B
buffalo
Guest
Oh really now. No harm done. You need to get the facts jack.
- Status
S
StAnastasia
Guest
B
buffalo
Guest
W
wildleafblower
Guest
In March 2000, California voters passed Proposition 22 to specify in state law that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California! Current Proposition 8 reinterates what Californians originally voted on in March 2000. It eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Horray for Proposition 8! (1) OK, I’m a heterosexual Roman Catholic woman and the California Bishops are for a marriage between a man and a woman. But, we need to see the ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 8.(2) Here is part of it:
Proposition 8 is simple and straightforward. It contains the same 14 words that were previously approved in 2000 by over 61% of California voters: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Because four activist judges in San Francisco wrongly overturned the people’s vote, we need to pass this measure as a constitutional amendment to RESTORE THE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE as a man and a woman.
Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it’s not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships. Under California law, “domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits” as married spouses. (Family Code § 297.5.) There are NO exceptions. Proposition 8 WILL NOT change this.
YES on Proposition 8 does three simple things:
It restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and human history has understood marriage to be.
It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people.
It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage.
Proposition 8 protects marriage as an essential institution of society. While death, divorce, or other circumstances may prevent the ideal, the best situation for a child is to be raised by a married mother and father.
The narrow decision of the California Supreme Court isn’t just about “live and let live.” State law may require teachers to instruct children as young as kindergarteners about marriage. (Education Code § 51890.) If the gay marriage ruling is not overturned, TEACHERS COULD BE REQUIRED to teach young children there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.
We should not accept a court decision that may result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn’t be forced on us against our will.
Some will try to tell you that Proposition 8 takes away legal rights of gay domestic partnerships. That is false. Proposition 8 DOES NOT take away any of those rights and does not interfere with gays living the lifestyle they choose.
However, while gays have the right to their private lives, they do not have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else.
CALIFORNIANS HAVE NEVER VOTED FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. If gay activists want to legalize gay marriage, they should put it on the ballot. Instead, they have gone behind the backs of voters and convinced four activist judges in San Francisco to redefine marriage for the rest of society. That is the wrong approach.
Voting YES on Proposition 8 RESTORES the definition of marriage that was approved by over 61% of voters. Voting YES overturns the decision of four activist judges. Voting YES protects our children.
Please vote YES on Proposition 8 to RESTORE the meaning of marriage.
Proposition 8 is simple and straightforward. It contains the same 14 words that were previously approved in 2000 by over 61% of California voters: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Because four activist judges in San Francisco wrongly overturned the people’s vote, we need to pass this measure as a constitutional amendment to RESTORE THE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE as a man and a woman.
Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it’s not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships. Under California law, “domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits” as married spouses. (Family Code § 297.5.) There are NO exceptions. Proposition 8 WILL NOT change this.
YES on Proposition 8 does three simple things:
It restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and human history has understood marriage to be.
It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people.
It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage.
Proposition 8 protects marriage as an essential institution of society. While death, divorce, or other circumstances may prevent the ideal, the best situation for a child is to be raised by a married mother and father.
The narrow decision of the California Supreme Court isn’t just about “live and let live.” State law may require teachers to instruct children as young as kindergarteners about marriage. (Education Code § 51890.) If the gay marriage ruling is not overturned, TEACHERS COULD BE REQUIRED to teach young children there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.
We should not accept a court decision that may result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn’t be forced on us against our will.
Some will try to tell you that Proposition 8 takes away legal rights of gay domestic partnerships. That is false. Proposition 8 DOES NOT take away any of those rights and does not interfere with gays living the lifestyle they choose.
However, while gays have the right to their private lives, they do not have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else.
CALIFORNIANS HAVE NEVER VOTED FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. If gay activists want to legalize gay marriage, they should put it on the ballot. Instead, they have gone behind the backs of voters and convinced four activist judges in San Francisco to redefine marriage for the rest of society. That is the wrong approach.
Voting YES on Proposition 8 RESTORES the definition of marriage that was approved by over 61% of voters. Voting YES overturns the decision of four activist judges. Voting YES protects our children.
Please vote YES on Proposition 8 to RESTORE the meaning of marriage.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Agreed – it should be voted on, not merely decided by four people. That’s why it’s on the ballot this year.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
The text should be amended to read, “only marriage between one man and one woman at one time is valid or recognized in California.” That way the Church could take the first step toward eliminating the abomination of divorce, which presents the major threat to marriage. But the Church winks at divorce now, at least in my diocese. I can’t even begin to count the number of divorced heterosexuals receiving communion in local parishes!
StAnastasia
M
Maxply
Guest
The whole homosexual propaganda is frightening to me—seeing how the leaders have worked to make people morally asleep.
I’m in the midwest and sent a check this week to support the Prop. 8 people.
If anything, all the homosexual political pressure makes me anti-gay—and proud of it!
I’m in the midwest and sent a check this week to support the Prop. 8 people.
If anything, all the homosexual political pressure makes me anti-gay—and proud of it!
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
Yet another “liberation theology” type?
Why is it good to be more concerned for one’s gay friend’s “feelings” instead of the destination of their very souls?
How is it impossible to be concerned with the MRSA problem AND one’s gay friend within the same week?
“Bandage the paper-cut and leave the gunshot wound as ‘someone else’s problem’.”
S
StAnastasia
Guest
It’s not impossible at all!
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
So, what are you actually DOING to help with the salvation of your gay friend’s soul?It’s not impossible at all!
S
StAnastasia
Guest
The right thing.
M
mullenpm
Guest
What IS the right thing?
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Love God with your whole heart, your whole mind, and your whole soul, and love your neighbor as yourself.What IS the right thing?
StAnastasia
B
buffalo
Guest
Do good, avoid evil.
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
So, the right thing is to not work to eliminate a thing that will promote evil (the “occasion of sin” producer called so-called “gay marriage”)?
Is it to love your neighbor by allowing them the opinion that it’s OK for men to marry men and women to marry women?
It’s fine to allow them that opinion, but it’s not fine to allow them to think that you think it’s an acceptable opinion, as it’s objectively not (according to the Magisterium).
If you’re a Catholic you know that. If you’re an impostor Catholic, then you are fully allowed to consider the Magisterium to be an inferior authority.
Are you REALLY Catholic? You say you are, but you say by your deeds, unless I’m missing something, that you’re not (Catholic)?
Which is it?
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Yes, I am a practicing Roman Catholic. And you have clearly not been reading my posts, or else you have been inserting your own fantasies into them. Let me reiterate my points, by post number:
#12
“It [California Prop 8] will probably fail because on the face of it, the proposition appears mean-spirited. Marriage is not threatened because more people want to enjoy it (is the existence of air threatened because more people want to breathe?). Marriage is threatened because those who have historically enjoyed its benefits hold it in contempt with their acquiescence to no-fault divorce, their obscene twenty-four hour heterosexual marriages, etc.”
#17
“In a nation that officially separates church and state, the state is in no position to sanctify anything. In a Catholic marriage it is the wife and husband who are ministers of the sacrament to each other. A lot of problems might be avoided if the state restricted itself to recognizing civil unions that carry equal legal protection for homosexual and heterosexual couples. The churches would be free to bless or condemn whatever types of union they wished to bless or condemn, and as voluntary associations they would not be forced to “marry” anyone they chose not to marry.”
#46
“The text should be amended to read, “only marriage between one man and one woman at one time is valid or recognized in California.” That way the Church could take the first step toward eliminating the abomination of divorce, which presents the major threat to marriage. But the Church winks at divorce now, at least in my diocese. I can’t even begin to count the number of divorced heterosexuals receiving communion in local parishes!”
God bless,
StAnastasia
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
The possibility that a worthy proposition, one which removes an occasion to sin from public approval, will be defeated is not a reason to oppose that proposition.
Marriage IS threatened, because it is being redefined within the public domain to be something which it is not.
If a “coupling” (partnership?) is not between one man and one woman then it is not a marriage, but rather something else.
To blur what “marriage” means to the public is to create an occasion to sin (public promotion of same-sex-sex-acts), and by doing so injures society.
The issue of true marriage being devalued by those who don’t know what it means is another matter entirely.
It is a simple fact that the proliferation of same-sex-sex-acts within society is a bad thing (an evil) which injures society.
ANY excuse that people can find to do this “bad thing” promotes injury to society.
Redefining marriage in such a way that it can be used as an excuse to judge that that “bad thing” is not such a bad thing is a bad thing.
Why should anyone not vote against a bad thing?
And your “alteration” would be more likely than the present ban on so-called same-sex marriages?
S
StAnastasia
Guest
What I am trying to point out by my posts about California’s Proposition 8 is that there are few instances of hypocrisy greater than that of divorced heterosexuals hiding the sinful fornication of their second marriages behind the self-righteous veneer of a morally laudable attack on homosexual “marriage.” If we want to protect marriage, then outlaw divorce, a practice Jesus himself denounced.
Prayerfully yours,
StAnastasia
F
fix
Guest
Civil divorce is not always evil. Homosexual unions are always evil. The Church does accept civil divorce is necessary at times.
- Status