Showing posts with label tolerance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tolerance. Show all posts

Friday, December 19, 2008

Government of the People, By the People, For the People

So the latest news: the state of California's fine Attorney General, Jerry Brown, has publically stated he will not defend prop 8 to the California Supreme Court.

Why?

...He and senior lawyers in his office have looked closely at the court's precendents and at the recent marriage ruling and concluded that they couldn't defend prop 8.

Excuse me? Did the people of California not vote twice to protect traditional marriage?

But in a lengthy filing late Friday, he argued that the measure was "inconsistent with the guarantees of individual liberty" in California's governing charter.

"Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification," Brown said.

"Extinguish fundamental constitutional rights"... um, I thought religious freedom and the freedom of speech were "fundamental constitutional rights". We've already seen those rights squashed, and the issue hasn't even been settled.

The court is reviewing lawsuits filed by gay and lesbian couples and by an array of local governments, led by San Francisco, that contend that ballot measure exceeded the legal limits on initiatives by destroying fundamental rights and stripping judges of their authority to protect a historically persecuted minority.

I think there are other minorities out there that have been persecuted a lot longer and a lot worse than same sex couples. And the more I've been researching this issue, the more I find that heterosexual couples and those that do not codone same sex marriage or that lifestyle are the ones being persecuted. Not to mention the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which there are less members of the Church in California than there are gay/lesbian people. So who's really the minority? And who's really being persecuted?

As the "chief law officer of the state," Brown said in his brief, he is "duty bound to uphold the whole of the Constitution" and not merely the power of the people to change the laws by initiative.

It was my understanding that the Attorney General's job description is to represent the wishes of the people. And the people have spoken twice. And what power do the people have if not to change the laws? This is our country. If the majority of the people want to uphold traditional marriage, then that is what should happen, whether the Attorney General (and other public leaders) agree or disagree.

A little FYI on Jerry Brown's position regarding the whole same sex issue, he is the brilliant one who changed the wording on the ballot to state "Eliminates the Rights of Same Sex Couples to Marry." So why is the media acting (emphasis on the word acting) so surprised that he would come out and say he's not going to uphold the will of the people?

Is this not a government of the people, by the people, for the people? Who are the people? Why do we vote if we can't even count on our leaders in the state capitol to uphold our wishes? Jerry Brown's job isn't hard... he walks into the Supreme Court and says, "The people of California have voted twice on this issue. This is what they want. We need to uphold their wishes." (I know it's not that simple, but you get the idea.)

Side note - I know of a governor in California not to long ago who was kicked out of office for doing far less than what Jerry Brown is doing. Hmmmm...

You can read the entire article at the SFGate.com

Friday, December 12, 2008

The First Step

This was forwarded to me via email from a friend. It fits perfectly with the theme of this blog. Please read, especially at the end.

The Daffodil Principle

Several times my daughter had telephoned to say, "Mother, you must come to see the daffodils before they are over." I wanted to go, but it was a two-hour drive from Laguna to Lake Arrowhead.

"I will come next Tuesday", I promised a little reluctantly on her third call. Next Tuesday dawned cold and rainy. Still, I had promised, and reluctantly I drove there. When I finally walked into Carolyn's house I was welcomed by the joyful sounds of happy children. I delightedly hugged and greeted my grandchildren.

"Forget the daffodils, Carolyn! The road is invisible in these clouds and fog, and there is nothing in the world except you and these children that I want to see badly enough to drive another inch!" My daughter smiled calmly and said, "We drive in this all the time, Mother."

"Well, you won't get me back on the road until it clears, and then I'm heading for home!" I assured her. "But first we're going to see the daffodils. It's just a few blocks," Carolyn said. "I'll drive. I'm used to this."

"Carolyn," I said sternly, "Please turn around."

"It's all right, Mother, I promise. You will never forgive yourself if you miss this experience."

It looked as though someone had taken a great vat of gold and poured it over the mountain and its surrounding slopes. The flowers were planted in majestic, swirling patterns, great ribbons and swaths of deep orange, creamy white, lemon yellow, salmon pink, and saffron and butter yellow. Each different coloured variety was planted in large groups so that it swirled and flowed like its own river with its own unique hue. There were five acres of flowers.
"Who did this?" I asked Carolyn. "Just one woman," Carolyn answered. "She lives on the property. That's her home." Carolyn pointed to a well-kept small A-frame house, modestly sitting in the midst of all that glory.

We walked up to the house. On the patio, we saw a poster. "Answers to the Questions I Know You Are Asking", was the headline. The first answer was a simple one. "50,000 bulbs," it read. The second answer was, "One at a time, by one woman. Two hands, two feet, and one brain." The third answer was, "Began in 1958."

For me, that moment was a life-changing experience. I thought of this woman whom I had never met, who, almost fifty years before, had begun, one bulb at a time, to bring her vision of beauty and joy to an obscure mountaintop. Planting one bulb at a time, year after year, this unknown woman had forever changed the world in which she lived. One day at a time, she had created something of extraordinary magnificence, beauty, and inspiration. The principle her daffodil garden taught is one of the greatest principles of celebration.

That is, learning to move toward our goals and desires one step at a time, often just one baby step at a time and learning to love the doing, learning to use the accumulation of time. When we multiply tiny pieces of time with small increments of daily effort, we too will find we can accomplish magnificent things. We can change the world.

Are you inspired after reading this story? I know I definitely was.

I'm going to make taking your first step VERY easy... click on the link below:

Join the Digital Network Army!

What is DNA? The DNA is an incredible, grassroots political movement made up of normal individuals just like you - throughout the US and beyond - who believe that traditional values are worth fighting for!

Does your email make a difference? Does your comment on a post or news article make a difference? Does your blog make a difference? Think of the daffodils, planted one at a time.


One vote turned into over 6 million in the passing of proposition 8. You do make a difference.

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Time to Make YOUR Vote Count

This petition was forwarded to me from friends at United Families California. I've heard differing opinions regarding online petitions. However, I do think the message is important and we do need to write to our state legislators and the governor. The people of California have voted twice now. It is not acceptable that our voices not be heard.

Opponents Try to Overturn Prop 8
Sign the Petition To Help Stop Them!

"...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." ~Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address

What would President Lincoln think if he saw the state of California'spolitics? Do our elected officials represent the people any longer? Consider their record with regard to family law.

In 2000, the people of California petitioned to put Proposition 22 onthe ballot that affirmed that marriage would continue to be defined in traditional terms, as being between one man and one woman. The people voted and by a margin of 61/39% passed this proposition. In political terms that is an overwhelming mandate.

First, our State Supreme Court ignored our voice and by May of 2008 overstepped their governing limits and created a new law - homosexual marriage. (Blog Author side note here... the Supreme Court did not create a new law, they said that prop 22 was not consitutional because it was not presented as a constitutional amendment. Same-sex couples had no more or no less rights than they did before the Supreme Court ruling.)

Next, the people answered that insult and petitioned to vote on the issue of marriage law. This November after an expensive and tiring campaign the majority of the people of California again voted and passed Prop 8, a State Constitutional Amendment that reaffirms traditional marriage. The voice of the people has clearly stated, twice, that we want marriage to be defined as the union of a man and awoman.

However, this has not stopped our governing officials from speakingout and trying to impose their own will on the people. Since the passage of Prop 8 our Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger has gone on record calling for the State Supreme Court to overturn that vote.

http://www.sacbee.com/capitolandcalifornia/story/1403231.html

And now, our state senate and assembly have drafted resolutions blatantly fighting against Prop 8. "On Tuesday, the second day of the2009-10 legislative session, Sen. Mark Leno and Assemblyman TomAmmiano (both D-San Francisco) launched senate resolution 7 and HR 5 in the Assembly. If approved, the bills would place both houses of the California Legislature on record as opposing the controversial initiative and declaring it an illegal revision to the state constitution." Politicker CA, December 2, 2008

Opponents of Proposition 8 are working hard to overturn Proposition 8 in our legislature before the case is heard in the Supreme Court. This weekend picketers were on street corners asking for support for SR 7 and HR 5. Petitions are being circulated in hopes of gaining 1,000,000 signatures to show support of this attempt to overrule ourvote.

We must answer this attempt to silence our vote.
Please quickly do the following things:
  1. Sign the petition to let our legislators know that they representyour vote and that they must uphold the law.
  2. Write to your State Senator and State Assemblymen and let them know that they areaccountable to the people who voted for them.
  3. Alert your friends. The opposition is trying to collect 1,000,000 signatures to show their support. We must continue to show that the majority of Californians stand by their recent vote. Please forward this email to all your friends and to those who worked with you on the Prop 8 campaign.
Though many of us are tired after a long battle to initially pass Proposition 8, it is apparent that it will take more energy and effortto continue to defend the laws that protect our families. May we remind our elected officials of Abraham Lincoln's desire "that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth" that includes California.

Monday, December 1, 2008

The Need to Keep Our Voices Heard

This afternoon I received the agenda for my local town council meeting to be held tonight and on it was a speaker against proposition 8. Okay, two thoughts popped into my head: 1) Prop 8 has already been voted on; 2) How is this an issue that the town council needs to address?

I could not attend due to prior commitments, but my mom did attend. Two people spoke, one was a lesbian who voiced her troubles in getting child support after separating from her partner 10 years ago; the second was a bisexual lawyer who felt that if you love someone, you should be able to marry him/her.

The woman said that all of the ads in favor of prop 8 were lies and it made her sick to her stomach to see all of the signs in favor of prop 8.

When it was time for questions, someone asked if domestic partnerships don't allow the same rights as marriages. The woman said a domestic partnership is for second-class citizens. The lawyer said that domestic partnerships provide for the same benefits as marriage but domestic partnerships are only recognized in California and not in other states.

A side note, this was the lowest attended town council meeting in a very long time, with only 20-25 people in the audience.

I felt this is important to post because I think it is important that we are aware of what is going on in our local communities. The question was raised, "How did we let it get this far." By not knowing what is being said at our town council meetings, by not telling our city council people our thoughts, by not voting because we think our vote doesn't matter.

Here is what we need to do NOW:
Voice our opinions in our local communities.
Reach out to our neighbors.
Write letters/make phone calls to our political leaders.

Now is not the time to sit back just because one issue was voted in our favor. Now is the time to stand up with the other 6 million Californians and reach out across the nation. Our grassroots effort is not over... it has just begun!

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Forget Democracy, We Want Anarchy

When Chuck Norris speaks, we listen.
(That was a reference to all the Chuck Norris jokes. My favorite: "Chuck Norris doesn't do push ups. He pushes the earth down.")

Below are some excerpts from an article he wrote titled "If Democracy Doesn't Work, Try Anarchy".

Nevertheless, bitter activists simply cannot accept the outcome as being truly reflective of the general public. So they have placed the brainwashing blame upon the crusading and misleading zealotry of those religious villains: the Catholics, evangelical Protestants, and especially Mormons, who allegedly are robbing the rights of American citizens by merely executing their right to vote and standing upon their moral convictions and traditional views.

What's surprising (or maybe not so) is that even though 70 percent of African-Americans voted in favor of Proposition 8, protests against black churches are virtually nonexistent. And everyone knows exactly why: Such actions would be viewed as racist. Yet these opponents of Prop. 8 can protest vehemently and shout obscenities in front of Mormon temples without ever being accused of religious bigotry. There's a clear double standard in our society. Where are the hate-crime cops when religious conservatives need them?

There were many of us who passionately opposed Obama, but you don't see us protesting in the streets or crying "unfair." Rather, we are submitting to a democratic process and now asking how we can support "our" president. Just because we don't like the election outcome doesn't give us the right to bully those who oppose us. In other words, if democracy doesn't tip our direction, we don't swing to anarchy.

Regardless of one's opinion of Proposition 8, it is flat-out wrong and un-American to intimidate and harass individuals, churches and businesses that are guilty of nothing more than participating in the democratic process. Political protests are one thing, but when old-fashioned bullying techniques are used that restrict voting liberties and even prompt fear of safety, activists have crossed a line. There is a difference between respectfully advocating one's civil rights and demanding public endorsement of what many still consider to be unnatural sexual behavior through cruel coercion and repression tactics. One thing is for sure: The days of peaceful marches, such as those headed up by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., seem to be long gone.

On Nov. 4, the pro-gay community obviously was flabbergasted that a state that generally leans left actually voted right when it came to holy matrimony. But that's exactly what happened; the majority of Californians -- red, yellow, black and white -- voted to define the margins of marriage as being between one man and one woman. California is the 30th state in our union to amend its constitution in doing so, joining Florida and Arizona in this election. Like it or not, it's the law now. The people have spoken.

I love the ending to the article, "The people have spoken." So the opposition needs to relax or you can take it up with Chuck Norris.

You can read the entire article here:
http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2008/11/18/if_democracy_doesnt_work,_try_anarchy?page=full&comments=true

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

The Right To Win

Wow! This article does a good job of summing up the past few months in America.

(You HAVE to see this blog... it's great!)
http://whatourcountryneeds.blogspot.com/

The Right to Win
by Thomas Sowell

Among the many new "rights" being conjured out of thin air, a new one seems to be a "right" to win.Americans have long had the right to put their candidates and their ideas to a vote. Now there seems to be a sense that your rights have been trampled on if you don't win.

Hillary Clinton's supporters were not merely disappointed, but outraged, when she lost the Democrats' nomination to Barack Obama. Some took it as a sign that, while racial barriers had come down, the "glass ceiling" holding down women was still in place.


Apparently, if you don't win, somebody has put up a barrier or a ceiling. The more obvious explanation of the nomination outcome was that Obama ran a better campaign than Hillary. There is not the slightest reason to doubt that she would have been the nominee if the votes in the primaries had come out her way.

As the election approached, pundits warned that, if Obama lost, there would be riots in the ghetto. We will never know. But since when does any candidate have a right to win any office, much less the White House?

The worst of all the reactions from people who act as if they have a right to win have come from gay activists in the wake of voter rejection of so-called "gay marriage," which is to say, redefining what marriage has meant for centuries.

Blacks and Mormons have been the main targets of the gay activists' anger. Seventy percent of blacks voted against gay marriage in California, so racial epithets were hurled at blacks in Los Angeles -- not in black neighborhoods, by the way.

Blacks who just happened to be driving through Westwood, near UCLA, were accosted in their cars and, in addition to being denounced, were warned, "You better watch your back."

Even blacks who were carrying signs in favor of gay marriage were denounced with racial epithets.

In Michigan, an evangelical church service was invaded and disrupted by gay activists, who also set off a fire alarm, because evangelicals had dared to exercise their right to express their opinions at the polls.

In Oakland, California, a mob gathered outside a Mormon temple in such numbers that officials shut down a nearby freeway exit for more than three hours.

In their midst was a San Francisco supervisor who said "The Mormon church has had to rely on our tolerance in the past, to be able to express their beliefs." He added, "This is a huge mistake for them. It looks like they've forgotten some lessons."

Apparently Mormons don't have the same rights as other Americans, at least not if they don't vote the way gay activists want them to vote.

There was another gay activist mob gathered outside a Mormon temple in Orange County, California.In the past, gay activists have disrupted Catholic services and their "gay pride" parades in San Francisco have crudely mocked nuns.

While demanding tolerance from others, gay activists apparently feel no need to show any themselves.

How did we get to this kind of situation?

With all the various groups who act as if they have a right to win, we got to the present situation over the years, going back to the 1960s, where the idea started gaining acceptance that people who felt aggrieved don't have to follow the rules or even the law.

"No justice, no peace!" was a slogan that found resonance.

Like so many slogans, it sounds good if you don't stop and think -- and awful if you do.

Almost by definition, everybody thinks their cause is just. Does that mean that nobody has to obey the rules? That is called anarchy.

Nobody is in favor of anarchy. But some people want everybody else to obey the rules, while they don't have to.

What they want is not decisive, however. It is what other people are willing to tolerate that determines how far any group can go.

When the majority of the people become like sheep, who will tolerate intolerance rather than make a fuss, then there is no limit to how far any group will go.


And one more shout out for the blog that I got this article from, there is a post that has what the colors on the gay's rainbow flag stand for.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

The Value of Work

It's a busy night... lots to post!

I could not believe the audacity of some people when I read this...
"Meanwhile, a gay rights activist submitted a formal complaint to the enforcement division of the California Fair Political Practices Commission alleging that the Mormon church failed to report the value of the work, including phone banks, commercials and other services, done to support the Proposition 8 campaign."

Are you kidding me?!?!?! I know the opposition doesn't play by the same rules, so I won't even ask if they reported the "value of the work" done to oppose prop 8.

Then you could look at this and say that the LDS church hasn't reported the "value of the work" because "the work" isn't over and we wouldn't want to be accused of reporting false information. (I'll put my disclaimer in here that I am being sarcastic with this last paragraph.)

It all goes back to the activist's agenda!

Endure to the End

I was watching the news last night and they said that the opposition to prop 8 is planning on putting their own proposition on the ballot in two years. This means that the fight is not over and it is imparitive that we continue to post information relevant to protecting marriage.

The title of my blog, "Does My Vote Really Matter?" was chosen for a reason... the people of California voted to protect the sanctity of marriage... twice. We need to stand up and tell the opposition that my vote does matter and no matter how many times you put it on the ballot, I will always vote to protect marriage.

Friday, November 7, 2008

It's Not Over

Lest we think our fight is over, it has just begun! (Which most of us already knew.)

I received an email from "Family Leader Network" noting the true colors of the opposition.
The LDS Temple in Los Angeles was under siege yesterday by 2,000 protesters angry over the Church's role in passing Proposition 8, forcing the temporary closure of the temple. According to reports, a gay activist called the temple saying they would be protesting outside the temple permanently until there is gay marriage.

Signs were hung from the fence around the temple and protesters screamed in anger, snarled afternoon rush-hour traffic and said, "This isn't going to stop us...If we do this we have a chance." "We're going to fight it until the world changes," protesters claimed. "Shame on you," chanted the protesters. Outside the temple, grafitti was scrawled on the walls and signs hung, "Go back to Utah," and "Go to hell Mormons." Their signs said, "No on H8." (Personal note here, I wanted to make a sign that said, "No on hate, yes on 8!")

Protesters promised to go after the Church's tax-exempt status and harass Mormons who had donated to the cause, listed on a website Mormonsfor8.com. The promise was to make the Mormons pay for their role in the passage of Prop 8.

And as if we haven't read enough hate in the blogs, here is my favorite:
Another blog entry: "If you're planning a heterosexual wedding in California ... be prepared for picketers. Designate someone to watch the parking lot ... You're going to have lots of unexpected expenses. Add $500 to your budget for security. ... Be prepared for the flowers not lasting to the reception or the tuxedos showing up two sizes too small or the music at the reception being a way too loud or the cake tasting a little funny," stated another threat. "Be afraid. Be very afraid. We are everywhere."

And what is our response to this?
On the same day, this happened, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, issued a statement calling for mutual civility. "No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated or harassed." It is a call to turn the other cheek.

I strongly believe in the democractic process, as is evidenced by this blog. You win some and you lose some. It's the process that builds character and makes this country the envy of many nations.

So, those who believe that same sex marriage should be legal, why don't you propose a ballot measure to the citizens of California?

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Whose Rights Are Being Taken Away?

I am very grateful to the people who spent several hours into creating this list of rights that will be (or already have been) taken away from EVERYONE if proposition 8 does not pass. Please look at this list, click on the links that serve as back up support to the claims made. This is not propaganda -- this is truth!

EDUCATION & PARENTS RIGHTS
If same-sex marriage remains legal, California schools that acceptstate money for their health curriculum and that choose to teach sexeducation (e.g. 96% of public schools) will be required by law topresent same-sex unions and traditional marriages as equal, whethertheir parents approve of this message or not. This is not a redherring as some in the “No on 8” Campaign have claimed. The erosion ofparental rights on this topic has already happened in both Californiaand Massachusetts. (Massachusetts was the first state in the union tolegalize same-sex marriage). http://tinyurl.com/NoParentalDisclosure.

Alarmingly, some first-grade students here in California are alreadybeing introduced to the concept of same-sex marriage. Just recently,first graders at a public charter school went on a field trip to asame-sex marriage performed by San Francisco’s mayor.http://tinyurl.com/SameSexFieldTrip

In Hayward, California, kindergarteners at a public school wereencouraged to become “allies” to homosexuality as part of “Gay andLesbian History Month.” On October 23rd they celebrated Coming OutDay. Parents received no advance notice of this event. http://tinyurl.com/ComingOutDay

The California Teachers Association has taken an activist standagainst traditional marriage by recently donating over $1.25 millionto the “No on Prop 8” campaign. This financial endorsement implies anagenda among educational leaders that is inconsistent with theirprimary responsibilities. You can watch a teacher’s reply to the CTAonline by going to http://tinyurl.com/TeacherRantsAgainstCTA.

RELIGIOUS RIGHTS

Catholic Charities was forced out of the adoption business for thefirst time in 100 years because it will not place children with ahomosexual couple. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/03/10/catholic_charities_to_halt_adoptions_over_issue_involving_gays/

In Ocean Grove, New Jersey, a Methodist group was stripped of part ofits state real estate tax exemption for refusing to permit a civilunion ceremony at the beachfront pavilion it owns. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyid=91554986

In Canada, A Catholic Priest is under criminal investigation under a“hate crimes” law for quoting from Bible, the Catechism of theCatholic Church of the Catholic Church, and Pope John Paul II’sencyclicals during Canada’s same-sex debate. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=page.printable&pageld=66247

A Lutheran school in Riverside county has been sued for expelling two allegedly lesbian students. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/september/6.20.html

WORKPLACE RIGHTS

A Christian gynecologist at North Coast Women's Care Medical Group in Vista, California declined to provide in vitro fertilization treatmentto a lesbian patient on the grounds that doing so would violate thedoctor’s religious beliefs. Although the doctor referred the patientto another partner in her practice who agreed to do the procedure, thepatient still sued and won. The judge also recommended the doctor finda new line of work. http://tinyurl.com/GaySuesDR

Wedding photographers who prefer not to shoot same-sex weddings andcivil unions for religious reasons are being sued. http://tinyurl.com/gaySuesPhotographer
On May 8, 2008, an African American administrator named Crystal Dixonwas fired from the University of Toledo, Ohio, for objecting to thecomparison of racial discrimination to same-sex marriage. http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050605.html
http://www.gaypeopleschronicle.com/stories08/may/0516082.htm
http://www.toledofreepress.com/?id=7609