneship when it is not about adult rights at all why do same sex adults want these so called rights when marriage is about the Needs of children children are best defined in culture society today
by having a mother and a father and it is best about the needs of children because children do best with a mother and a father in society America needs not to forget what our society stands for
as the familie is important to our society as well as religion and that is important to the Nuturing of children for those who do not have kids often adopt do foster care ect.... but these bills should not be for adult rights but for the basic nuturing of children.
Domestic partnership should be vetoed first of all it is not about the rights of adults Like I can hold a person hand excetera Domestic partnership should be vetoed because it is not about adult rights it is about the needs of children rights not adults I think that same sex like to use children as rights to grant domestic partnership but children should not be used for this purpose,
Domestic partnership should be vetoed because it is not about adults needs
or hold her hand as her soul leaves this world. Why do you need to try to deny me such basic right
,children do best in relationships with a mom and a dad and socially do best with a relationship with a mom and a dad the family is a foundation of our society today
and Marriage is about childrens needs and for people who do not have kids in often take in their neices and nephews in times of trial Marriage is about children and the adoption of children
and children do best with a mother and a father in todays society today it is about the Nuturing and care of children.
Post a Comment
<< Home