QUICK LINKS
Oregon Domestic Partner Law Effective Jan 1 2008
The Seattle Times ran a story yesterday reminding citizens that the gay-rights agenda is moving forward in Oregon as it has been in Washington. The Associated Press story sympathizes with the gay-rights activists and affirms that the domestic partners is merely a step on the way to gay marriage.
Chris Edelson of the Human Rights Campaign in New York is quoted as saying, "Our hope is that Oregon and other states will soon join Massachusetts in legalizing gay marriage."
Oregon's law is said to be one of the strongest of the spousal rights enacted so far.
Former State Senator Marylin Shannon led an unsuccessful effort to gather enough signatures to refer the matter to the voters, who have already spoken on the matter of gay marriage. She says she is not giving up and will try again in January. However, John Hummel, executive director of Basic Rights Oregon, says they couldn't get enough votes the first time so he's not particularly worried about future attempts to stop the gay marriage movement.
In fact he said, "People were not buying what they were selling."
Yet, Oregon strongly passed a constitutional ban on gay marriage in 2004. The confidence of the gay activists may be premature.
Oregon, as Washington State, played heavily on people's goodness in getting the benefits laws, with their companion so-called "hate crimes" laws passed. Washington activists even added people over 60, who were living together out side of marriage, to their bill telling the voting public not to neglect the needs of seniors. In both cases, sad stories were told and retold, strongly identifying with the African American's civil rights struggle. While the two are not the same, the activists won by appealing to the basic decency and goodness of the average citizen, all under the guise of benefits.
In the case of Oregon, the law makers have clearly subverted the will of the people in approving this step to gay marriage.
I personally believe we are approaching the point, the proverbial tipping point, where citizens are going to say "enough." "We want to show consideration for all people, but we will not allow these folks to re-engineer marriage, family and our social order regarding those proven institutions."
I have provided a link to the Princeton Papers, the finest work I have seen in support of traditional marriage.
I have also provided a link to Faith and Freedom's plan for Washington to "Change The State in '08 ." Please take a moment and read this information and consider if you should become a part of the traditional values response.
This is a time when people of faith and traditional values must step up and assert those principles that have given us the freedoms and prosperity that we have all come to enjoy. They are fragile and the biblical basis for family and marriage is the cornerstone of our society as we have known it.
________________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.
6 Comments:
I live in Oregon and vividly remember that the supporters of Measure 39 (anti gay marriage) specifically stated it was only about gay marriage and would have no effect on civil unions. Now they are revising history to claim it was a referendum on civil unions.
Gary references Massachusetts, so maybe he could tell us just how far the sky has fallen there. How badly has hetero marriage been impacted? How has the state been ruined (emperical data, please)?
The fact is, there have been no negative consequences. However, acknowledging this wouldn't help with fundraising
Mark in Tigard
Gary,
As much as you'd like to pretend that civil unions and marriage are the same, they are not.
Polls have consistently shown that a majority of Americans are in support of some sort of legal recognition for same-sex couples, even if a majority do not yet support marriage.
For example, the latest LA Times/Bloomberg poll shows that 30% of Americans favor full marriage for same-sex couples, while 26% on top of that support civil unions, for a total of 56% of Americans in favor of some kind of legal recognition for same-sex couples. Only 38% of Americans want neither.
It's clear that Americans see a disctinction between the two; I would assume Oregonians do, too.
The way I see it, Oregonians already had a chance to speak up on this new law by signing a petition to put it on the ballot. Obviously, Oregonians weren't very motivated to block this law, and so it stands. This seems very consitent with the polls I mentioned above.
I sense your frustration stems from being part of an ever-shrinking group of people who want to continue to see gay people and their families stripped of their basic human dignity and rights.
More and more Americans see that allowing same-sex couples to acquire the ability to visit each other in the hospital, plan for the burials of their spouses, receive health benefits or sick leave to care for each other, and other rights straight families take for granting is nothing less than the fair and decent thing to do.
Tony in Seattle
LA Times/Bloomberg polls are not reliable sources. The majority of Americans do not support homosexual marriages. It is time for true conservative Americans to stand up to the well funded homosexual rights activists and send them back to the closet. I have seen first hand the devistation of individuals trapped in this way of life, one dead and the other dying. Both came from disfunctional families without fathers. We should pray for these individuals trapped in this sinful lifestyle, but we should certainly not support unfair rights for perverted lifestyles. Gil in Tacoma.
Thank you Gil for that textbook example of bigotry. Jesus must be so proud.
Gil,
I have no doubt that homosexuality is unnatural. But why are you worried about "civil" rights??? If our citizenship is heaven and we are called to a country that is not our own - why are you spending so much of the precious life that Jesus has given you focused on this decaying flesh?
Thanks for the clarification.
Patrick
Is denying the humanity of a segments of society a Christian ethic?
Post a Comment
<< Home