Prop. 8

Although I don't live in the great state of California (or Arizona), I am very concerned about the outcome of Proposition 8. It will directly affect all of us. Here are a few things that others have had to say, and that I totally agree with:

"I was upset with Apple this past week for coming out publicly against Prop 8. I am writing this on a mac and am a very loyal Apple customer. Their official press release is calling Proposition 8 a "Civil Rights Issue" and I strongly disagree with that. I already fired off an e-mail to their public relations office but I wanted to share what I think is the best Prop 8 video I have seen thus far."

Civil Rights Issue?

{thanks, eric (and josie)!}

"These are the consequences if Prop 8 does not pass:

Children in public schools will have to be taught that same-sex marriage is just as good as traditional marriage. The California Education Code already requires that health education classes instruct children about marriage. (§51890) Therefore, unless Proposition 8 passes, children will be taught that marriage between any two adults is of the same worth, regardless of gender. There will be serious clashes between the secular school system and the right of parents to teach their children their own values and beliefs.

Churches may be sued over their tax exempt status if they refuse to allow same-sex marriage ceremonies in their religious buildings open to the public. Ask whether your pastor, priest, minister, bishop, or rabbi is ready to perform such marriages in your chapels and sanctuaries.

Religious adoption agencies will be challenged by government agencies to give up their long-held right to place children only in homes with both a mother and a father. Catholic Charities in Boston already had to stop providing adoption services in Massachusetts because courts legalized same-sex marriage there.

Religions that sponsor private schools with married student housing may be required to provide housing for same-sex couples, even if counter to church doctrine, or risk lawsuits over tax exemptions and related benefits.

Ministers who preach against same-sex marriages may be sued for hate speech and risk government fines. It already happened in Canada, a country that legalized gay marriage. A recent California court held that municipal employees may not say: "traditional marriage," or "family values" because, after the same-sex marriage case, it is "hate speech."

{thanks, greg!}


"On the state level in Arizona, there is a Proposition that I DO feel passionate about because it effects me and my children on a personal level. Prop. 102. If passed, it will add the following to the state constitution: Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. Before you call me "homophobe", hear me out. Essentially, what I don't want is the homosexual agenda forced on my family.

Don't think it will happen in our schools, funded by our tax dollars? An article was recently published in the San Fransisco Gate, applauding a class of first graders for going on a field trip to their teacher's same sex wedding (BTW-one argument I've seen says that it was a Charter School, therefore not funded by our tax dollars and the general public should have no say in the school's curriculum choices. Obviously, that person did not research charters. They are FULLY funded by our tax dollars.). When did non-curricular activities like this become appropriate? But it is justified because it's "teaching" the value of this type of union. What?!? I didn't make a field trip out of my nuptials! I am a huge advocate of parents teaching children values/principles/ethical beliefs at home. The school is NOT a place for teachers or administration to indoctrinate small children (or ANY children for that matter).

This will not be an isolated incident if Proposition 102 (or 8 in California) does not pass. It's true that it says nothing about adding same sex marriage to educational curriculum, but without the amendment, it will HAVE to be taught as equal to a traditional "one woman one man" union-a teaching I do not believe.

...In the end, the proposition is not about gay marriage at all, but about the protection of the definition of marriage. If Prop. 102 (also applies to 8) does not pass, there will no longer be ANY definition of marriage in our state constitution. This will open up a whole new can of worms-it starts with same-sex marriages, but where will it end? In a few years will a brother be able to marry his sister, man and three women, couples marry couples, a woman to her beloved cat? All joking aside, there will be no limits and lawsuits directed at churches, doctors, adoption agencies, and private companies will inundate the courts. This is not the environment that I want my children to grow up in. Gay or straight, male or female, I don't believe that any of us want the repercussions the elimination of a marriage definition will cause."

{thanks, bethany!}

In 1995, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints published The Family: A Proclamation to the World. It states:

"We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children. "

I believe this. I have a firm testimony of it. I have great admiration and love for those family members, friends, church, and community members who have taken a stand to protect the sanctity of marriage in CA by holding signs, making phone calls, and voicing their opinion "pro 8" despite the hateful, cruel, and uniformed things that have been spewn at them.

I know what I would be voting for on November 4th. Do you? Yes on 102. Yes on 8.