Each week we get a number of important questions that come into our office. This week, the important question we decided to answer is, does Exodus International have a policy on gay marriage? And the answer is, no, we don’t.
If you’ll remember, a number of years ago, we were involved in public policy. About five years ago, we decided that that was a major distraction for us, frankly, at Exodus international, for a number of reasons. First and foremost, we found the amount of energy and money being spent to fight against same-sex marriage was a poor comparison to the money and the time and the energy that was being spent serving people in need. Often times we’ve said that we have an angry and bitter gay rights movement because we in the church have created it. At Exodus International we don’t want to be a part of a stigmatizing or divisive debate. We want to be about an ongoing conversation with our neighbors. Whether our neighbors agree with us or not isn’t important, the fact of the matter is, the relationship with people is. That’s what Jesus has called us to do at Exodus International -- to be a part of a long conversation, not a raging debate. I hope you as believers will follow that lead, realizing that it is more important for us to be in people’s lives. To live our faith and to share our lives with others. That’s what we’re about at Exodus International.
I sense some coded language in a few things he said there.
does Exodus International have a policy on gay marriage? And the answer is, no, we don’t.
Sounds benign enough, until you take into consideration their past policy positions on the subject, in addition to the thoroughly dehumanizing contents contained in the link above.
Alan Chambers’ personal position on California’s Proposition 8:
I’m so grateful that back in 1990 and 1991 that [gay marriage] wasn’t something that stood in my way in coming to Christ in the way that he had me come to him. If that had been an option for me, I certainly would have chosen it...
As an organization (from the video):
At Exodus International we don’t want to be a part of a stigmatizing or divisive debate. We want to be about an ongoing conversation with our neighbors. Whether our neighbors agree with us or not isn’t important, the fact of the matter is, the relationship with people is. That’s what Jesus has called us to do at Exodus International -- to be a part of a long conversation, not a raging debate.
I maybe extrapolating too much here, but an “ongoing” and “long” conversation with neighbors who may disagree with your religious beliefs on the matter of marriage equality sounds more like a manipulative end game of conversion. Leading, of course, to an opening to convince them of the sinfulness of homosexuality, and by extension, same-sex marriage.
The terms “ex-gay,” “post-gay,” “formerly homosexual” etc., are in themselves an implication that one can choose to no longer have same-gender attractions, thereby upsiding the issue of same-sex marriage as being not a matter of equality, but one of irrelevance at best and a threat to the concept of fully and legally recognizing our love for our partners as being on par with that of heterosexual couples.
And lest we forget who the true victims are in all this...
Exodus may no longer publicly excoriate same-sex marriage in their rhetoric or on the current version of their website, but to me at least, it smacks of underhanded dog-whistle politics aimed at their members and supporters to continue spreading the word (just make sure to do it on the down-low).
And to cap it off, for an organization that bases it’s anti-gay beliefs on the Bible, not having a position on the subject is patently unbiblical:
I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.
Personally, I don’t think Alan Chambers is that dog-whistle devious or clever, but no matter, a proclaimed non-policy on the issue opens wide a sea of nefarious interpretation for those that are.
No, that's not the statement, but it tells you where this is going. -- I ran across this a few times lately and finally decided to Check it out.
MANHATTAN DECLARATION: A CALL OF CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE Drafted October 20, 2009 & Released November 20, 2009
Founded by anti-gay hate monger, Chuck Colson, and drafted by himself, Robert George and Timothy George.
The Manhattan Declaration has a preamble, a declaration, and follows with articles on "life" "marriage" and "religious liberty," and boasts of nearly half a million signatories.
Naturally I was drawn to the section on marriage, to see what was being said about me homsexuality.
They begin with a couple of Bible verses, here's one of them:
The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24
They then soften us up with some “acknowledgement” of mistakes (without the anti-gay parts):
We confess with sadness that Christians and our institutions have too often scandalously failed to uphold the institution of marriage ... we have too easily embraced the culture of divorce ... we repent, and call upon all Christians to do the same.
And then proceed to bash gay-marriage.
The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex [marriage] ... would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about procreation..."
Yes, I'm sure "romance" and "adult satisfactions" are the reasons why so many gay couples want to adopt.
We'll get back to that "procreation" song and dancee thing later.
We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct. We have compassion for those so disposed; we respect them as human beings possessing profound, inherent, and equal dignity
Yes, I felt more "dignified" by the syllable.
There's really nothing quite like having someone express their love and support for you than by characterizing the most precious moments of your life, shared with someone you love more than life itself, as a matter of good and evil.
Marriage is what one man and one woman establish when, forsaking all others and pledging lifelong commitment, they found a sharing of life at every level of being—the biological, the emotional, the dispositional, the rational, the spiritual— on a commitment that is sealed, completed and actualized by loving sexual intercourse in which the spouses become one flesh, not in some merely metaphorical sense, but by fulfilling together the behavioral conditions of procreation.
That is why in the Christian tradition, and historically in Western law, consummated marriages are not dissoluble or annullable on the ground of infertility, even though the nature of the marital relationship is shaped and structured by its intrinsic orientation to the great good of procreation.
So, in order to blunt the accusation of hypocrisy in regard to having no problem with non-procreative heterosexual-marriages, they now maintain that gays shouldn't be able to marry because LGBT-sex DOESN'T LOOK LIKE hetero-sex?
Anyone?
…the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships;
it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No.
No. No it could not be asserted with equal validity.
This argument states that should one event occur, so will other harmful events. There is no proof made that the harmful events are caused by the first event.
The fallacy here is the assumption that something is wrong because it is right next to something that is wrong. Or, it is wrong because it could slide towards something that is wrong.
So there's that, plus all this stuff:
-Given that incest is Biblically-approved (see Genesis), why would you even have a problem with incestuous marriage?
-Unlike same-gender attraction, being attracted to one's siblings is NOT a sexual orientation.
-There are direct social consequences to the legalization of incestuous marriage.
If the family unit, as you say, is indeed the cornerstone of society, then the home should the safest place. Legalizing incestuous marriages could fundamentally undermine the perceived sincerity of familial affection.
-slippery slope fallacy -Polygamy, also God approved -The desire to marry ONE partner is not the same as the desire to marry additional partners -Also, there are directsocial consequences of legalizing polygamous marriages.
The wealthiest would marry up hundreds if not thousands of potential mates for other men. Marriage would become a highly coveted privilege. Now add an ocean of testosterone with no place to go. The incidences of rape and molestation would skyrocket. -- And while we’re at it, whenever they compare the “sin” of homosexuality with the “sin” of adultery, they’re comparing having a partner with cheating on one’s partner. --- I am left to conclude one of three things about the drafters and many, if not most of the signatories of this "Declaration."
1. They know these arguments are bogus and are fully aware that they are lying. 2. They just don't care about the truth. 3. They really are that stupid.
I've been mulling on this since I first read the article and I think I've finally come to a conclusion. -- From Truth Wins Out: February 12th, 2010 by Wayne Besen
Why I Loathe The Term ‘Same-Sex Attraction’(SSA)
Personally, I don’t like the bogus term “SSA”, which stands for “same-sex attraction.” There is no such thing (or diagnosis) as SSA and it is a manipulative attempt to separate LGBT people from their natural, inborn sexuality.
The term SSA is skillfully employed to make it appear as if fundamentalist bigots are not attacking the person, just their sexual feelings.
He then quotes from this article to show the power of words. Note, this is a different quote from the article that TWO uses:
New Poll Shows Support for Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ February 11, 2010 By DALIA SUSSMAN
As the Obama administration proposes repealing the policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” a new New York Times/CBS News poll finds that a majority of the public support allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the military.
There’s less support, however, for allowing homosexuals to serve openly.
As one commenter put it: "The reason the far right uses the term “homosexual” is that it implies that our community consists of nothing but unfettered sexual urges on a daily basis."
Agreed. By using the term homosexuality, they are essentially able to characterize our equality-agenda as being sexually motivated. The use of the term "same-sex marriage" is no different.
When we hear "same-sex marriage," we think of marriage equality.
When they hear the term, they hear "sex marriage," reducing our motive for marriage-equality as being nothing more than a selfish desire to earn governmental recognition of our relationships promiscuity with the same person. Ergo, "sex marriage."
Another commenter had this to say: "SAME-GENDER MARRIAGE (SGM): Now, there’s a term I can understand and believe in. It’s not ambiguous to me at all."
I try to be consistent when using opposing terms, like, gay/straight heterosexual/homosexual, etc. It depends on what I'm writing and how I'm using the words.
So that much I'll defend in regard to the use of SSA, SSM, homosexual, etc.--sometimes they just fit.
But I will say that I have been, and will continue to use the terms "same-gender attraction" and "same-gender marriage" to help ensure that they are being taken in the context they were meant to be. As opposed to the anti-gay industry's use of the terms to reduce us, and the intimacy we share with our partners, as being nothing more than recurring sex acts.
I was familiar with him from (before the anti-gay movement kicked into overdrive) when I saw one of his inspiring sermons (on TV).
The second time I ran across him, he basically said that the root cause of same-gender attraction is the result of confusion. Which I take to mean that every gay person on the planet is just to stupid to see that they are attracted to the opposite sex.
So this time, I was naturally curious to see if he’d broach the subject. And broach he did.I’d add a caveat about the age of this DVD, and how his views may be different now, but the video is still for sale on his website.
Father John Corapi: So the P squad, that’s an attack--a contemporary attack on the family. The attack of the P squad: permissiveness, promiscuity, potions [drugs], pornography, prostitution and progressivism.
Homosexuality. So called alternative lifestyles. Whenever I have talked about this, someone always misunderstands me, even though I do take great pains to try clarify what I’m saying. But I always begin by saying “Look, we are called all people. You can’t hate any class of persons. Everyone is to be loved as God loves them. A person may have a particularly loathsome---to you---habit, persuasion, be in a certain class, maybe ethnics.
You know, when I was a kid, it wasn’t fashionable, yet, to be Italian. I remember being called those names, derogatory names, when I was a little kid. I kinda hurt me. And Irish people were discriminated against. In my home area in upstate New York, it was settled by the Dutch, and the English--Protestant. And in the 1850’s the Irish came, and they were persecuted by the Protestants--Christians. And then the Italians came and low and behold, the Irish persecuted the Italians. And then the Polish came, and low and behold the Pols were persecuted by the Italians and the Irish. And then the Hispanics came, and the Hispanics were looked down upon by the Pols, the Italians and the Irish, and everybody.
So I think we’re getting better. I think there’s less of that kind of thing. But we’ve got to be careful, we don’t want to look down. We don’t want to be derisive, we don’t want to be hateful, we don’t want to be bigoted--for whatever reason a person has that sexual orientation toward a person of the same sex, we don’t quite understand it yet.
It may be a variety of environmental, and societal things. It may even have a genetic component, I don’t know, but you want to know what I tell gay people? And I don’t hate them. Many of the very creative, sensitive--beautiful people. I’m not homophobic, at all, I’m not afraid of them. I say, you know what, you’re just like me---no, not that way---you’re just like me because like me, you’re called to celibacy.
That’s the answer. For whatever reason you are the way you are, and I sympathize, with being the way you are. It must be tough--It must be tough. But if you are in fact that way, then you are called to celibacy, just like me. I am human, there are days when I might be tempted to this that or the other thing. I’m called to celibacy, and I don’t question it, and I don’t doubt it, I know it. And may I die having been faithful to it, all the days of my priestly life--I don’t mess with that, that’s a fact. And I tell them, same for you until you can resolve that, or maybe you never will, you’re called to be celibate.
That’s an attack on the family. This nonsense of giving legal recognition to samesex partners. It’s a terrible contemporary attack on the family.
It will undermine society, and society will go from bad to worse. And it will unravel, it will crash, and it will burn.
First time I’ve ever heard this one:
“…you want to know what I tell gay people? …I say, you know what, you’re just like me, you’re just like me because like me, you’re called to celibacy.”
Alan Chambers of Exodus: This is why I believe that it is so important to clarify that just living a celibate gay life is just as sinful as living a sexually promiscuous one. The sin is in identifying with anything that is contrary to Christ, which homosexuality clearly is. (218)
So, every same-sex attracted human being on the earth is not just “called” to a life of celibacy, but "called" to hate themselves on top of it.
It also goes to show the disingenuousness of those who so rabidly condemn the symptom: "homosexual behavior,” rather than the so-called "cause" of the problem: “identifying with anything that is contrary to Christ”
“…you’re just like me because like me, you’re called to celibacy.”
Calling: impulse to follow particular job: a strong urge to follow a particular career or do a particular type of work
Impulse? Urge? That which one is drawn to most? Seems to me that homosexuality would fit more in line with the definition of "calling" than does celibacy, besides, human sexuality is not a "calling," it's an empirical fact.
“…you’re just like me because like me, you’re called to celibacy.”
First of all, who the hell are you to decide what another person's calling is, especially when it is based, arbitrarily, on an unverifiable third party source?
Secondly, I was supposedly “called” to celibacy AGAINST MY WILL---the very antithesis of what it means to be "called."
Third, what do you say to those who tell you that their “calling” is to fall in love? Oh that's right:
"This nonsense of giving legal recognition to samesex partners."
"Nonsense" being code for 'their love is fake, and their relationships irrelevant.'
--
We are NOT just like you, Fr. Corapi, there’s quite a difference between “a calling” and the perversion of its meaning.
We are called, by you (et al), to rebel against our own human-nature, yet no Golden Rule has been broken. Which puts your moral credibility into serious question.
--
Celibacy is not a “calling” for homosexuals any more than lefties are "called" not write with their left hand. In this case, it's a "calling" to a life sentence of solitary confinement. The kind of "calling" you suggest is IMMORAL.
And for the record, I don’t recall him having said anything about the effect of violence---and the promotion of it---as being an attack on the family (but he had plenty to say on the evils of birth control).
--
And then there's this:
Fr. Corapi: “we’ve got to be careful, we don’t want to look down. We don’t want to be derisive, we don’t want to be hateful, we don’t want to be bigoted.”
Father Corapi, I have no respect for those who preach that I'm too stupid to know what love is, or to recognize intentionally veiled condescension.
Until you can decipher the true meaning of right and wrong, you’re "calling" will remain as an atheist generator.
A federal bill reintroduced this week would place children and their need for a mother and a father at the mercy of an agenda to promote gay and lesbian couples.
Implying that the only reason gay couples adopt children is so that the kids can be used as props to “normalize” their own relationship in the eyes of the public.
If passed, the bill would make it illegal for states that give priority to married mother and father couples for foster care and adoption placement, to receive federal funds for the purpose. Read about it here.
Yep. From the link:
The bill would make it illegal for any entity involved with adoption or foster care placement that receives federal funding to discriminate in its placement decisions based on sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status. States whose statutes or policies conflict with the laws would need to change those policies or risk losing federal adoption funds.
And voilà , “big government” finds a family, and “small government” becomes an orphan.
There's some interesting stuff in section 2 of the bill that you may want to check out:
(4) As of 2007, gay, lesbian, and bisexual parents were raising 4 percent of all adopted children and fostering for 3 percent of all foster children. A report from the Evan B. Donaldson Institute found that an additional 2,000,000 gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals are interested in adoption.
(5) According to the Urban Institute, same-sex couples raising adopted children tend to be older, more educated, and have more economic resources than other adoptive parents. Studies confirm that children with same-sex parents have the same advantages and same expectations for health, social and psychological adjustment, and development as children whose parents are heterosexual.
Unlike FOTF's disingenuous show of concern for the wefare of foster kids, This bill really is about improving their lives. --- Extrapolating from the ‘bigotry should be government sanctioned' stance, Ms. Jenny decries this potential LGBT measure of equality as a travesty, managing to take swipes at gay marriage along the way:
1) …State policies favoring the most stable family structure for orphaned children would necessarily be thrown out in order to comply with the federal law. 2) …faith-based foster care and adoption organizations … [will] lose business with the state. 3) People of sincere religious faith will marginalized… 4) …Catholic Charities in D.C. had to drop its foster care services when the city council redefined marriage. 5) …Catholic Charities of Boston was run out of that state, too—just after same-sex marriage became law.
And apparently it’s all our fault.
~The Sociopath Next Door, p59:
Using fear-based propaganda to amplify a destructive ideology, such a leader can bring the members of a frightened society to see the its as the sole impediment to the good life, for themselves and maybe even for humanity as a whole, and the conflict as and epic battle between good and evil. Once these beliefs have been disseminated, crushing the its without pity or conscience can, with chilling ease, become and incontrovertible mandate.
And if there’s one thing the anti-gay industry knows how to do best, it’s how to portray a gay as an it. Gays are promiscuous, disease ridden, drug addicted, child molesters, to name just a few of the dehumanizing terms they use to turn us into its.
Also, did you know that CHILDREN NEED A MOTHER AND A FATHER!!!!
Six out of nine paragraphs include some combination of the words “mother” and “father,” the rest implied it:
1) need for a mother and a father 2) married mother and father 3) both a mother and a father 4) mother-father homes 5) a mother and a father. 6) need a mother and a father, and the best way to make that happen is still marriage.
~~~~
To use Jenny’s words; “It’s hard to know where to begin with all that is wrong with this.”
1)Let's start with the Gay Bashing used to decry LGBT adoptions:
a) …children…at the mercy of an agenda to promote gay and lesbian couples.
b) We all know that difficult situations arise and family policy should address those situations, but it shouldn’t create them.
c) The “family”… …[is] more specific than two adults—or the current fad in social engineering.
2)Faith based adoption agencies will be forced to shut down.
a) According to the article you linked to, That's only if they can't pay their own discriminatory way.
b) If an organization wants to discriminate against a certain group, then I think it's only ethical to not receive their tax dollars in doing so.
Why should discriminatory agencies be allowed to receive federal funding that includes a portion of the tax dollars of LGBT citizens and their supporters? Otherwise it's thievery.
c) Being organizations of faith, shouldn’t this be where your “faith” kicks in?
d) And finally, If a child-placement service---especially a faith based one---is willing to sacrifice the welfare of the many in order to starve the few, I think it’s fair to question the integrity of that organization. --- This was an interesting article in regard to how Catholic Charities of Boston was “run out of that state”:
Hehir said he hoped the decision will end the tumult surrounding the gay adoption issue. The controversy began in October when the Globe reported that Catholic Charities had been quietly processing a small number of gay adoptions, despite Vatican statements condemning the practice. Over the last decades, the Globe reported, approximately 13 children had been placed by Catholic Charities in gay households, a fraction [1/55th] of the 720 children placed by the agency during that period.
Agency officials said they had been permitting gay adoptions to comply with the state's antidiscrimination laws. But after the story was published, the state's four bishops announced they would appoint a panel to examine whether the practice should continue. In December, the Catholic Charities board, which is dominated by lay people, voted unanimously to continue gay adoptions.
3)“Children need a Mother and a Father”
OMG, by far the most irritating of all.
a) A motherload of a lie. If that was their concern they’d be fundraising to make divorce illegal.
5"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6"But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.'[a] 7'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,[b] 8and the two will become one flesh.'[c] So they are no longer two, but one. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
Yet man separates “one flesh” all the time. But who cares what the Bible says, right, FOTF?
b) Are you seriously suggesting that it would be better for a child to live in an abusive home with “a mother and a father,” than to live in a same-gender parented household that was safe?
c) The studies that FOTF points to that prove the power of the mom and dad, are too often (if not always), irrelevant and/or misleading in some way, but that’s whole ‘nother can of worms.
d) Placing so much emphasis on the importance of gender cheapens this theoretical “mother and father” down to an “Any married p and v will do” position.
~The Sociopath Next Door, p109:
When deciding whom to trust, bear in mind that the combination of consistently bad or egregiously inadequate behavior with frequent plays for your pity is as close to a warning mark on a conscienceless person’s forehead as you will ever be given.
Pity the “victims” of gay adoption, and then pity us, and our loss of yet another government subsidized expression of faith based hate religious freedom.
Boo. Hoo. --- The results of the studies on the welfare of kids in foster care are appalling. That’s a long article, you can get a sense of it here:
Now, consider a study released on April 7, 2005 by a large, Washington State-based foster-care provider, Casey Family Programs, and Harvard Medical School. The study used case records and interviews to assess the status of young adult “alumni” of foster care.
When compared to adults of the same age and ethnic background who did not endure foster care:
· Only 20 percent of the alumni could be said to be “doing well.” Thus, foster care failed for 80 percent. · They have double the rate of mental illness. · Their rate of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder was double the rate for Iraq War veterans. · The former foster children were three times more likely to be living in poverty – and fifteen times less likely to have finished college. · And nearly one-third of the alumni reported that they had been abused by a foster parent or another adult in a foster home. --- Why, then, do we continue to pour billions of dollars into a system which fails 80 percent of the time and actually abuses at least one-third of those forced into it?
We do it because, over 150 years, we’ve built up a huge, powerful network of foster-care “providers” – “a foster care-industrial complex” with an enormous vested interest in perpetuating the status quo.
If you click on one link in this article, that’s the one. It offers a variety of solutions to fix the broken foster-care system, focusing mainly on prevention. This is where Focus on the Family’s priorities should lie--ON THE FAMILY.
Focus on the Family has an annual budget of over 100 million dollars and boasts of a 38 state network of “Fully Associated Family Policy Councils.” So far, twenty-nine states have been successful in their bid to bash gay relationships by legal decree.
They’ve raised millions upon millions upon millions through campaigns of lies and deception. The sociopaths at the top make them up, and their nonthinking followers repeat them.
Bush’s trillion dollar deficit, a-okay. An unnecessary war that cost the lives of tens of thousands (at least), to the tune of another trillion, a-okay. Children languishing in foster care, children in foster care unnecessarily, families that can’t make ends meet--also, a-okay.
But two gay people in love who want to wed? That, classily enough, opens up the floodgates. Wallets open, volunteers appear, press releases claiming victimhood are “rushed” out, and church networking explodes in the effort to prevent any chance of it.
However, when it comes to raising funds for actual families in need, Focus and their 38 state network of "family" groups are MIA.
Rosie O’Donnell’s movie, America -Resources and disturbing facts section.
The sociopath next door-Amazon. -This book changed my life. It really helped me to better understand the atrocious behavior of the anti-gay industry’s talking heads and their non-thinking flocks.
Citizenlink 3-11-10 Gay Agenda in New York Classrooms
New York City schools are hosting a Respect for All week. --- Citizenlink was apparently unable to provide a link to these gay-agenda shenanigans, so I took the liberty of Googling the event to find out for myself.
Anti-Bullying and Harassment Week Will Kick Off on March 8 and Run through March 12, 2010
...The Department’s “Respect for All” initiative is New York City’s effort to combat bullying and harassment based on ethnicity, national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, and other characteristics...
Re video below: The two city advocates featured here, more than ‘made the case’ for the Respect For All program and seemed genuinely and passionately interested in its success (I especially enjoyed the reasons, facts and examples portion of the adult conversation ;).
Christine Quinn: But it was just very exciting today at the kickoff precedent, just to have such a hugely diverse group of New Yorkers standing behind us. Rabbis, Imams, Reverends, ..coalition, everybody there with a united message that everyone has to be respected in our public school system if children are going to have the ability to get a quality education.
Naturally, Focus on the Family---via Citizenlink---is having none of it. One of the characteristics listed on the scale of bullying is sexual orientation, which they invariably interpret to mean homosexuality:
Joseph Mattera, presiding bishop of the Christ Covenant Coalition, said that gives GLSEN a permanent foothold in New York City classrooms.
"The whole idea is just to soften up the students so that there will be a receptivity in the future to same-sex marriage or other gay-friendly curriculum," Mattera said.
“The whole idea ... gay-friendly curriculum”
Yes. And an ethnic-friendly curriculum, and a nationality-friendly curriculum, and a religion-friendly curriculum, and a disability-friendly curriculum, and a gender-friendly curriculum, etc --- As the sign says: Respect for All.
Which goes to a place called truetolerance.org; “a project of focus on the family”:
Concerned about the pro-gay agenda in your child’s public school? It’s sad, but many public schools have, in the name of “tolerance,” stifled free speech and true diversity by silencing students of faith, and those with conservative perspectives.
This isn’t true tolerance. True Tolerance means a free and respectful exchange of ideas.
One of those free and respectful exchanges of ideas might include the “truly tolerant” way of smearing any program that supports LGBT persons.
The Day of Silence is a student-led national event that brings attention to anti-LGBT name-calling, bullying and harassment in schools. ...The event is designed to illustrate the silencing effect of this bullying and harassment on LGBT students and those perceived to be LGBT.
And this is how truetolerance.org characterizes the participants of the pro-gay Day of Silence. definition (PDF) of the Day of Silence:
GLSEN claims its “Day of Silence” event, held annually in mid April, is about tolerance and safety. But if you pay close attention to the materials being distributed for this event, it’s clear there is a one-sided political agenda beneath the rhetoric.
They define concern for LGBT bullying as “rhetoric,” and then charge that “there is a one-sided political agenda beneath” it.
IMNSHO, truetolerance.org is essentially another site designed to bash any program that brings attention to gay-bashing.
Jayson Graves, a board member of Exodus International, co-hosts a show called “Pure Passion” (now in reruns). A show that highlights those who’ve supposedly overcome “sexual bondage.” Personally, I think it gives genuine testimony of changed (for the better) lives, and actually helps some people.
Unless you’re gay. Then you will get AIDS and die because of your “sinful behavior.” At least according to this program.
Jayson Graves (intro): Welcome to Pure Passion. My name is Jayson Graves and I’m your host for today’s program.
Did you know that the US Center for Disease Control has a fact sheet they’ve issued, which says that in 2006, 54% of HIV infections among males age 13-29, were caused by homosexual contact. As well, that demographic is the only one that is seeing an increased rate of HIV infection in this country. Sadly, there were over 56,000 people in the US who were newly infected with HIV that same year, most of them being homosexual men.
The CDC fact sheet went on to say that 77% of HIV positive homosexual men, between the ages of 15 and 29, do not know they’ve been infected.
Another study shows that HIV positive, practicing homosexual men, are 9000% more likely to develop anal cancer.
Even in Canada, the HIV / AIDS rates have risen sharply, 51% of infections are now found among homosexual men.
On today’s program, we’re going to talk with a man who has AIDS. These are always sobering stories, but it’s important that we become informed on the subject.
So let’s hear Dan’s testimony, and let it be a witness not only to the consequences of sinful behavior, but, also to the power and love of God, to cleanse us, and forgive us, from all unrighteousness.
The entire intro was devoted to the conclusion that HIV/AIDS are due to "sinful behavior."
From the Exodus website: "In brief, AIDS is better seen as a reaping of consequences than as God's wrath on a specific group."
Exodus leaves it up to the reader to decide whether or not AIDS is God's punishment.
Timothy Kicaid of Box Turtle Bulletin crunched some numbers and estimates that there is a "5.9% incidence of gay people (men and women) who are living with HIV/AIDS"
Instead of expressing a desire to find a cure and/or vaccine for the disease, they exploit, in God's name, the 6% of us who are suffering and dying, to suggest to their audience that anyone GLB or T are are warehouses of infectious disease.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think it‘s appropriate to criminalize homosexual conduct anymore?
BROWNBACK: I can‘t - I don‘t know the specifics of the bill. I‘ve learned you need to know what‘s actually -
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, just in general terms?
BROWNBACK: Well, I‘m not going to comment on something.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right. Well, thanks, senator.
"Do you think it‘s appropriate to criminalize homosexual conduct anymore?"
Brownback took it in his mind to respond to "the specifics of the Bill" in lieu of addressing the most pertinent part of the issue---the criminalization of homosexuality. --- Reconstructionism/Dominionism:
The use of the death penalty would be greatly expanded, when the Hebrew Scriptures' laws are reapplied. People will be executed for adultery, blasphemy, heresy, homosexual behavior, idolatry, prostitution, evil sorcery (some translations say Witchcraft), etc. The Bible requires those found guilty of these "crimes" to be either stoned to death or burned alive. Reconstructionists are divided on the execution method to be used.
RWW links to an article that addresses the DC's City Counsel's vote to legalize gay marriage.
From that article:
Opponents, however, said the issue is far from settled. Members of a group called Stand4Marriage, led by local pastor Bishop Harry Jackson, have met with members of Congress to urge them to oppose the bill...
..."If it gets to the vote, we win," he said, referencing the other states where residents overturned same-sex marriage laws.
One of the Biblical passages [1 Corinthians 13:1] Stand4Marriage quotes is thus:
If I speak with human eloquence and angelic ecstasy but don't love, I'm nothing but the creaking of a rusty gate.
Stand4marriage then goes on to state the rest of the verse that explains the 'true' meaning of love, (essentially, that it's unconditional).
This coming from a man who asserts in his book---The Truth in Black & white---that homosexuality is a choice [p147].
This chosen belief about LGBT persons is a common excuse to justify the non-passage of pro-equality laws.
I vote that his love is of the "rusty gate" kind. --- Much more on Jackson here.
Maddow's coverage on Ugandagate (to my recollection) began this Monday 11-30, and has been ongoing since. I have included the video clips of these segments as well as their corresponding transcripts for the sake of full coverage and ease of quotation.
I wish to emphasize the point that we often feel that we are “preaching to the choir” in regard to pro-gay watchdog sites.
What we may not remember is that the “choir” still needs to be preached to. Too many in the LGBT community are CLUELESS as to the threats we face in the political arena.
I was talking with a friend of mine (gay) from high school awhile back, about the threats we face from mostly, the religious right, in regard to marriage equality. He replied, paraphrased: “I think all they really want is to keep the name ‘marriage’.” A ridiculous assertion to those of us who are actively engaged in the current culture war.
I also attended the recent Anti-Heterosexism Conference in West Palm Beach and spoke with several activists who organized the nearby NARTH conference protest and this past march on Washington, and they told me stories of how difficult it was to get support and involvement with not only LGBT persons, but also with pro-LGBT groups. So this kind of apathy seems to be epidemic.
My point being, in regard to this post, is that the importance of in depth MSM coverage like this should not be underestimated. The Rachel Maddow show, I suspect, has an almost exclusively liberal/progressive audience, and so it’s expose´s like this that may help to waken some of those in our community, and allies, who continue to slumber.
A point of note, you can now edit the portions of the Rachel Maddow clips you wish to embed. I don’t know if that extends to all MSNBC shows, but it was a welcome discovery in putting this post together.
MADDOW: The government of Uganda is considering passing a law to execute gay people. Execute as in by hanging a, quote, “serial offender” or an HIV-positive person who commits same sex act. If enacted, this law would also impose a three-year prison sentence on anyone who knows of a gay person in the country but doesn‘t report that gay person to the government within 24 hours.
Who is supporting and promoting this legislation? Well, one of the proponents is a minister named Pastor Martin Ssempa. He was a familiar face to American conservative Evangelicals, because Mr. Ssempa has been a frequent guest of Pastor Rick Warren at One Saddleback Church in California.
Do you remember Rick Warren? Him being selected to deliver the invocation at Barack Obama‘s inauguration was the little black cloud that crawled inside the silver lining that day for a lot of Americans who support gay rights.
Given with Rick Warren‘s deep involvement with Pastor Ssempa on matters including gay rights and AIDS issues in Uganda, “Newsweek” magazine asked Pastor Rick Warren his opinion of this proposed “kill the gays” law in Uganda.
Mr. Warren responded by distancing himself from Martin Ssempa, but also by refusing to condemn the proposal saying, quote, “It is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations.”
In a moment, we‘ll speak with Jeff Sharlet who has written extensively about the secret of Evangelical religious organization called The Family. We first started discussing The Family on this show when it emerged as a player in, not two, but three Republican sex scandals - those of South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, Nevada Senator John Ensign and the alleged sex scandal involving former Mississippi Congressman Chip Pickering.
The Family, among other things, provides well-below market rent housing for a select group of members of Congress at its, until recently, nearly tax-exempt church on Capitol Hill - a house called C Street.
Jeff Sharlet is now reporting that there aren‘t just ties between American Evangelical Rick Warren and the “kill the gays” bill in Uganda. He reports that, in fact, the president of Uganda and the legislator who introduced the “kill the gays” bill are more than just supported by American Evangelicals. They are both members of The Family.
Joining us now is Jeff Sharlet, author of “The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power.” He is also a contributing editor to “Harper‘s” magazine. Jeff, it‘s nice to see you again. Thanks for joining us.
JEFF SHARLET, AUTHOR, “THE FAMILY”: Good to be back, Rachel. Thanks.
MADDOW: So who introduced the “kill the gays” bill and what‘s his connection to The Family?
SHARLET: It‘s a member of parliament named David Bahati who has been very involved with a sort of conservative Evangelical revival in Uganda, very involved with a lot of American Evangelical groups and has also taken a leadership role in The Family‘s Uganda operation through something called the African Student Leadership Program at the Uganda‘s National Prayer Breakfast, which is an offshoot of the prayer breakfast The Family hosts every year here in the United States.
So he‘s got this leadership role that puts him not just at the sort of the margin of things, but functioning as one of their key men on the ground in Uganda.
MADDOW: In the big picture, why is The Family interested in Uganda? Why are they interested in operating there? And what are their goals there?
SHARLET: Well, The Family has always viewed its religious outreach, its worldwide spiritual offensive, as they describe it, in very clear geopolitical terms. Uganda, right now, is an incredibly important country for world politics. It‘s functioning in many ways as a U.S. proxy with Sudan, with Congo, with Rwanda.
There‘s oil in that general region and The Family needs to have a presence out there. They‘ve had that presence in Uganda since 1986 when they sent over a man to recruit Museveni who was then the new leader. Didn‘t look like a bright Democratic spot in African leadership. And they recruited him to be one of their main brothers, as they put it, for the whole continent.
MADDOW: So President Museveni in Uganda - he‘s not explicitly backing this horrendous bill. But it is thought that he tacitly supports it, at least as far as I can tell, and that the ethics and integrity minister in his government is vocally in favor of this thing. You‘re saying he has Family connections that go back decades.
SHARLET: Yes, to 1986. And it‘s hard to call it passive support when he‘s coming out there and saying that homosexuality is a plot that‘s sort of being imposed on Africa by Europe and that this is a time for Africans to rally together against sort of the foreign influence of homosexuality.
Now, Museveni is - the thought in Ugandan politics is that he‘s sort of letting other guys take the lead on this. But through his ethics minister, who is the main organizer of the National Prayer Breakfast in Uganda and it‘s his right-hand man - he‘s got a direct involvement.
And just last week, in fact, Museveni responded to questions from Uganda‘s main newspaper, is he a part of The Family. And his press secretary said, “Well, I can‘t answer that.” But it certainly sounds like an organization the president would like to be a part of but only if they really, really hate homosexuals.
MADDOW: Wow. That bastardization of that Groucho Marx quote is running through my head right now. Back in July, Jeff, you uncovered a video and we played it on the show, of Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, a Republican senator in the United States. He‘s got admitted association with C Street and The Family.
We played video that you found of him talking about his trips taken to Africa on the urging of leaders of The Family. I just want a real quick clip to remind folks here.
SEN. JIM INHOFE(R-OK): If you‘re a member of the United States Senate, in Africa, they think you are important, so you can always go to see the kings.
MADDOW: You always get in to see the kings. Is Sen. Inhofe or any other American politician powerful enough among Ugandan politicians that they could derail this legislation if they wanted to?
SHARLET: Well, working with colleagues, I‘ve reached out to Inhofe‘s office and he refuses to say a word about it despite the fact that he likes to boast of his incredibly close relationship with Ugandan politics. He‘s attended the Uganda National Prayer Breakfast. He says, in fact, he has adopted the nation and he regularly travels over there in behalf of The Family. Yet, he‘s refused to condemn it. Does he have the influence? We don‘t know because he‘s not exerting it. It‘s just like Rick Warren. Could Rick Warren, who has designated Uganda a purpose-driven nation, make a difference?
We don‘t know because they‘re not trying. And I think that‘s the kind of the bottom line with the American involvement. There‘s been a lot of American support for the guys who are promoting this bill and no pushback against this incredibly hateful piece of violence put in the legislation.
MADDOW: Jeff Sharlet is author of “The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power.” Thanks, as always, for joining us, Jeff. I really appreciate it.
Rachel Maddow: [T]oday is world AIDS Day. And for that occasion, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has announced a ground-breaking Obama administration policy which, awkwardly enough, reverses a policy implemented during the Reagan administration that was codified into law during the Clinton administration. It‘s a law that banned HIV positive people from traveling to the United States. The Obama administration has finally dropped that inexplicable ban and one immediate consequence of that is that the world‘s largest AIDS conference can once again be held in the United States. For the first time since 1990, when you might recall Paula Abdul‘s “Opposites Attract” was the No. 1 hit.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: Today, I‘m pleased to announce that with the repeal of the ban, the International AIDS Society will hold the 2012 International AIDS Conference in Washington, D.C.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Secretary Clinton also using World AIDS Day to make a legacy-defining statement that the United States would not tolerate homophobia on the international stage.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CLINTON: We have to stand against any efforts to marginalize and criminalize and penalize members of the LGBT community, worldwide. It is an unacceptable step backwards on behalf of human rights.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: And if that sounded to you like an oblique reference to the Kill the Gay‘s bill in Uganda which we covered last night on this show, yes, it sounded like that to me, too.
We are learning more today about anti-gay extremism in Uganda and its connections to American extremists. Last night, investigative journalist, Jeff Charlotte, laid out for us the web connecting the author of the bill, calling for the death penalty for so-called “aggravated homosexuality” in Uganda. The connections between him and Pastor Rick Warren. And to our favorite denizens of “C” Street, the family.
But three other Americans are also closely linked to the proposed Kill the Gay‘s law. They are members of the so-called, “Ex-gay Movement,” who back, in March, spoke at a conference in Uganda, and riling up anti-gay fervor in that country.
The direct result of that conference, according to in-depth coverage in London‘s “Guardian” newspaper, was this bill that‘s now before the Ugandan parliament. So, who were the Americans who went to Uganda to stir up anti-gay fervor? And why are at least two of them now distancing themselves from the harsh consequences of their rhetoric? We‘ll have much more about them on tomorrow night‘s show, you may want to clear your schedule. -- And finally, the most recent clip from December 2nd, 2009:
Rachel Maddow: Bill number 18, The Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009, section 2, subsection 2: A person who commits the offense of homosexuality shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.
Section 3, subsection 2: A person who commit’s the offense of aggravated homosexuality shall be liable on conviction to suffer death.
Section 4, subsection 1: A person who attempts to commit the offense of homosexuality commits a felony, and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for 7 years.
If you attempt to commit aggravated homosexuality, that’s life imprisonment.
Then there’s Section 13, subsection 1B: A person who funds or sponsors homosexuality is liable on conviction to a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 7 years imprisonment.
Then there’s Section 14: Where if you know if someone who’s gay, you can get 3 years for not reporting that person to the authorities.
Then there’s section 16, where they will extradite their citizens from anywhere in the world, back to this country for prosecution if that citizen commits any of these crimes of homosexuality, somewhere else on God’s green Earth.
This is Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 [PDF, courtesy Warren Throckmorton, via the Rachel Maddow show]. It was introduced this fall after 3 American evangelical activists, who proclaim that homosexuality can be cured, traveled to Uganda this spring to lead an anti-homosexuality inspirational seminar. The more we investigate, the more Americans we’ve turned up with links to this, so I will warn you that you can expect some continuing coverage from us on this issue.
But tonight, we’ve obtained some reactions from the three anti-gay American activists who’s travel to Uganda is credited with inspiring the kill-the-gays legislation.
They are Don Schmierer of the group Exodus International, a group that claims that Christianity can cure you of being gay. Also, Caleb Lee Brundidge of the group The International Healing Foundation, which also says that it tries to change gay people into straight people. And there’s Scott Lively, president of a group called Defend the Family, and author a book call The Pink Swastika.
These are the three American anti-gay gay-people-can-be-cured speakers who traveled to Uganda earlier this year, and who are credited with having inspired the kill-the-gays bill that is being considered in that country now.
Mr. Schmierer has said the he is opposed to the kill-the-gays legislation, and he says that he’s signed onto a letter to Uganda’s president, against it.
The group with which Mr. Brundidge is associated, first, denied knowing anything about the bill’s existence, and asked us for a copy of it. After we emailed them the legislation, they issued a statement that quote “We condemn any harsh and extreme punishment of persons who identify as homosexual or engage in homosexual behavior. Instead, we advocate education and counseling for those who experience unwanted Same-Sex Attraction.”
Education and counseling to cure you of ’the gay.’
Then there’s the last one, Mr. Scott Lively, the Pink Swastika guy. He told Lifesite news.com that the law is too harsh, but quoting “Dr. Lively explained that the impetus for the bill was "a lot of external interference from European and American gay activists attempting to do in Uganda what they've done around the world - homosexualize that society." One of their main concerns, explained Mr. Lively, "are the many male homosexuals coming in to the country and abusing boys who are on the streets."
So I mean, can you really blame them? I mean, of course Uganda wants to execute people for being gay. May be a little harsh, but it’s a normal reaction to all this pressure they’ve been getting. Can you blame them?
We thank Mr. Lively, Mr. Schmierer, and Mr. Brundidge, for giving us their reactions to the bill they reportedly inspired, to the extent that they responded to our calls for comment.
If American anti-gay activists inspired this bill, are there other Americans who have the clout to stop it from passing? You bet there are, and it turns out that a lot of them are household names. And so far, as far as we can tell, they have done nothing. We continue to investigate this, our next segment on the kill-the-gays bill tomorrow will familiarize you with some of the Americans who probably could stop this, who apparently don’t want to. That’s tomorrow. ----------------- So stay tuned. Literally, The Rachel Maddow show airs on MSNBC @ 9E 8C
The American Humanist Association has launched a nationwide promotion to undermine Christmas. The "National Godless Holiday" campaign includes a series of bus and rail ads that take a swipe at the Christmas celebration, exhorting people to "Be Good for Goodness' Sake."
Oh the humanity. What a bad thing it is to "Be Good for Goodness' Sake." Unlike those who need to be told by the Bible to be good. How ever will supremacist Christians regain their monopoly on goodness?
According the The American Humanist Association, they are "driven by a desire to meet the needs of people in the here and now, and "The positions we hold and the actions we take are not simply for our own benefit, but for the betterment of all of society."
Pretty ominous, eh?
Back to the Citizenlink article:
Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University School of Law, said the ads are insensitive and mean.
"It is wrong to belittle Jews for celebrating Hanukkah during the holiday season, and it is wrong to offend all religions during Christmas."
Of course, Jews and the members of all other religions are going to burn in a lake of fire for all eternity---by a loving god no less. But that doesn't discourage Staver and Focus on the Family from exploiting them--No doubt for goodness' sake.
And as far as “insensitive and mean” goes, that’s quite rich coming from Matt Staver. This is a man who argued in front of the California Supreme Court to deny marriage equality.
Same sex relations will not accidentally, unintentionally, in an unplanned fashion, produce children.
This is also a man who penned a book called “Same-Sex Marriage: Putting Every Household at Risk." A book that contains some of the most hateful and vile rhetoric and slander that I have ever read in an anti-gay book.
In Chapter 3: Our Children At Risk, he had this to say on p46:
Another study found a significant increase in the risk of incest among children raised by homosexual parents. “A disproportionate percentage---29 percent of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of the adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent…Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor about 50.” (92)
And what does footnote 92 list as its source, you ask. *drum roll please*…The long-time discredited lord of virulently anti-gay fake studies, Paul Cameron. -- Psychopath: A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse.
I have to admit, there must be nothing quite like seeing your High School guidance counselor appear on TV, to express to the world, what a piece of shit you are if you are GLB or T---AND THEN COMPLAIN ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF DOING SO!
They isolate gays as being unworthy of hate-crime protection, attempt to hide that fact by pretending that they are against ALL hate-crime legislation, and then claim it’s not about hate.
Rick Scarborough highlights these points, and then some:
Rick Scarborough: But I don’t believe hate-crimes legislation is about protecting homosexuals, I think it’s about silencing alternate speech.
For the first time in American Jurisprudence, we now have laws on the books, and this adds to those laws, where lady justice has to drop the blindfold, speak out, and see who it is that’s being protected, and then mitigate justice based upon one person as being superior to another person. One of our speakers hit that hard and very clear. That’s the problem I have with it. --- I think it’s much superior to have a life in a world, I should say, or a country, where this group [pro-gay] can have their rallies, we can have our rallies--let the superior idea win.
I’m not here to hurt anyone, or to infringe on anyone’s rights, but I’m going to die protecting my own. And that is the American way.
"justice based upon one person as being superior to another person"
That’s a load of garbage, as he is equally protected under the same hate-crime legislation, as per religion and sexual orientation.
"I think it’s much superior to … let the superior idea win"
That “superior idea” being that GLBT Americans are inferior, a "right" he is willing to “die” for, and considers to be the “American way.”
Rick Scarborough: So listen, homosexuality is a sinful lifestyle. Therefore homosexuals, and this is just going to burn people that disagree. But homosexuals by definition are immoral people. They’re breaking the moral codes and standards of God.
Now, if a man will commit the act of sodomy, you can pretty well decide he will do about anything, include lying.
Opponents of Question 1 call on activists to turn churches in to the IRS in an attempt to revoke tax-exempt status.
Ken Graves, senior pastor at Calvary Chapel in Bangor, said..."We've directly consulted the ethics commission here in the state of Maine with regard to our political involvement."
Graves said they must stand up for biblical values.
First of all, notice that this Focus on the Family "reporter," spelled Bible---THE Bible---with a small b. Apparently, Focus on the Family's Nima Reza doesn't think God's Word is worth capitalizing.
As far as "Biblical values" go, we know that by sheer logic, Adam and Eve's children (and possibly them) "committed" incest in order to "be fruitful and multiply."
2 Samuel 12:8: I gave your master's house to you, and your master's wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.
Luke 16:18: Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
So much for "Biblical values," or should I say "biblical values"
Pastor Ken Graves states that they've reported their political involvement to the "ethics commission here in the state of Maine...". Implying, of course, that his motives were "ethical."
does not discriminate against gays restores the meaning of marriage marriage is between a man and a woman. marriage is between a man and a woman does not take away any rights from gay and lesbian Gays and lesbians…enjoy…the legal rights and benefits of marriage same-sex marriage…redefines marriage for all of society. Mainers will have to accept a radical new understanding of marriage healthy marriages will be eliminated instruct…kindergartners about marriage teaching our kids that gay marriage is the equivalent of traditional marriage. marriage is between a man and a woman gay marriage advocates want to change the definition of marriage gays living the lifestyle they choose redefine marriage for the rest of society. the legal meaning of marriage definition of marriage definition of marriage marriage is only between a man and a woman.
According to that page, they needed to pass this pro-hatred legislation in order to protect their thoughts on the matter.
It maintains the rights and benefits of Maine same-sex couples who are covered by our domestic partners law. A YES vote does not take anything away from homosexual couples, but protects traditional marriage.
What does a NO Vote Mean?
Maine law will no longer promote monogamous marriages and the interests of children. Marriage’s powerful influence on the betterment of society will be lost.
No longer will the interests of children and families even be a consideration.
would destroy marriage as we know it and cause profound harm to society
Question 1 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits from gay or lesbian partners who are covered by Maine’s domestic partners law.
parents will lose control over what their kids learn in school about marriage and sexual orientation
parents who do not want their children exposed to this homosexual marriage instruction have been denied an opportunity to opt their children out.
As is usual for these morally bankrupt "family" groups, it's a literal feast of distortion, deception and lies.
Voting Yes on Question 1, A People’s Veto does three simple things.
•It restores the definition of marriage to what Maine law has always been and what human history has always understood marriage to be. [protect fragile thoughts about marriage]
•It strengthens democracy and places the power to alter or overturn laws where it always should be- with the people. [tyranny of the majority]
•It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage. [protects children from thinking that gays are equal to straights]
Fraud: deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.
Pastor Graves, where in the Bible does it say that God approves of fraud?
