Well said, JiveSlew. I think it's quite telling that 70 percent of the black voters would not extend the civil rights they have rightfully earned to gays. After all, they do not have a choice about their skin color although gays certainly can do something about a sexual disorder that is no different from indecencies committed by straights.

Just received the latest e-mail from Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage with the latest developments and thoughts about this issue, which follows. Interesting that the Sacramento paper thinks the No on 8 folks are veering into harassment, while a law expert thinks the state high court justices would be contradicting themselves if they once again overturn the will of the people:

This week the gay marriage movement pulled off the gloves--and the veil--and showed what they intend.

A TV ad campaign viciously attacking a religious minority has been followed by a week of public intimidations, threats, calls for retribution, and attacks on people's livelihoods, like nothing I've ever seen before.

And this unprecedented flood of sheer hatred against Americans who think marriage is the union of husband and wife has been applauded and encouraged by mainstream, powerful politicians and organizations.

What is Arnold Schwarzenegger, a white Republican, doing calling on courts to invalidate the votes of the 70 percent of African-Americans who voted to uphold marriage as one man and one woman? Not to mention the rest of California voters?

A vile television ad portraying a religion minority as "home invaders" because they participated in the political process was actually applauded by the Los Angeles Times, who said we needed more "hard-hitting" ads like this one inciting religious hatred.

The calls for "in-your-face radicalism" have had a predictable result: horrifying attacks--physical and verbal--on peaceful, law-abiding Americans simply because they've exercised their core civil rights to vote, to speak, and to donate. There have even been fake anthrax attacks--which are nothing other than domestic terrorism--against LDS temples in Salt Lake City and Los Angeles.

What is happening to America?

But the word is slowly beginning to get out. The Sacramento Bee just told Prop 8 opponents their actions are crossing the line into harassment.

Maggie Gallagher made the same point Wednesday morning on Fox News(.

And I appear at the end of an excellent Los Angeles Channel 4 (KNBC) story on the protests--and the targeting of African-Americans.

What will happen next week, when the court rules on a request for a preliminary injunction against Prop 8?  In these extraordinary times, there are no guarantees. But let me tell you how off-the-wall and completely frivolous these legal charges are. 

Don't believe me. Look to Prof. Daniel Lowenstein, a professor of law at UCLA, whose textbook, "Election Law," was the first textbook on the subject to be published in the U.S. Prof. Lowenstein is the co-editor of the Election Law Journal. He has published articles on the initiative process in the UCLA Law Review and the Election Law Journal, and articles on many aspects of election law in many different journals, including the Harvard Law Review, Stanford Law Review, Texas Law Review, and the University of Chicago Legal Forum.

This is what he says about the gay-marriage advocates' attempt to overturn the constitutional rights of the 7 million Californians who voted for marriage:

"The contention that Proposition 8 is a constitutional revision rather than an amendment borders on the frivolous.  For the California Supreme Court to rule otherwise would be for the justices in the majority to place their own will over the rule of law, as enunciated in their own precedents."

Stay tuned. We'll be your voice for decency, for common sense, for the civil rights of Americans who support marriage.

Thank you for your courage in defense of the good, for generations to come.

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ  08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org

This Week's Articles: 
Prop 8's Battle Lessons  
Editorial
Los Angeles Times
November 11, 2008

Ever since Proposition 8 passed Nov. 4, enshrining heterosexual-only marriage in the California Constitution, demonstrators from Sacramento to San Diego have staged daily marches and protests to express their anger and disappointment that homosexuals will continue to be treated as second-class citizens. It's a stirring movement, reminiscent of past civil rights struggles, but it raises a troubling question: Where were these marchers before the election?

Like nearly every aspect of the fight against Proposition 8, the recent protests come too late to make a difference. Opponents of the measure ran a disorganized campaign that consistently underestimated the strength of the other side. Apparently lulled by poll numbers that showed the initiative was likely to fail, the campaign's fundraising efforts were lackluster -- until it discovered that the Yes on 8 side was raking in millions from Mormons and members of other churches. By the time fundraising began in earnest, there wasn't time to mount a strong opposition.

Same-sex marriage advocates produced only one hard-hitting commercial, depicting a pair of Mormon missionaries ripping up the wedding license of a married gay couple, but didn't air it until election day. The campaign made little effort to reach out to the African American community, whose large turnout and overwhelming support of Proposition 8 were enough to put it over the top. And while it's nice that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger now says he hopes that the courts will overturn the initiative, he was all but invisible before Nov. 4.

The failure of leadership extends beyond the governor. If there was a public face to the No on 8 campaign, it was San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who is (notoriously) heterosexual. Where were the gay leaders? It's hard to imagine the civil rights movement of the 1960s succeeding without Martin Luther King Jr. or Malcolm X, or to imagine the women's suffrage movement without the likes of Susan B. Anthony.

Wresting equal rights from a society reluctant to grant them isn't easy. It can take years of nonviolent resistance, passionate speeches and even in-your-face radicalism. If people who voted yes on Proposition 8 say they didn't see it as a civil rights matter, that's because until now there has been nothing resembling a civil rights crusade by the gay community. Courts can assist downtrodden groups, but they never have and never will be enough to guarantee equality on their own.

The fight for gay equality won't end with Proposition 8; it will continue until the battle is won, in California and across the nation. Supporters should take some lessons from the many mistakes made in this round.


FBI: White Powder Mailed to Temple Harmless; Church, Gay-Rights Groups Respond
Ben Winslow Deseret News
November 14, 2008

Preliminary tests have found that a white powdery substance found in an envelope mailed to LDS Church headquarters is not hazardous, the FBI said.

"There is no known toxins or biological agents," FBI Special Agent Juan Becerra told the Deseret News.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' First Presidency issued a statement Friday urging respect and civility in public discourse. Gay rights groups are also condemning the threats.

Lab tests were conducted overnight to determine whether the powder that slipped out of an envelope opened in the annex of the Salt Lake Temple was ricin, anthrax, smallpox or any other deadly toxin. They came back negative, but further tests were being conducted on Friday by state health officials, Becerra said.

The FBI on Friday also said it has labeled their probe into the suspicious substances as a domestic terrorist investigation.

"Obviously it instills fear in the public eye and causes people not to feel safe," Becerra said. "It is illegal to mail something out and to threaten the use of a biological weapon or even pretend it's a biological weapon."

The LDS temples in Salt Lake City and Los Angeles received envelopes on Thursday containing a white powdery substance. So did the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization based in New Haven, Conn. Both organizations were heavy backers of Proposition 8, the measure in California that narrowly passed Nov. 4, banning same-sex marriage.

The FBI said it is a "strong possibility" that all three letters are linked, but federal investigators reiterated they have no information to point a finger of blame at the proposition and its opponents.

"The evidence does not lead to that right now and it would be irresponsible to say anything otherwise," Becerra said.

He would not say if federal agents had identified any suspects. No one has claimed responsibility for the mailings.

In a statement, the First Presidency of the LDS Church said that since the Nov. 4 election, places of worship have been targeted with protests and vandalism.

"People of faith have been intimidated for simply exercising their democratic rights. These are not actions that are worthy of the democratic ideals of our nation," the statement said. "The end of a free and fair election should not be the beginning of a hostile response in America."

The LDS Church said it was keenly aware of the "differences of opinion on this difficult and sensitive manner," but the First Presidency expressed disappointment in what it has seen since Prop. 8 passed.

"We call upon those who have honest disagreements on this issue to urge restraint upon the extreme actions of a few that are further polarizing our communities and urge them to act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility towards each other," the statement said.

In its own statement, the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center decried the threats.

"While the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center organized a peaceful demonstration against the involvement of the leadership of the Mormon Church in the deceitful Yes on Prop. 8 campaign, we decry the use or threat of violence," said Darrel Cummings, the center's chief of staff.

"Just as the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community seeks the right to be treated equally under the law, all Americans should have the right to live lives free from fear and violence."

The gay rights group Equality Utah also issued a statement Friday condemning violence, vandalism or intimidation.

"During such an emotional time, where wounds run deep, we must remind ourselves of the greater good," executive director Mike Thompson said. "We must make efforts to forgive where forgiveness is needed and fix what needs to be fixed. We must find ways to work together — families in our community are depending on us. As the LDS Church stated, we can build a better society. Equality Utah is committed to doing just that."

Thompson reiterated his call for the LDS Church to work with them on gay rights legislation including medical rights, housing and employment rights and domestic partnerships that past church statements said LDS leaders did not oppose.

"Equality Utah remains confident that the LDS Church will be true to its past public statements that it is not anti-gay," Thompson said.

LDS temples in California, Salt Lake City and New York have been the subject of mass demonstrations over the faith's heavy involvement in the campaign to pass Proposition 8. More demonstrations are planned this weekend over marriage and gay rights -- including a pair of demonstrations in Salt Lake City.

 
Bitterness Serves No One's Interest  
Editorial
Sacramento Bee
November 13, 2008

Nine days after voters approved Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriages in California, the raw emotions that fueled and fought this initiative remain as volatile as ever.

Angry opponents of Proposition 8 are targeting businesses and individuals who contributed money to the "yes" campaign. Vandals have hit churches that supported the initiative. Sparked by the speed and reach of the Internet, supporters of gay and lesbian rights are organizing protests from California to Salt Lake City, the home of the Mormon Church.

The charged reaction is understandable. Gays and lesbians view Proposition 8 as part of a long line of state-sanctioned discriminatory acts that feed hate and violence against homosexuals.

They are frustrated that the Proposition 8 campaign misled so many voters into thinking that, if the initiative failed, churches would be forced to marry same-sex couples and schools would have to include gay rights in their curriculum.

And they are astounded that California, a diverse state that has been a leader in extending privileges to domestic partners, would amend its constitution to deny marriage rights to a single group of people.

Yet in venting their anger and in exercising their right to challenge Proposition 8, some opponents risk crossing the line that separates civil protest from harassment. And by crossing that line, they undermine the message that some gay and lesbian leaders are trying to impart: that everyone's rights should be respected.

Consider the case of Scott Eckern, the former artistic director of the California Musical Theatre.

After it was revealed that Eckern donated $1,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign, he was vilified by various Proposition 8 opponents. One prominent blogger said he should be "viciously attacked using words and nothing but words by the men and women of the American theatre." That and other Internet postings prompted thousands of theater professionals to flood the CMT with phone calls in recent days.

As a result of this barrage, Eckern resigned Wednesday. While that may have emboldened some of Proposition 8's more aggressive opponents, it embitters others who respect Eckern's work, even if they disagree with his political views.

Boycotts have a long history in the civil rights movement, but the action taken against Eckern -- and threats and harassment directed toward other individuals and businesses -- crosses the line to the realm of blacklisting. While Martin Luther King Jr. used boycotts effectively and firmly, he never advocated that his opponents be "viciously attacked" with words or anything else.

King's consistency in preaching the message of tolerance went beyond his personal convictions. He realized that, in winning the American people to his cause, he could not afford to alienate potential supporters with inflammatory rhetoric or actions.

In a statement issued after the election, leaders of the No on Proposition 8 campaign urged its coalition to take the long view. "We achieve nothing if we isolate the people who did not stand with us in this fight," the statement said.

Unfortunately, a lone statement on a Web site is not adequate. That message needs to be spread widely and loudly by all leaders in the gay and lesbian community, and all opponents of Proposition 8. It's part of the task of building enough support to ensure that Californians support equal rights for same-sex couples the next time the question is on the ballot.


Maggie Gallagher on Backlash After Prop 8  
Fox News
November 12, 2008

Click here for video.
Prop 8 Supporters Lie Low  
NBC Los Angeles
November 11, 2008

Click here for video.

I remember when Abortion clinics were being blown up.

I remember when Doctors were being shot in their own homes.

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. 
Thomas Jefferson 

Every generation needs a new revolution. 
Thomas Jefferson 

It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. 
Thomas Jefferson 

"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." --Thomas Jefferson

Oh, you're going to be so mad in the upcoming months. I suggest you build a giant wall around Bakersfield so we can defend ourselves from free thought, secularism and Democracy. These liberals need to understand that us conservatives have God on our side, even if we go against all the nonsense he spouted.

Spartan, are you suggesting that God is on the side of the homosexuals?  If so, maybe you should open up your bible and see what it has to say about homosexuality.  If your God is the Christian God, then there is no excuse for gayness. 

Tkozy, great quotes!  That's why the founders set up our country as a Republic, not a Democracy.  Very simple.  We need to get that Republic back before we lose this country to homosexual socialist globalists.

"That's why the founders set up our country as a Republic, not a Democracy."

Exactly my point.  That's why minority rights trump majority rule, and why gays and lesbians deserve, no, DEMAND equal rights.

"If your God is the Christian God, then there is no excuse for gayness. "

Again, we are a Republic, not a theocracy.  It doesn't matter what the Bible says, or people claim it says, about homosexuality.  If homosexuality feels wrong to you, then don't involve yourself with it.  But gays and lesbians deserve to be free to develop same sex relationships just as you have the right to form heterosexual relationships, with all the same rights, priviledges, and yes, responsibilities legal civil marriage brings with it.

These are the kinds of issues that are brought up when one group demands special rights because it doesn't start with one, or two, it's like a cancer - it continues to breed until the host dies.  Rather than a live and let live society where we can all at least pretend to get along, we now have discord and people (on both sides) going to extremes.

No, Erikbako, they are brought up when a discriminated group demands equal rights, and it will continue to breed until equality is achieved.  To suggest that heterosexuals are entitled to "special rights" that homosexuals are denied, that is called discrimination.

Jive does make a point: This controversy is getting complicated for me. Suddenly, sexual deviance is an alternate lifestyle; perversity is "gay;" embracing same sex marriage is equality; injecting deviate behavior into social morals and school curriculum is integration. Anyone taking exception is a religious fanatic, a bigot and a hateful person. Lipstick on a pig...however it is defined, it is still sexual perversion.

So when does this all ends..and what's next...the right to marry your cousin,aunt...etc...just how far is far enough...

Main Entry: per·ver·sion
Function: noun
Pronunciation: p&r-'v&r-zh&n, -sh&n
1 : the action of perverting : the condition of being perverted
2 : a perverted form ; especially : an aberrant sexual practice especially when habitual and preferred to normal coitus

 

Just a thought.

Next amendment to the constitution should be to outlaw interfaith marriages. God says no to that. Oh, and I want the law changed so that anyone who commits adultery will be stoned to death. The bible says we're supposed to do that too. And lets solve this pesky old teen abortion problem by letting parents kill their unmarried pregnant daughters, as the bible dictates. Problem solved! Religion, a wonderful thing it is.

Folks, I have to ask: do you ever tire of inciting animosity and spread negative energy around?  Or is it some kind of self-destructive addiction to go looking for things to stew over?

Think of what you are doing to yourselves, and the overall level of happiness in the community.

"2 : a perverted form ; especially : an aberrant sexual practice especially when habitual and preferred to normal coitus"

Nancy, the definition is okay; the connotation that the word "perversion" carries - an evil beyond words - is not OK.  It is very inaccurate in all but a few cases.

Human beings are pervasively sexual beings and always will be.  Everybody, everybody sexualizes something or another that is not directly related to sexual intercourse.  If I were to start interviewing every one of you on what turns you on, I will find that exactly 100 percent of you are "perverted."

I do not mean that in any derogatory manner at all; it is only my firm belief that it is what an interview under an oath of total honesty will reveal.  :)

Before long I intend to write a post on the broader issue of sexual relationships and behaviors.  All opinions will be welcomed as long as they are presented in a civil manner.

But be prepared: I intend, more than anything else, to make us really think and consider things at depths that may be new to some.

catpaw:  I like your post so much, I'm pasting it here again.  I hope you don't mind.

Jive does make a point: This controversy is getting complicated for me. Suddenly, sexual deviance is an alternate lifestyle; perversity is "gay;" embracing same sex marriage is equality; injecting deviate behavior into social morals and school curriculum is integration. Anyone taking exception is a religious fanatic, a bigot and a hateful person. Lipstick on a pig...however it is defined, it is still sexual perversion.

Apollo, I understand that the definition above is the textbook definition and many variations have come from it.  When I mentioned before that homosexuality is not the norm I was scalped for saying such a  heinous thing.  However, it remains true.  Humans are just about the only ones who use sex for pleasure and not strictly for procreation.  Even though gender to gender attempt at sexual  activity is seen in the animal kingdom, it STILL is not the norm.

I've also been reminded that sexual acts between same gender wasn't uncommon aboard ships or in the early Greek society.  That STILL does not make it the norm.

That's all I've ever said about it.  I neither condone nor do I condemn, I just present facts.  That's just my feeling about the subject and if I were to go further and bring religion into it I would have to say that it's not my call.  I'm not the final judge on whether it's a sin or not.  That will be done by someone with a "higher pay grade" than mine.

Homosexuality doesn't affect me on way or another but I still have the right to my opinion and my beliefs.

As far as people leaving this topic alone...you see what the No on 8 folks have posted here.  For the rest of us, this was voted on and settled as far as we're concerned.  As noted by others, if it had not passed, you wouldn't have the protesting and continuation by us on the subject no matter how much we disagreed with it.  Please folks, note who is escalating and dragging this topic on and on with "spam" or whatever you want to call it.   As long as those people want to continue to insult and call names, don't be surprised when we retaliate.

Apollo, I look forward to your blog on the topic.

Thank you Nancy.  I know that you do not condemn it; you don't seem like that sort of person.  "Practical" is the word that comes to mind first.  :)

If I understand right, you are OK with recognition of something that is the legal clone of marriage, but you reserve the word marriage itself for opposite-sex unions.  I understand that; I also respect it.

It is not my ideal resolution of the issue, of course, but an argument can be made that the country is best off when no one group gets its way all of the time.

Practically speaking, I could accept the civil unions compromise, in the belief that public opinion will eventually come around. 

I am actually more disturbed by the number of people who feel it's OK to vote on others' personal life decisions.  That belief concerns me more than compromising on civil unions would.

The problem is that laws already exist where marriage is concerned and shouldn't be arbitrarily changed to suit whoever comes down the pike.  New laws should be voted on no matter what they are about unless it's public safety, then for the good of all comes into play.

This is a tad off topic in a way but yesterday I heard of someone in, I believe, Japan, who wanted to marry his comic book heroine.  I'll have to look that up and provide a link.

That didn't take long..here you go folks....the latest in wedding bells.

http://www.news.com.au/tech...

That does it.  I want to marry the Mighty Thor.  :)

I respectfully disagree, Nancy. I think all laws should be about public safety. A law should be about protecting us from something. (Some laws about bundling mortgage securities and selling them to third and forth parties would have been nice) Laws should not be made to prevent something that harms absolutely nobody. Laws should not be made to simply prevent something from offending people. Not all of us are offended by the same things. Leave that up to the individual, not the Government.

Spam code: KOOGY