QUICK LINKS
Domestic Partnerships and Sex-Ed May Go To Vote Today
It is likely that the Domestic Partnership, SB 5336, and the Sex-Ed, SB 5297, will come up for vote today in Olympia.
The Democratic leadership has been very calculated in the way they have shepherded these and other bills like them through the legislative process. These bills will probably come to vote late in the afternoon so the leadership can limit public response under the three minute rule.
Jon Russell will be in Olympia today. If you live in the area and are able to join him, please do. Even while the Legislators are on the floor,it is appropiate to send a note requesting to speak to your repersentative lawmaker for a moment in the hallway. Even at that late moment you can express your strong opposition to these bills and ask them to vote against them.
If you can not be in Olympia today, please call the office of Speaker Frank Chopand ask him to pull the bills. His office number is: 360-786-7920.
These bills are not in the best interest of the State and certainly do not repersent the the will of the faith community.
And please pray specifically regarding these matters today.
God bless you.
______________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.
28 Comments:
I wish someone would help oregon and washington save marriage between one man and one woman
he subject of granting "Civil Rights" protection to individuals who are part of Oregon’s gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) population is on a fast-track to becoming Oregon law. I believe expanding civil rights to include such behavior-based activities in not in the best interest of Oregon or its citizens. Here is why.
Senate Bill 2 has already passed the Senate and will have public hearings in the House on Monday, April 9, 2007. Notwithstanding the magnitude and consequences of this bill on Oregon churches, schools, closely-held businesses and the rights of individual citizens who hold strong religious beliefs about morality, the Chair of the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee, Representative Diane Rosenbaum, has just scheduled a Work Session to pass S.B. 2 out of her Committee on the following morning, Tuesday, April 10th. If this occurs the bill could be up for a full House vote on Thursday, April 12, 2007.
Essentially, S.B. 2 is a Civil Rights bill that elevates “Sexual Orientation” to the same protected civil rights status as race and religion. The bill defines “Sexual Orientation” as follows:
“Sexual orientation” means an individual’s actual or perceived heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality or gender identity, regardless of whether the individual’s gender identity, appearance, expression or behavior differs from that traditionally associated with the individual’s sex at birth. ( Senate Bill 2, Section 1, para. 6)
One problem with elevating sexual orientation, “perceived” homosexuality, appearance, expression and behavior to a protected, civil rights status is the uncertainty of enforcement. Current protected classes of civil rights are based on who people are, not what they do.
Martin Luther King Jr.'s niece, Alveta Scott King, expressed the difference when she said, "While I have met many former homosexuals, I have yet to meet a former black." On the other side of the issue, former lesbian, Yvette Schneider, asked the thought provoking question when responding to the issue of special rights based on sexual orientation, "Why should I receive less protection now that I am no longer a lesbian?"
The GLBT activists and their sympathizers repeatedly exclaim their GLBT proclivities are inherent and genetic. I am not one who accepts theory as fact, merely because allegations are made passionately and frequently. My research for dispositive, peer-reviewed evidence of a “homosexual gene” has been without success. (For those who care to read a summary of the research, click here.) I have no doubt GLBT tendencies are real and powerful, but tendencies are one thing and behavior is another.
If S.B. 2 becomes law—and the Senate and House leaders believe it will—there will be consequences to the many Oregonians whose religious and moral beliefs strongly oppose the GLBT lifestyle. For instance,
* A school district provides sex education instruction that does not give equal attention to homosexual relationships and practices; an adopted child of a gay/lesbian couple feels discriminated against because the parent’s lifestyle is not equally represented. The parents contact the ACLU demanding equal time and instruction for homosexual practices as that given to heterosexual practices.
* A homeowner operates an adult foster home in her duplex, but does not want to hire a lesbian because the homeowner and her elderly residents do not believe it would "be right".
* A Christian Bookstore owner refused to hire an otherwise qualified applicant when the owner learned the applicant sometimes dressed and otherwise changed his appearance, behavior and expressions from that traditionally associated with the applicant's sex at birth. The applicant presented the employer with a doctor's note indicating the applicant's need to cross-dress was necessary to maintain the applicant's proper mental health.
In each of the above situations, and in countless others, if S.B. 2 becomes law, the rights of the majority must legally bow to the demands of a vocal minority.
S.B. 2 will grant state sanctioned and enforced civil rights protections for a person's appearance and behavior. Please understand, I am against constitutionally protected discrimination and I believe individuals should have the right to live their own lives with a minimum of interference. I am also committed to defending our inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I am willing to tolerate another person's sexual preferences, but I am unwilling to use the force of governmental power to elevate that person's sexual preferences, appearance and behavior above the religious, commercial, educational, residential and personal freedoms of the majority of Oregonians.
Sincerely,
Dennis Richardson
State Representative
Gary states:
The Democratic leadership has been very calculated in the way they have shepherded these and other bills like them through the legislative process.
Human responds:
Gary, this is the point where your lack of integrity shows so clearly through. The calculating and vicious procedures/policy of subterfuge and deception used by the Republicans has beens amply demonstrated time and again - yet you fail to say even a single word.
Therefore you have become nothing but a hypocritical partisan shill - not manifesting Christ but simply your personal, fleshly desire for personal domination and power.
When you genuinely point ALL evil - both the evil of the Democrats and the evil of the Republicans, you will at least be showing some element of the integrity that those in Christ have been called to.
Sadly,
In Christ,
Human
Hey Dennis
Just so you know - "religion" is a behavior based activity. I am not sure if integrity or truth or honesty matter to you, but that would be a good place to start.
I am happy to work with you on presenting a genuinely Christ oriented view to handling these matters if you like.
Sincerely,
In Christ,
Human
What's wrong with the sex ed bill? Parents can choose to remove their children from it, I read the whole thing. Because our nation has fallen away from a Christian foundation, they are trying to use sex ed to show how to solve teen problems with a secular view. It's too bad that we can't just follow God's law which is very blatant, just, and good. So, why is the bill bad? Because it is too graphic?
I've met many former Christians, too -- should we remove civil rights protections from individuals who are Christian? Of course not!
One common misconception about civil rights laws is that those who are protected somehow get "more rights" or "special rights" over everyone else. Not true.
For example, in our state, one cannot discriminate on the basis of any religion. That means, I cannot fire or evict someone simply for being a Christian. But I cannot also not fire that person for not being Christian. Or for being atheist, or Buddhist, or Muslim.
Same goes for sexual orientation. I cannot fire or evict a homosexual, nor can I do the same to an individual for being heterosexual (say, if I were a vengeful gay landlord). Everyone is protected regardless of their sexual orientation.
Another misconception is that only immutable charicteristics should attain minority status. Yet, minorities protections encompass religion, marital status, veteran status, and more -- all choices.
Finally, research is continuing to reveal that sexual orientation -- especially in men -- is largely or even entire set before birth. Though this information should not matter, it does for some. Today's New York Times has an interesting story about sexuality today:
Click here
Dear 12:40 Anon,
You can't argue Logic with Faith. Faith says that it trumps everything else because that's what makes it Faith.
So despite facts that sexual orientation for most (if not all) is set before birth, that gay marriage doesn't do anything to prevent opposite sexual couples from marrying, that same-sex marriage in Mass and Canada hasn't led to the end of society, etc., it doesn't matter to some Bible-pushers because their faith says that science is wrong and the Bible is right.
Of course they use that science to proclaim that science is wrong and the Bible is right, but that is another thread.
I have no reason to believe that Dennis Richardson is anything but hard working, intelligent representative, but he seems to think that Christianity is not a behavior, but sexual orientation is. "Current protected classes of civil rights are based on who people are, not what they do."
So are people born, Christian? Do children who are born into non-Christian homes become Christian? Oops, logic again. Please leave all luggage at the front door with your shoes. Now where is the snake-charming going on?
Tim,
Sadly, since the Evangelical Religious Right (ERR) became involved with the fleshly pursuit of political domination and control IN CONTRAST TO THE MANY SCRIPTURAL STATEMENTS AND CONCEPTS THAT DECLARE OTHERWISE(as I have tirelessly noted), they have come into bad company - the Republican Party and the Secular Right. "Bad company corrupts good morals". As a result, they are no long honest and care nothing about integrity in their puruit of politcal domination and control. They spin in every manner using fear as a motivator (contrary to Christ).
Therefore, I suspect that God has given them over to a reprobate mind. Thus, their thinking simply no long makes any sense on even a basic level.
Many decent people and some genuine disiciples of Jesus the Messiah have attempted to pull them back from this desparate state but it appears that the pull and enticements of the flesh are too strong and they want to eat their bowl of pottage thinking they will reap great reward.
How sad when the Kingdom of God is already here!!
Sincerely,
In Christ,
Human
"I've met many former Christians, too"
I doubt it. They probably were never Christians to begin with. Calling oneself "Christian" or signing off with lengthy pious claims like "Sincerely In Christ"
don't make one a Christian either.
Anom 1232
My Rep also told me that the sex ed bill allows each school district to curtail the curiculum to each district's needs. That makes it better .
What bothers me is you are basically getting sex education curriculum taught by who has the political power . Possibly 51 percent majority teaches our kids their view of sexuality .. That should bother both sides if you really think about it .
Also If you had opp in instead of opp out you would have a better bill also .
But in my own opinion , its not the graphic nature .. heck the kids in this generation by the time they are in middle school have seen it all .. Know more about sex then any generation before it .
The curriculum and teaching materials I have seen that bothered me was the lack of respect for Marriage .. In fact some materials left marriage out completly and just substituted committed relationship as healthier .
Also the flavored condoms , what the heck did my school district have a condom tasting test to scientifically prove they tasted good ?
Well anyway , separation of church and state dealt with respecting our neigbors and not using the state to promote one religion over the other . Now we have the state promoting their values over another .. To me it is basically violating the same principle .
One problem with elevating sexual orientation, “perceived” homosexuality, appearance, expression and behavior to a protected, civil rights status is the uncertainty of enforcement. Current protected classes of civil rights are based on who people are, not what they do.
As was pointed out 'sexual orientation' is no more 'behavior-based' then religion is.
This is a good thing and to illustrate the point I am having to gather up my $1000+ costing documents right now to take with me for my hospital admission just to insure that my partner of 17 years will have a right to visit me if my surgery goes awry, and to make the necessary decisions for me if it comes to that. AND even then the hospital has no legal obligation to pay attention to my wishes - the forms only give him my permission, there is no requirement that the institution honor my wishes.
But then this fear for 'the institution of marriage' is really just a fund-raising issue anyway isn't it?
More later when I return from the hospital, maybe (probably) won't be til the 17th I'll be back home with computer access - enjoy your vacation while you can.
"I doubt it. They probably were never Christians to begin with. Calling oneself "Christian" or signing off with lengthy pious claims like "Sincerely In Christ"
don't make one a Christian either."
So, I guess we need to remove protections from discrimnation based on Religion, since there is no objective way to tell is someone is really Christian or not.
rep Richardson appears to be confusing the late Correta Scott King, Dr King's widow and true heir to his legacy, who supports equal rights for homosexuals, just as Dr King himself did; with Alveda C. King-Tookes, Dr King's niece, who was but a child when King was murdered, and who drops her married name pulibcally in an attempt to trade on her uncle's good name while spewing her agenda of hate.
" I guess we need to remove protections from discrimnation based on Religion, since there is no objective way to tell is someone is really Christian or not. "
Silly, statement indicating shallow thinking.
Silly, statement indicating shallow thinking.
Just like the argument against including homosexuals in non-discrimination laws. Will you now be repudiating that shallow thinking?
Once again, marriage laws are for the benefit of society. A strong society is what government laws are for, to "promote general welfare" as our Constitution puts it.
A man and woman as defined by 1000's of years of history are the most stable setup for a family, and the most productive as far as stability for the future generations.
When the left cannot counter this information, they go off on rabbit trails to distract people, but no one who is serious about the future health of our state and nation is for laws such as the ones passed in Olympia today.
Anon 4:18
Please read my first post in the Domestic Partnerships blog. You apparently are accusing Jesus of being left since He disagrees with you.
Sincerely,
In Him who is neither left nor right,
Human
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040402306.html
Washington Post
After a meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Ms. Pelosi announced that she had delivered a message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. What's more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to "resume the peace process" as well. Having announced this seeming diplomatic breakthrough, Ms. Pelosi suggested that her Kissingerian shuttle diplomacy was just getting started. "We expressed our interest in using our good offices in promoting peace between Israel and Syria," she said.
Ms. Pelosi responded by pointing out that Republican congressmen had visited Syria without drawing presidential censure. That's true enough -- but those other congressmen didn't try to introduce a new U.S. diplomatic initiative in the Middle East.
Mick,
Since the Bush regime has shown that it is totally incompentent at literally everything it touches including being able to keep their own email straight, we certainly would not want them to start any more initiatives anywhere, much less the Mid-East.
Let's recall Don Rumsfeld's words re: the longevity of the war - "CERTAINLY NOT MORE THAN SIX MONTHS".
Talk about grotesque incompetence!!
So, Mick, I assume you will be bringing up the Six Republican Congressmen, who also traveled to Syria and met Assad, either on Pelosi's trip or as part of a seperate GOP only trip arranged by the White House.
This post has been removed by the author.
Actually JC , I will donate to the democrats who run against them next time if the Congressmen were not asked to by the whitehouse . I know one GOP rep was pathetic with some of his comments .Just using this as a ploy to make a cheap name for himself .
I just went to a Barbecue welcoming a friend home from Iraq , politically he may be more on your side . Whcih does not mean his life is any less valuable does it ?
When it comes to protecting our troops , most Americans are pretty much non political . Its why Pelosi popularity ratings just took a dive .. And only the small percentage of leftward idealogues will defend her , or some of the rightward ones only see it as a political gotcha .
Most Americans just see it as bad policy to send out a divided message to a terrorist nation like Syria.
Human,
Did you see AMAZING GRACE, the story of William Wilberforce who worked to abolish the slave trade, and felt the call of God in his life in the area of (gasp) politics?
Oh no! Not combining politics and Chrisitianity? What a horrific thing! It only managed to get rid of the horrible slave trade in the British Empire is all.
We are to be salt and light in ALL areas of life.
anom 1049,
Church tonight we had a great visitor who preached on Grace .
it was awesome , and you are so right on here here .
We are to be active in all parts of our culture . How can we do different ? We owe so much !
Of course the mix of Christianity and politics also defended slavery in the US for a Century, but let's all just ignore that inconvienent fact and sing the praises of theocracy.
This post has been removed by the author.
Anom,
Religion has been used as an excuse for much evil man had inflicted on another in the course of history . I never thought of our country as of a thecracy , but your opinion is noted .
Culture and Religion
America today is in a virtue deficit where our standards of right and wrong have become increasingly hazy. Out of this haze have arisen great problems within our society including: hostility towards organized religion, sexual exploitation, the homosexual agenda, the demise of the family, and the culture of death. Sadly, we now live in a country where children kill children, families are broken, mothers have been told that allowing an abortionist to take the life of an unborn baby is simply a matter of "choice," and where the public expression of our nation's religious heritage is considered a crime. These are disastrous trends for our country. If they aren't reversed, America – this great experiment in self-government – will be in jeopardy. Unfortunately, politicians have done much to make these problems worse by pursuing policies that shift power from families to the bureaucracy and by imposing Washington's values on the American people. This must stop. We need elected leaders who will care as much about the virtue deficit as they do about the budget deficit.
We realize that one of the main underlying causes of all of these problems is the secularization of our country. Recently, we have witnessed a substantial effort by secularist forces to prevent people of faith from continuing to acknowledge religion in the public square. At a time when Americans need to be reminded of our nation’s moral roots and the virtues that spring from those roots, secularists have worked tirelessly for such things as removing the words “under God” from our country’s most sacred oath, an education system that forbids any mention or recognition of faith, and the removal of Judge Roy Moore as Alabama’s Chief Justice because he refused to remove a 10 Commandments monument from the state’s Supreme Court building.
Not only have the public expression and acknowledgement of religion and traditional values been banned, but in its place emerges the liberal culture, which targets our children. Hollywood serves up a steady diet of irresponsible sex and violence. The pro-abortion crowd gives them condoms and birth control pills. And even worse, textbooks and liberal education bureaucrats are selling our children the liberal political agenda. We need to do more to equip America's youth. We need to do more to let their voices speak the powerful truths to their peers and school officials.
American Values isn’t shy about proclaiming the need for moral values in restoring our nation. We work for a country where reliable standards of right and wrong matter again; where character counts; where virtue isn't seen as something old-fashioned but as something to treasure and pass on from one generation to another. We want America to be a country where once again women who choose to be mothers are not looked down upon or seen as being behind the times and wives are appreciated for their valuable contribution to America. We support measures that protect religious expression, restore the freedom of states to allow the acknowledgement of God in public places, and allow the posting of the Ten Commandments in public buildings. We encourage and support the heroic work being done by churches, non-profit groups and people of faith and compassion to reach out to drug addicts, prisoners, at-risk children, and women facing crisis pregnancies and support public policies that give faith-based organizations equal opportunity to apply for federal funding for these purposes.
We are convinced that, if we do these things, we can start to reverse the terrible trends we have seen in recent years, and we can once again be "the shining city upon a hill" that our founders envisioned.
So how do we go about that anom , through politics ... Hardly .
Involvement , yes !
Post a Comment
<< Home