Don't miss this!

USA Today published an article yesterday in which Sir Elton John spoke about his position on Proposition 8. John clarified his position on Prop 8 while attending the annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation. He was accompanied by his longtime partner David Furnish, whom he joined in a civil union in 2005. John was quoted as saying, "We're not married. Let's get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."

John went on to emphasize that civil unions grant same-sex couples the same rights afforded to married heterosexual couples. He stated, "I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership…the word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."

Sacramento Bee Editorial: No on 8 Supporters Cross the Line that Separates Civil Protest from Harassment

An editorial in the Sacramento Bee today takes a close look at the outrageous actions undertaken by many No on 8 supporters following the passage of Prop 8.

The editorial summarizes the opposition’s actions, citing that, “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.”

And while the editorial takes a sympathetic approach to the opposition’s protests, saying their “charged reaction is understandable,” it does not justify that by “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.”

The editorial went on to acknowledge that the No on 8 campaign has not adequately addressed the acts of violence and harassment undertaken by their supporters, saying that “a lone statement” on their Web site asking supporters to not isolate those who oppose their views is simply not enough.

Excerpts from the LA Times

But the demonstrations also have raised questions about whether the in-your-face approach will alienate voters, who may be asked one day to approve gay marriage. Twice in the last eight years, voters have rejected it.

"I think the No on 8 forces have devolved into mob justice," said Jeff Flint of Southern California
Several opponents of Prop 8 have already begun to apologize publicly to their friends who supported prop 8.
..."I find this backlash disgusting and shameful and I fear that it makes gay-marriage advocates seem aggressive and intolerant. We just spent 4 months and $40 million in an effort to convince California voters that gay-marriage won't lead to an attack on the religious liberties of churches who do not condone gay marriage. Now our actions are really convincing the people that our quest for equality will indeed clash with religious freedoms. The public rarely empathizes with an aggressor and these protests targeting businesses and churches are staining our image as the "under-dog in need of compassion", said one worker with the No on 8 campaign. "We need to stick to public demonstrations that do not attack individuals and groups. I was appalled to hear from my neighbors who donated to the Yes on 8 campaign that they were approached and threatened by strangers carrying lists of donors. "Extortionists" is the last thing we want to be called, especially when the fate of our marriages lies in the hands of the public. Here we are, advocating that we be treated fairly while groups of passionate youth treat our opponents unfairly. It just isn't going to work."
...Michael Weinstein, president of the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation, called for a thorough analysis of the failures of the No on 8 campaign. He said, "We need to show we can win in the court of public opinion."
...Whether the current protests will help or hinder that effort remains unclear, said Bruce Cain, a political science professor at UC Berkeley.

"It can backfire," he said.

"The key, he said, is that the protesters not irritate or alienate the people they are trying to persuade by appearing too out of the mainstream or by tying up traffic for hours."

Those who claim they want to be treated fairly...

...ARE ATTACKING CITIZENS AND TAKING REVENGE ON THEM SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY EXERCISED THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE! IT IS VERY, VERY REMINISCENT OF HISTORY'S OPPRESSIVE REGIMES WHEN WE SEE A MINORITY ATTACKING THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY AND USING PROPAGANDA AND INTIMIDATION IN ATTEMPTS TO SILENCE OR PUNISH THEM. Way to turn the public against you- for your show of aggression against those whose beliefs you won't tolerate! Way to make a clear statement that you aren't willing to follow the civil process, but would impose your desires on all regardless of how the vote goes. What an important asset you are to society- you're doing a lot of good. My suggestion to those who can't tolerate voting results and elections is this- spend some time in the third world where people have REAL problems and are struggling to survive. If you actually reach out and help these needy- you may actually lose your aggression and hate toward others who don't follow your ideals and instead learn to love others regardless of their actions.

After the election we see the REAL bigotry and intolerance!

Dear Friends,

In the aftermath of the recent election, we may find ourselves oddly on the defensive regarding our support for the Yes on Proposition 8 cause. Our young people have been especially subject to mean spirited comments by high school friends and teachers. We have nothing to be ashamed of. We did nothing wrong. In fact, we did everything that a civic minded American can and should do. I have put together a few facts that help me to appreciate our position better. For example:

1. Mormons make up less than 2% of the population of California. There are approximately 800,000 LDS out of a total population of approximately 34 million.

2. Mormon voters were less than 5% of the yes vote. If one estimates that 250,000 LDS are registered voters (the rest being children), then LDS voters made up 4.6% of the Yes vote and 2.4% of the total Proposition 8 vote.

3. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) donated no money to the Yes on 8 campaign. Individual members of the Church were encouraged to support the Yes on 8 efforts and, exercising their constitutional right to free speech, donated whatever they felt like donating.

4. The No on 8 campaign raised more money than the Yes on 8 campaign. Unofficial estimates put No on 8 at $38 million and Yes on 8 at $32 million, making it the most expensive non-presidential election in the country.

5. Advertising messages for the Yes on 8 campaign are based on case law and real-life situations. The No on 8 supporters have insisted that the Yes on 8 messaging is based on lies. Every Yes on 8 claim is supported.

6. The majority of our friends and neighbors voted Yes on 8. Los Angeles County voted in favor of Yes on 8. Ventura County voted in favor of Yes on 8.

7. African Americans overwhelmingly supported Yes on 8. Exit polls show that 70% of Black voters chose Yes on 8. This was interesting because the majority of these voters voted for President-elect Obama. No on 8 supporters had assumed that Obama voters would vote No on 8.

8. The majority of Latino voters voted Yes on 8. Exit polls show that the majority of Latinos supported Yes on 8 and cited religious beliefs (assumed to be primarily Catholic).

9. The Yes on 8 coalition was a broad spectrum of religious organizations. Catholics, Evangelicals, Protestants, Orthodox Jews, Muslims – all supported Yes on 8. It is estimated that there are 10 million Catholics and 10 million Protestants in California. Mormons were a tiny fraction of the population represented by Yes on 8 coalition members.

10. Not all Mormons voted in favor of Proposition 8. Our faith accords that each person be allowed to choose for him or her self. Church leaders have asked members to treat other members with "civility, respect and love," despite their differing views.

11. The Church did not violate the principal of separation of church and state. This principle is derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." The phrase "separation of church and state", which does not appear in the Constitution itself, is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, although it has since been quoted in several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court in recent years. The LDS Church is under no obligation to refrain from participating in the political process, to the extent permitted by law. U.S. election law is very clear that Churches may not endorse candidates, but may support issues. The Church has always been very careful on this matter and occasionally (not often) chooses to support causes that it feels to be of a moral nature.

12. Supporters of Proposition 8 did exactly what the Constitution provides for all citizens: they exercised their First Amendment rights to speak out on an issue that concerned them, make contributions to a cause that they support, and then vote in the regular electoral process. For the most part, this seems to have been done in an open, fair, and civil way. Opponents of 8 have accused supporters of being bigots, liars, and worse. The fact is, we simply did what Americans do – we spoke up, we campaigned, and we voted.

Hold your heads up high – you did a great job on this most important cause. We will have more opportunities in the future to participate in our democratic process. Let’s remember the lessons learned and do an even better job next time.

These are my personal opinions and thoughts; any errors are mine and in no way reflect official Church policy or doctrine.

Thanks,
Kevin Hamilton

How can anyone fail to see the connection?

"It's just a matter of time before voters statewide agree with those in the central valley. "Just a week or two ago, we were approximately 10 percentage points behind, now we're 5 percentage points behind. So as people gain knowledge, and understanding, especially when they understand the effects, they'll vote 'yes' on Prop 8," said Boyd."

From Lisa

"In defense of (Steve) Young and his family, I ask that you do not judge him or anyone harshly AND more importantly that you do not believe EVERYTHING reported in the media as “truth or fact”. The KCRA news story is NOT accurate in its report that “The Mormon Church has donated much money to the Yes on 8 campaign”. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has donated no money to YES on 8. Members of the Church have been encouraged to donate, and have donated, but not the Church itself.

Just today, some news reports have indicated the story may be fabricated and that Steve Young has denounced it. However, no one knows for sure if those reports are accurate as well. I for one cannot tell you how many times I have been misquoted by the media; so much can easily be dismissed as media bias or inaccuracy."

Check out this Straight-forward video.

LDS Church gives a response to disgusting late attacks

“The Church has joined a broad-based coalition in defense of traditional marriage. While we feel this is important to all of society, we have always emphasized that respect be given to those who feel differently on this issue. It is unfortunate that some who oppose this proposition have not given the Church this same courtesy.”
-LW

"Dear Brothers and Sisters fighting the good fight for Proposition 8:

We are now in the last hours before the election, and as we might have anticipated, our opponents are pulling out all stops to beat us down. Their most recent, and perhaps final attack, is against Christian missionaries, specifically, missionaries from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Please see the video at http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=e1f83189-843f-41d7-84c4-2029fbd9a2ce. These "missionaries" are portrayed as invading the home of two women, ransacking their house, stealing their wedding rings and tearing up their marriage certificate. Were real LDS missionaries to engage in this sort of behavior, the LDS Church would turn them over to legal authorities for prosecution, and they would face church discipline as well. I, and many of you, have seen, met with and worked with LDS missionaries over the years, and have found them to be unfailingly polite, courteous and helpful - not vindictive or assaultive, as portrayed in this attack ad. This is my church, and we do not do such things. This ad is a false and unjustified attack against us all.

As you know, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have supplied a good portion of the Yes on Proposition 8 funds, and now the church is under attack. If this attack results in people changing their votes to No on 8, we all will suffer the consequences. Therefore, I ask that you immediately write a letter of condemnation in the strongest possible terms, and send it via e-mail to Bart Marcois of ProtectMarriage.com. His e-mail address is bmarcois@gmail.com. In addition, it would be helpful if you sent a copy of your letter to the Sacramento Bee, via e-mail, and to any TV stations that may be airing this ad. If you do this, you will be protecting your own congregations from misinterpreting this ad as a reason to vote No.

I have met most of you personally over the last few weeks, and have come to admire you for your steadfastness in Christ as you work to lead your congregations in this fight. I now ask that you trust me, and counter this attack against one of our company with letters of protest of your own.

Benjamin Franklin, the famous statesman during the time of the American Revolution, was one of the original signers of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. At the signing, which was a very dangerous act of sedition against the British Crown, he said, "We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." I think that statement applies to each one of us. If we hang together, if we work cooperatively on this last night before the election, I think we shall succeed. If we do not cooperate, if we do not "hang together", we face a future that none of wants to see.

Thank you very much for your help in this vital work we are all engaged in."
-VW

“This ad reaches new lows of religious bigotry and intolerance,” said Yes on 8 Chairman Ron Prentice. “We hope that the leadership of the No on 8 campaign – including Senator Feinstein, Mayor Newsom and Superintendent O’Connell -- as well as all Californians regardless of their position on Proposition 8, will not only condemn the ad but join us in asking television stations to refuse to air it. After all, the No on 8 campaign has been running their own television commercials saying we must all oppose discrimination and intolerance whenever we see it. The bigotry this ad shows to members of the LDS church demands action now.”

Echoing Prentice’s call, Yes on 8 Campaign Manager Frank Schubert tonight emailed Steve Smith, Campaign Manager for the No on Proposition 8 Campaign the following request:

“Steve – Below find a link to a deplorable No on 8 television commercial hitting the airwaves tomorrow. This commercial depicts faux Mormon Missionaries invading the home of a lesbian couple, ransacking the house in search of the couple’s marriage license, taking the couple’s wedding rings, etc. This is a blatant display of religious bigotry that has no place in political discourse. We urge Equality for All, Senator Feinstein, Superintendent O’Connell and the No on 8 Campaign to immediately denounce this commercial and join us in urging television stations to refuse to air it. After all, we must always oppose discrimination and intolerance whenever we see it.

Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter.”

Separately, an interfaith coalition of religious leaders representing many faiths will be releasing a statement condemning the ad."
-CW

Wanna' see who is stealing your signs?

Tolerance needed here

I am a high school student trying to learn about political issues and prepare to soon become a participating citizen. Already I am troubled by those who don't respect my freedom of speech and right to my opinion.

After studying the one proposition I feel particularly strongly about, I decided to put up a simple bumper sticker to support Proposition 8. Then one day after school, I came out and found the "yes" on the sticker crossed out and replaced, in permanent ink, with "no." And below that, on the paint of my car, the person wrote a obscene note calling me a "homophobe," with more vulgar embellishment.

I have no problem with those who disagree with me, but I have a right to express my opinion, especially on my own property.

Of course it was probably just a passionate kid who doesn't think before he acts, but I believe this action reflects a very disappointing trend toward attacks on others rights to have differing opinions.

If people feel so strongly they can do what I ended up doing: volunteering time and effort to support what they believe in. I volunteered to walk, helped with signs and made calls.

To me, it is just absolutely wrong for anyone to oppose something in the name of "tolerance" and at the same time not have any tolerance for someone who doesn't completely agree with that position.

Adam Lane

Latest Commercial

News story: School Clams Up on 'Gay' Pledge Cards Given to Kindergartners

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,445865,00.html

Sign Waving in the Rain

What an amazing, dedicated group these people are! It was pouring rain but that didn't stop them from showing our support of Prop. 8!

For all interested, this was a great event. The number of positive responses from motorists was entirely unexpected in Davis, showing that there really is some support there, and I think many in passing vehicles were grateful to see their views represented. This was an upbeat group, and even interactions with those who opposed us were friendly and positive, which had to leave a good impression.
Thanks to the Perez Family and the Spanish Branch for spearheading this, and for rounding up such a good turnout--well over 20 people on 3 and sometimes all 4 corners of Covell and Anderson, in the pouring rain.
JB

Alex, Rachel, Casey, Tom and Kim -you are an inspiration to us all. Although it would have been great to get some more "exciting" footage- I'm so glad that we didn't need to gather evidence or replace the signs nearly as often as we thought. Those paper signs held up amazingly well in the rain!
We're not alone in Nor Cal either- here's some footage of 7 solid miles of sign wavers in Sac on Saturday.

We're in the paper! The Aggie posted this article today: Prop 8 supporters face sign theft, vandalism

Prop 8 supporters face sign theft, vandalism

Freedom of speech is at stake, supporters say

Written by AARON BRUNER

Published October 29, 2008

In a community that values free speech and open debate, recent political sign thefts have outraged some community members.

The controversy over Proposition 8, which would amend the California Constitution to allow marriage between only a man and a woman, has spilled over into petty theft and vandalism of lawn signs.

Yes on 8 supporters say they've been hit especially hard in Davis, where a large number of signs have been defaced or stolen.

Davis resident Jo Lynn Meirovitz had Yes on 8 signs stolen from her front yard last week.

"People preach tolerance but they are very intolerant of other people," Meirovitz said. "They see us protecting marriage as full of hate, bigots … and are appalled that we would want to help Prop 8 pass. I'm sure the more signs they see the more frustrated they get."

Having left the house for only an hour and a half and not expecting her signs to be taken during the middle of the day, Meirovitz found two lawn signs missing upon her return, she said.

"We believe in freedom of speech for everybody, not just one side of this proposition," Meirovitz said. "Everybody should be able to voice their opinion."

Davis resident and Cedric Papa is involved in Yes on 8 sign distribution and says voters are calling in daily to report that their signs have been stolen.

Papa, who has had 14 signs taken, estimates that 200 or more may have been taken or vandalized in Davis alone.

"I will follow the law, no matter what happens, so I'd like to get my voice out now," Papa said. "We are just trying to keep our individual rights and keep the government out of our lives."

Papa said one group of people went so far as to pretend to support Prop 8 and took 100 signs and dumped them.

Yolo County Republican Party chair Mark Pruner said it has been common in this and previous elections for political signs to be stolen.

"We spend so much money replacing signs, you almost feel violated," he said.

In addition to sign theft in Davis, there have been several incidences of vandalism and theft in Sacramento, and video of at least two incidences have been posted on YouTube, Pruner said.

"Let's face it, stealing of political signs is something that always happens," he said. "We have to budget for paying for more signs."

There is little legal recourse for people who have had their signs stolen or vandalized, and many don't bother to report the crimes. The Davis and Sacramento Police Departments and the Yolo County Sheriff all say no police reports regarding stolen or damaged signs have been filed in their jurisdictions.

Among other incidents in Davis are keyed cars displaying Yes on 8 bumper stickers, while last week the Yes on 8 table located on the Quad was hit with water balloons by a group of students yelling "you teach hate," according to UC Davis graduate student Casey Meirovitz, who is married to Jo Lynn Meirovitz.

"I think yelling 'you teach hate' and exhibiting hate isn't the coolest thing in the world, especially at a university," he said. "People feel very passionately about Prop 8 and they are letting it get the best of them. Unfortunately they're weakening the stance of their argument by acting hypocritically."

Meirovitz and wife Jo Lynn have since replaced their Yes on 8 signs with a homemade sign made of plywood, attached to a tree in their front yard with a bike lock, a sign that they will not forfeit their right to free speech anytime soon.

Representatives from the No on 8 campaign did not respond to requests for information regarding sign theft or vandalism on their side.

AARON BRUNER can be reached at city@californiaaggie.com.

Rally for 8 at the state capitol

The Radio Clip of Cedric from the Rally

Here is the link to listen to the clip:



http://www.kfbk.com/cc-common/mainheadlines3.html?feed=172730&article=4488711

Police Arrest 3 for Stealing Political Signs

As reported on KFBK at 4:10 this afternoon:
Roseville Police officers arrested three young people on suspicion of stealing political signs from yards throughout Roseville. At 12:32 a.m. Tuesday morning, October 28, a resident of the 200 block of Sierra Boulevard called police to report seeing suspects taking a political sign from his neighbor's yard. The resident provided police with a description of the suspects and their vehicle, a green four-door sedan.

Minutes before the call was dispatched, a Roseville Police officer on routine patrol spotted a sedan parked in the 700 block of Shasta Street. The vehicle had all doors and its trunk opened. As the officer watched, two people walked to the vehicle, put something in the trunk, and drove away. Suspicious, the officer began to follow the vehicle, and then heard the report of the stolen political sign being dispatched. The officer stopped the vehicle and contacted the occupants. A search of the vehicle produced 53 "Yes on 8" signs.

Kacey Elizabeth Flieder, 18, of Sacramento, Brian Joseph Greene, 18, of Roseville, and a 17-year-old girl from Roseville were arrested on suspicion of possession of stolen property, conspiracy, and petty theft. The two 18-year-olds were also charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Flieder was booked into the Roseville Police Department Jail and released on a $5,000 bail bond. Green remains in custody in the RPD jail on $5,000 bail. The 17-year-old was cited and released to her parents.

We're working hard to catch the Davis thieves as well.

If your sign was stolen or vandalized report the crime right away at: https://www2.ci.davis.ca.us/police/crimereporting/

Powerful Rally- 1 week to go!

Rally at the Capital October 28, 2008

From a scholar and physician who grew up in Davis.

Why I Support Proposition 8

Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court discovered a “right” to gay marriage in the state constitution that its founders never intended or imagined. Proposition 8, which appears on the November ballot, seeks to reverse the court’s decision by specifying in the state constitution that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Opponents of Proposition 8, under the appealing slogan “equality for all,” characterize the measure as an attempt to limit the rights of gays, rather than what it really is--a stand on principle to defend and preserve an institution vital to society.
Traditional marriage, once the hallmark of society, has already undergone serious decline as too many of us have allowed other interests to take precedence over our family responsibilities. We have divorced too much. We have made our sexual unions more important than our family obligations. We have become cavalier about bearing children out of wedlock. We have too often left the rearing of our children to others. The consequences, both for children and for society, have been disastrous.
The legalization of same-sex marriage deals another crucial blow to marriage as an institution, the consequences of which will certainly be more profound than most Californians realize. What are the harms? This is hard to predict, but the following results seem certain to occur:
1. The indoctrination of our kids. This is already happening to a degree, but now has gained a new and important legal basis. The legalization of same-sex marriage will require the school curriculum to become “gender neutral” where marriage is concerned, placing the schools increasingly in conflict with parents trying to maintain the traditional family ideal. Claims that legalized gay marriage will have little effect on the school curriculum are either naive or deceptive. As well-publicized incidents in both California and Massachusetts illustrate, it already has.
2. The limiting of our freedoms. The establishment of a “right” to gay marriage brings the legal powers of government in conflict with truly constitutional freedoms, such as freedom of religion and freedom of speech. This has already begun to occur--on the basis of this new-found “right” physicians, church adoption agencies, and even wedding photographers have already found themselves in legal jeopardy for declining to perform services, readily available elsewhere in the community, which run contrary to their religious or personal beliefs. Employees in public workplaces must be increasingly cautious in expressing their views for fear of being accused of “hate speech.”
This is only the beginning. The legal forces are already poised, and if Proposition 8 fails, we can expect a flood of litigation challenging virtually every institution, religious or otherwise, which chooses on moral grounds not to adopt this radical new definition of what constitutes a marriage and family. The results are yet to be seen, but in California courts, it seems clear that in the rush to uphold a trendy new “right” to gay marriage, freedom of speech and freedom of religion are not likely to fare well in the courts. The powers of government will increasingly be brought to bear on what we as citizens may openly believe, do, or say.
3. Most importantly, the traditional family itself is dealt a crippling blow, by altering the very institution on which it is based. Once a “right” to same-sex marriage is established, equality requires the law to treat heterosexual couples and homosexual ones the same, despite the obvious biological differences. In effect, our effort to extend marriage to gays will ultimately reduce the legal institution of marriage itself to no more than a domestic partnership. This change will profoundly affect the rising generation’s perception of what a marriage and family are, and the traditional family will continue to lose ground.
The fact is that our collective experience and social research have consistently shown that children reared in traditional families as a whole fare better, contribute more, and fail less, than those who are not. Indeed, the traditional family, once the hallmark of society, still seems its only real hope. Amid a flood of social decay, young couples can still turn to the traditional institution of marriage as a foundation for their adult lives, with the confidence that if they adhere to its expectations, they will reap its benefits. This institution is now in jeopardy.
Legalized same-sex marriage does not just provide an alternative to the traditional family, it strikes at the heart of the institution upon which the traditional family is based. Indeed, for all our rhetoric about gay rights, it is not the gay lifestyle that is endangered in our society, but the traditional family itself.
Proposition 8 has never been about bigotry versus equal rights for gays--such rights, in California especially, have and will continue to be abundantly protected with or without the passage of Prop. 8. Instead, it is a measure to restore and defend our most vital public institution, the American family.
I urge a “yes” vote on Proposition 8.

Author:
John Bringhurst
Profession: Physician.
Residence: Woodland, CA.

The interracial marriage comparison?

When the desires of adults clash with what's best for childhood development- which will we choose on Nov. 4th?

Meaningful Relationship: YES. But if every relationship out there can suddenly be called a marriage- then MARRIAGE loses it's significance.

A civil right? No. Marriage is a sacred privilege to those who conform to what society deems is best for children: A FULLY COMMITTED MOTHER AND FATHER

privilege

The opposition claims it won't affect schools but indoctrinating our young without our consent is one of their key objectives (NCLR website)

Not going to be taught in scholls, huh?

“Coming Out Day”
Coming This Week to California Elementary Schools
City: Hayward, CA
October 22, 2008
Parents at a K-8 charter school in Hayward were shocked to learn this week the
extent to which their school is promoting gay and lesbian ideals to their daughter in
kindergarten.
The parents were shocked to see a poster announcing that “Coming Out Day”
will be celebrated at the school this coming Thursday, October 23. The school,
Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science, chose not to tell parents ahead of time,
but it is in the midst of celebrating “Ally Week,” a pro-homosexual push typically
aimed at high school students. When one mother asked her daughter earlier this
week what she was learning in kindergarten at the school, the 5-year-old replied,
“We're learning to be allies.” The mother also learned that her daughter's kindergarten
classroom is regularly used during lunchtime for meetings of a Gay Straight
Alliance club.
Later this week, the school is slated to talk about families. The parents have
noticed several posters promoting families, all of which depict only homosexual
families. More controversial discussions can be expected through next week, as the
elementary school continues to celebrate Gay and Lesbian History Month. On
November 20, the school will host TransAction Gender-Bender Read-Aloud, where
students will hear adapted tales such as “Jane and the Beanstalk.”
These parents are being advised by attorneys from Pacific Justice Institute. Brad
Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, commented, “Do we need any further
proof that gay activists will target children as early as possible? Opponents of traditional marriage keep telling us that Prop. 8 has nothing to do with education. In reality, they want to push the gay lifestyle on kindergartners, and we can only
imagine how much worse it will be if Prop. 8 is defeated. This is not a scenario
most Californians want replayed in their elementary schools.”

This is Just the Beginning. We Must Stop It!

When they strike at our freedom of speech they ILLUSTRATE who doesn't believe in TOLERANCE.

Interview with those who have already felt the effects.

Take Courage

STRENGTH IN NUMBERS: We are not alone, sign wavers can be seen in almost every city in CA

FYI

Sacramento – The Campaign Manager of the ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8 campaign today urged its supporters to ignore efforts circulating on the Internet encouraging parents and students to boycott class for a day to protest the California Teachers Association contribution of $1 million to the campaign opposing Proposition 8.

“We have no idea where this idea to boycott class attendance for a day came from,” said Frank Schubert, Campaign Manager of the Yes on 8 campaign, “but we disavow it and urge our supporters to ignore it. Students belong in class. Taking a child out of class as a political protest is wrong and detrimental to the child. While we understand the anger that some parents may feel toward the teacher’s union for donating to our opponents, the best way to counteract that donation is to urge people to vote yes on Proposition 8. We call on the millions of supporters of traditional marriage to ignore attempts to organize a student “sick in” and instead focus their attention on passing Proposition 8.”

Recalling Undecided Voters

Inspired by Casey and Jo Lynn

The warning atop the steel construction reads:
"

Friendly warning which leaves you without a defense if you touch this:

You are hereby notified that this Prop 8 sign is valued at $413 due to its custom construction. I have also concealed my Owner Applied Number on it to further incriminate you if you vandalize or steal my property. It is a felony to be in possession of stolen property and it is a felony to KNOWINGLY vandalize private property valued over $400. I have a web-cam watching this at all times and the Davis PD on speed-dial- so I suggest that you don’t fuel my campaign by giving me more videos of the “No campaign’s Intolerance.” If you try to take away my freedom of speech I WILL take away your freedom to not pay heavy fines for your intolerance."

Freedom of Speech in Action

ARC students reject recall of Student Council members supporting Prop 8

By Ed Fletcher
efletcher@sacbee.com

Published: Thursday, Oct. 23, 2008

The students of American River College turned back an effort to recall nine campus leaders in response to their support of Proposition 8, the statewide ballot measure banning same-sex marriage. Results of the vote were released by ARC officials this afternoon.
Surviving the recall were Jacob Johnson, Blaze Jeppesen, Viktor Choban, Alex Malash, Jorge Riley, Carolina Burachek, Veronika Vorbyov, Heather Johnson and Vladimir Musovrischi. Individual results differed among the recall targets, but they all cleared the recall by a 200-300 vote margin out of the 3531 votes cast Tuesday and Wednesday.

Yes on 8 Campaign Slams New No Ad with Jack OConnell: O’Connell’s New Ad is only 96% a Lie

Sacramento—Oct. 23—The ProtectMarriage.com—Yes on 8 campaign today criticized the "No on 8" campaign’s new television ad, released yesterday, which features California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell.

The ad raises a new standard for using a small, cleverly worded kernel of truth to foster the Big Lie.

Specifically, the discussed whether schools are "required" to teach anything about marriage, and states that they are not.

By this logic, presumably, they would argue that no one in California is required to have a drivers’ license, only the people who want to drive cars are.

The real fact, as stated clearly in the "Yes on 8" ads, are that, whether it is technically "required" or not, that virtually all schools in California do teach marriage now, and if gay marriage is legal, they will be REQUIRED to teach about gay marriage as well, because that will be the definition of marriage.

"O’Connell’s cleverly worded denials try to trick voters into thinking schools do not teach about marriage," said Chip White, press secretary for Yes on 8. "But for the 96% of public schools that teach sex education, state law requires them to teach about marriage."

The California Department of Education’s own website says that 96 % of public schools provide instruction under the Comprehensive Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention Act (Educ. Code Sec. 51930, et seq.) and every school that provides instruction under that Act must provide instruction and materials that teach about marriage. Additionally, the Department of Education’s own checklist for instruction under the Act confirms that instruction about marriage is required for the school district to be in compliance with state law.

"There is no foundation for O’Connell’s untruthful statements that nothing in California law requires teaching about marriage," said Andrew Pugno, general counsel for Yes on 8. "The voters deserve to hear the truth. While O’Connell may personally favor gay marriage, as a public official it is his obligation to tell the truth about California’s education laws."

The Yes on 8 campaign sent a letter to O’Connell yesterday demanding that he retract his misstatements. The letter, which is attached, identifies Education Code sections that demonstrate public schools do teach about marriage, at a rate of 96%.

"Perhaps if O’Connell spent less time making false statements in TV ads," said White, "he’d have more time to read his own website."