Lets Get Visual

Introduction


I wish it were this easy! I but I hope it is for some people. I have a really kind neighbor who is gay. Though he knows I am "pro 8" so far we have skirted the subject, in hopes to avoid confrontation. At this time I don't feel I need to talk to him about the subject until maybe we know eachother more. I am going to his Halloween party tomorrow, and I hope it's a good enough experience to post on my personal blog.

Q&A


Will same sex marriages hurt others?



Sick and tired of intolerance?



Are others supporting Prop 8?



Will courts overturn it again?



Didn’t we already vote on this?


Don’t others deserve the same happiness?


Will existing rights disappear?

A "No on 8" Affects Me and My Daughter

Six Consequences If Proposition 8 Fails


1. Children in public schools will be taught that both traditional marriage and same-sex marriage are okay.

The California Education Code already requires that health education classes instruct children about marriage. (§51890)

Therefore, if the definition of marriage is changed, children will be taught that marriage is a relation between any two adults. There will be serious clashes between the secular school system and the right of parents to teach their children their own values and beliefs.

This is completely true. In San Francisco children were taken to a same-sex wedding:http://www.protectmarriage.com/article/first-graders-taken-to-san-francisco-city-hall-for-gay-wedding

Children being read books about homosexuality in school. Not matter how others feel about that, I don't feel good about that. Thats why I would desire to take my own kids out of school, hence this proposition failing would nudge my child out of school and I would have to home school her.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20081016/pl_usnw/proposition8__who_s_really_lying

http://www.protectmarriage.com/article/protect-marriage-yes-on-prop-8-campaign-releases-second-television-commercial-it-s-already-happened-

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

http://townhall.com/Columnists/MaggieGallagher/2007/09/19/can_new_jersey_punish_methodists_for_marriage

http://ww.uniontrib.com/uniontrib/20081019/news_lz1e19limandr.html

3. Religious adoption agencies will be challenged by government agencies to give up their long-held right to place children only in homes with both a mother and a father. Catholic Charities in Boston has already closed its doors because of the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.

4. Religions that sponsor private schools and which provide housing for married students will be required to provide housing for same-sex couples, even if it runs counter to church doctrine, or lose tax exemptions and benefits.

5. Ministers who preach against same-sex marriages will be sued for hate speech and could be fined by the government. It has already happened in Canada, one of six countries that have legalized gay marriage.

6. It will cost ME & YOU money. A change in the definition of marriage will bring a cascade of lawsuits. Even if courts eventually find in favor of a defender of traditional marriage (highly improbable given today's activist judges), think of the money - your money, your church contributions - that will have to be spent on legal fees. Not religious? Please take my pleading into account, and respect the thousands of Religious run charity organizations that make this nation great such as the Catholic Adoption agency in Chicago that was force to close rather than disrespect it's own religious beliefs.

"...it's amazing what's really at stake here. It has nothing to do with whether or not two people can exercise their agency and live together, or even enjoy benefits. If we fail the real impact will come when the curriculum in schools is changed, churches lose their abilitly to perform adoption services unless they place children in gay homes (anti-discrimination laws), and churches lose their ability to perform marriages unless they agree to perform gay marriages. So much for separation of church and state. I don't think it's a stretch to say that if the church loses it's ability to perform marriages in California then faithful couples will have to get married civily and then go to the temple to be sealed. It seems to me that it's about what will trump what in the court room: freedom of religion, or the 'fundamental right of any two consenting parties to get married' and step on anyone's toes they want regardless of their beliefs."



And think of all the unintended consequences that we cannot even foresee at this time. Where will it end?

It's your children, your grandchildren, your money, and your liberties and mine.

Lets work together to protect them.

He that cannot reason is a fool.He that will not is a bigot.He that dare not is a slave.~Andrew Carnegie

We complain of a dying economy. On November 4th America expects that they will elect one man that will fix it completely.

The answer is not in one man. The answer is in one man and one woman.

Please enjoy the following essay written by Jane Doe Oct 17, 2008.

The decrease in our population and the affect on the economy
According to the documentary called "The Demographic Winter," the reason our economy is suffering so greatly is because people are having fewer children. In fact, people are not even having enough children to MAINTAIN the population, which would be something like an average of 2.1 children per couple. Why is that a bad thing, you might ask? There would be fewer people to populate the earth and consume resources if that is the case. The reason this is a negative thing is because having babies stimulates the economy more than anything else in the long run. Why? We see from the baby boomer generation that spending money is what primarily stimulates the economy. Back in the 50's (or thereabouts) the resources of food were plentiful, and the economy was continually stimulated by the demand of the population. It produced jobs, and people were making money. The economy did well for the next few decades, but hit a peak recently and has been declining. As people reach a certain age (around 58) they start spending less and eventually become the responsibility of the younger generation to support. How interesting that that is the approximate age of the baby boomer generation right now, and the stock market just crashed! If there are fewer and fewer people being born that means the number of people spending money is going down too. Experts say they expect the stock market to recover in a year or so. I doubt it will recover unless people start having more children! Let's face it, we are in it for the long haul. Now that our population is decreasing, people are getting laid off (because of the lack of demand) and the burden of social security is going to be really bad for those who are working. The generational pyramid is upside down right now, and that means more elderly to support, and fewer young people to share the burden. So you can expect the chunk that gets taken out of your paycheck to get bigger and bigger as time passes. This is not only a bad thing for us financially, but it will also take a toll on our respect and reverance for our elderly. They will simply become a burden and our respect for them will dwindle into resentment. We see this happening already in other parts of the world, such as Spain, France, and other parts of Europe, where the population decrease is ahead of ours by several years. So the best thing we can do for our economy in the long run, is have more children. If the government wants to save the economy, they should start thinking about insentives for people to have children, like special tax breaks or something.
I encourage you to watch the documentary "The Demographic Winter" so you can see for yourself all of the statistics and hear the experts talk about this problem. I think I'm going to do my part and raise up a bunch of future tax payers for Uncle Sam!

Now, if you found yourself scoffing at that last sentence (though it was written playfully) ask yourself- who is going to pay for your social security? If our population keeps shrinking who is going to pay for anything the Government does- roads, cops, and humanitarian aid, not to mention the things we want today such as Government help in health care.

Yes marriage is "special." And our Government would do wise (and sane) to encourage this special union between heterosexual couples so they may bond and reproduce the next generation and healthy productive people.

Dee Garrett, Civil Rights Activist explains what marriage is really for:

If your saying "Well, so what? Why can't gays marry to? It's not gonna hurt anybody" Our majorily tolerant and accepting society has provided Civil Unions for their cause specific. Marriage is about children and the capability thereof. Society gives "Marriage" to those who are likely to provide a future for it, lest it becomes unsustainable (in terms of the Economy) or even extinct. Allowing gays to marry "just because they want to feel special" is frivolous. The law is not to be frivolous, but to sustain reason and sensibility. Giving them a title will not increase the amount of rights they have. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, "How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg." I can no sooner promote "gay marriage" than a homosexual couple can physically reproduce posterity.

Yet, I fear T.S. Eliot was right, when he said, "Humankind cannot bear very much reality."