You know, I have never outed myself before.

But since I've been hounded over the last few days with people banging on my door and calling the house and waving all manners of religious literature in my face, I realize that my time for silence is over.

So much for respecting other people's points of views and not forcing opinions down anyone's throats.

Here are the questions and statements that I presented to each and every person who has come to my door or called me on the phone or accosted me on my way to public transit:

IS someone who is thrice married and thrice divorced and fighting for custody over a set of children - all from the three different marriages - a good example of 'good traditional family values and traditional marriage'?

IS someone who is married and commits adultery while married a better example of the supposed perfection that is traditional marriage?

IS a single parent more capable of giving to hers or his child(ren) more love, more stability, and more support than a same-sex couple can? The American Psychiatric Association sure doesn't think so and you'd think that of all people to know about 'craziness', they'd know best. Citation can be found in earlier comments or by searching.

IS a childless heterosexual couple or a heterosexual couple out of childbearing years a better example of how marriage is for procreation and the furthering of our species?

IS someone who works in the adult industry - selling their bodies online, in Vegas, in Playboy magazines - more qualified to be a 'good parent' and more qualified to be able to provide a good example of 'good traditional family values'?

IS someone who is guilty of spousal or child abuse and/or neglect a good representative of someone who makes up a 'good traditional family'?

If you want to go by what everyone has been preaching to me so far, NO.

BUT:

ALL of these people can vote come election and ALL of these people have the right to marry.

Who cares if mom or dad is an adult entertainer and who cares if mom or dad is guilty of beating up their spouse or children.

Considering that Proposition 8 addresses NONE of these viable concerns - concerns that AFFECT EVERYONE and not just gays or straights or whatever other group, then I say that at the heart, Proposition 8 is NOT about preserving 'traditional marriage' or 'traditional families' as everything that's UNtraditional is accepted.

It's okay to be thrice married, thrice divorced, have a history of spousal abuse, and be a porn star and STILL MARRY... so long as the person in question is heterosexual.

But me?

I'm none of the above and in addition - up to this date and time - have never 'forced' anyone to 'submit' to my viewpoints.

But I can't marry because I'm gay - fancy that.

If you want to promote traditional family values, then fine! But if THAT is what your agenda is, then start off by weeding out the heterosexuals who DON'T adhere to these values and ideals and THEN we can start talking about how Proposition 8 is NOT about discrimination based on fear and hate.

NO to discrimination, NO to scapegoats, NO to hypocrisy, and YES to EQUALITY and YES to FAIRNESS and YES to EQUAL JUDGEMENT!

NO ON PROPOSITION 8.

My name's Ray and I wrote this message - for myself, for my partner, and for everyone and anyone else in CA who believes that Proposition 8 is about discrimination, hypocrisy, and finding a scapegoat.

---

I support everyone in their making of choices (informed ones, mind!) whether I agree with them or not. This is why we are the United States of America and not a Communist country. Because we have the freedom to think for ourselves. But PLEASE. Get the facts right and DON'T be a hypocrite!

Here are some additional facts:

- Like with sex ed, parents have the option of opting their kids out of events and even school lessons that they feel go against their religious or moral beliefs.

The kids in that video who went on the field trip? They all had the option to opt-out.

- Clergymen and people of the cloth and churches are not and will not be required to marry same-sex couples. They don't have to now, they won't have to later. People can and DO understand if other people feel that same-sex marriages go against religious beliefs. At least, I do.

On that note, I don't bang on church-going citizens' doors at 7 in the morning and start spewing about how great it is to be in love with another man, and I would appreciate it if the church-goers would STOP COMING TO MY HOUSE and STOP CALLING AT 10 PM! The whole 'forcing beliefs' goes both ways, thanks.

---

And for a bonus:

Why do I want to marry?

Because I love him. Have loved him. Loved him longer than many of you heterosexual folks will stay married. Because he's stood by my side through thick and thin. Because he's proved to me - and me to him - that what we've got can span time - a LONG time.

It's very, very simple...a yes vote for proposition 8 is a vote for discrimination....why the church generally doesn't see this is beyond my comprehension. please VOTE NO ON 8! Thanks!

People are making a big deal over something that's simple.......It's about fairness and equality. Every human being deserves the same rights. What are people worried about? It does not effect raditional marriage and we all know that marriage is not taught in the schools. People need to put the shoe on the other foot....What if you had a family member or a child who was gay...wouldn't you want equal rights for your loved one? VOTE NO ON 8!!!

Jeanie Campbell...EL Dorado County

I think that this is so funny, because a lot of the companies that donate to Prop 8 are very much supporters of Gay Rights, but the win/win comes in because they get good press from donating to Prop 8 anyway. So to say that you are going to "out" them is ridiculous, cause they out themselves for donating in the first place. It's a good PR move to donate!! NO on H8!

Please... Vote YES on Propostion 8

After reading this post it occurred to me that someone is interpretting a letter that hasn't been brought forth for public scrutiny.

Please post where the letter may be found.

Secondly, I've received an email that is lengthy but full of pertinant information:

"Proposition 8—Clergy Executive Summary

Preserving the Traditional Definition of Marriage

Language of Proposition: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California .”

History: Biblical: In the beginning, “male and female created He them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife; and they shall be one flesh.” (Gen. 1:27-28; 2:24) “What therefore God hath joined together (man and woman; husband and wife), let not man put asunder.” (Mark 10:9) Since the beginning of time, marriage has been defined as between a man and a woman.

More recently: In 2000, the voters in California passed Proposition 22, with wording identical to Proposition 8, by an incredible 22 point margin: 61% to 39%. On May 15, 2008 Prop 22 was overturned by California courts by a 4-3 vote—one judicial vote overturning the overwhelming will of the people. Proposition 8 will restore, as an amendment to the California constitution, the definition of marriage that has stood for millennia.

Current Law: Under California law, “[D]omestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law…as are granted to and imposed upon [married] spouses.” (Family Code §297.5) Domestic partners in California have all the rights of married spouses. There are no exceptions! Prop 8 will NOT take away any of those rights. Prop 8 is not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Prop 8 is all about protecting the ideal of marriage.

What’s in a word? Traditional marriage is an ideal. Every objective study has shown, and theologians and social scientists agree, that a family headed by a father and a mother is the best environment in which to raise the next generation. Marriage has not been perfect in our society, but it has been the ideal goal. When it works, it works admirably. By lowering the standard of marriage, we lower the standard of society—and future generations will not be taught the value of the traditional marriage ideal. Just because it is not perfect in practice does not mean that it is not perfect in ideal. What’s in a word? Think Nike: How much money does Nike spend each year to protect its name—to protect that ideal? Answer: Millions and millions of dollars. If someone starts using the Nike name on its product, Nike will use all of its resources to stop that person…to protect that one word…its name…the “ideal.” In the legal world, it’s called protecting against “dilution” of the name—protecting its value. Same with Adidas, and McDonalds, and Microsoft, and tens of thousands of others. There is great value in a word! Someone might say to Nike: “It doesn’t hurt you if we use your name too—you can still use it any way you want!” It doesn’t work that way. Nike would insist that its name no longer be used…and that the other company find its own name, and build up its own goodwill associated with that new name—not dilute the meaning and ideal that Nike has developed. “Marriage” is no different. How much value is there in a word representing God’s ideal relationship? In that epic war in heaven described in Revelation 12, we are told that Satan and his angels were finally overcome “by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony.” (Rev. 12:7-11) Every minister; every politician; every advertising executive; every parent knows that words have great meaning—and marriage, and the ideal it represents, is one of those words worth protecting. It should be a bright beacon that must be kept shining as an ideal to the world.

Practical Effects: As important as a word—as an ideal—is, there is much more to Proposition 8. It will stand as a protection of vital constitutional rights, including freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, free speech, parental rights to teach traditional values, and freedom of association. Consider the following recent developments—most not well-foreseen by most of us, but all of great significance affecting the freedoms and rights of each of us:

Ø In California , state law requires teachers to instruct children as young as kindergarteners about marriage. (Education Code §51890) If Prop 8 fails to pass, teachers (even against their own consciences and moral values) will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage. No opt out rights to parents. Don’t believe it? Consider what is happening in Massachusetts ! Those kinds of discussions are best handled by parents at home, not at school.

Ø In Massachusetts (the only state where gay marriage has been legal for an extended period of time), the Catholic Church had a very strong and effective adoption agency—perhaps the strongest in the state—that was especially effective at placing “hard-to-place” children. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts refused to renew adoption agency licensing to the Catholic Charities unless it changed its religion-based stance against placing children with same-sex couples. As a result, Catholic Charities no longer functions in Massachusetts . The victims? Institutional religious freedom; and the hard to place children!

Ø In New Jersey , a lesbian couple wanted to solemnize their civil union in a Methodist pavilion. Based on firmly-held religious beliefs that marriage is only between a man and a woman, the Methodist organization said that the couple could have their marriage ceremony on the boardwalk or anywhere else in the surrounding area, but not in the building where they hold religious services. In the ensuing law suit brought by the couple, the Methodist organization responded that it was their property, and the First Amendment protects their right to practice their faith without government intrusion. The Methodist organization lost, and its tax exemption has been rescinded by the state. If upheld, this decision (and the reasoning behind it—elevating personal “rights” above religious beliefs and practices) potentially affects every religious organization in America —not just Christian organizations, but EVERY organization. Institutional freedom of religion is affected in a very fundamental way. (Bernstein/Paster v. Methodist Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association)

Ø Only weeks ago, the California Supreme Court held, in a case involving a lesbian woman seeking artificial insemination, that doctors do not have the right to refuse to provide even nonessential care to patients, even when: (i) the procedure sought conflicted with deeply-held religious beliefs; and (ii) treatment from other doctors was readily available (and was in fact readily provided!). Dr. Brody argued that the reason that treatment was denied was a longstanding policy that artificial insemination would not be provided to any single woman. The court held that the fundamental rights of religious freedom and conscience were trumped by provisions of law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. Personal freedom of religion has been reduced in a very significant way. (Benitez v. Brody, et al)

Ø Similarly, a same sex couple in Albuquerque , NM asked a photographer to shoot their commitment ceremony. The photographer declined, saying that her Christian beliefs prevented her from sanctioning or promoting same-sex unions. In the words of the photographer: “We wanted to make sure that everything we photographed—everything we used our artistic ability for, everything we told a story for or conveyed a message of—would be in line with our values and our beliefs.” Notwithstanding the fact that there were many other well-qualified photographers willing to work with the couple, the couple sued, and the New Mexico Human Rights Commission found the photographer guilty of discrimination. Freedom of religion; freedom of association; freedom of conscience; freedom of artistic expression—all abrogated. If this can happen to a doctor; if this can happen to a photographer…then it can happen to a lawyer; to a cake maker; to a therapist….to a minister. (Vanessa Willock v. Elane Photography)

Ø An employee of the City of Oakland was threatened with termination for using the terms “natural family, marriage and family values” in a public forum for co-workers. The City claimed that such language constituted "statements of a homophobic nature" and promoted "sexual-orientation-based harassment,” and threatened to terminate the employees. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “administrative efficiency in a government office is more important than free speech.” (The Good News Employees Association v. City of Oakland ) In Canada , one of six countries where gay marriage is legal, the Alberta Human Rights Commission prevailed in its action against a minister for “hate speech” for reading and teaching from the pulpit what the Bible says about homosexuality. Freedom of speech and religion are under attack!

Failure to pass Proposition 8 to restore the traditional definition of marriage will significantly reduce freedoms for a vast majority, further opening a Pandora’s box of litigation—while not providing any additional legal rights whatsoever for same sex couples! Our children will be taught—with official sanction of the school authorities—that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage. The ideal of marriage will be diluted—and perhaps destroyed.

“Ye are the light of the world…Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works…” (Matt. 5:14, 16) We cannot sit by and let the ideal of traditional marriage be destroyed. Vote Yes on Prop 8. Rally around Prop 8. Step up and support Prop 8 in word and deed. We must do all in our power to protect the ideal of this time-honored institution. "

As far as signs go, my YES on Proposition 8 has not been stolen, though a neighbor did lose two of theirs after posting them too close their goats... reminding me of the following scripture:

ST MATTHEW CHAPTER 25:

31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Please... Vote YES on Propostion 8

http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,161-1-11-1,00.html

Thank you,
and God bless

Laura, gays and lesbians don't choose their sexual orienation. The only choice is whether or not someone who is gay hides that aspect of them. And the "lifestyle" is a stereotype. Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they are flamboyant (but all the power to them) or look differently from you or I. The only difference is who they're naturally attracted to. And it is natural. Even if you wiped the planet of homosexuals, they'd all come back just the same as the ones today. The only difference? Society doesn't accept it now, but people tend to forget that society has never been consistently the same throughout time. There's always room for change, acceptance, and being able to celebrate love with your fellow human beings.

Put my name on the list of those supporting a NO vote on proposition 8. Since I just married by partner (now my husband) of 30 years, our families and friends all celebrated with us, and our co-workers all cheered our marriage, I don't know who is left that we can be "outed" to. Oh, by the way, Yes on 8 people...the idea of threatening to blackmail people by outing them is really pretty 70's. Doesn't work much anymore (unless it's among your closeted supporters)...

I don't know about anyone else, but it strikes me odd that the fonts on the 2nd page are different for the name and address at the top and the signatures. This letter seems too outrageous to me. Anything is possible, but when typing a letter you usually keep it consistent throughout. Nothing surprises me anymore.

I am a former California resident now living in Washington DC but I'm still donating to the NO camp to help defeat this pitiful attempt to create second-class citizens! Though I can't afford to give much, I have given freely and happily and would be glad to have my name published by the yes camp!

I dont believe the state should get involved in marriages of any kind.
How is it the governments job.? The law can grant contracts, civil, legal unions for any one that whats one and the couples that want a "marriage" can go to church or temple and have a ceremony if they want... Government get OUT of the romance business.

Such hate on this board, I dont see how anyone can compare this to racial civil rights... you choose a LIFESTYLE that had been not recognized as traditional for thousands of years, not a cultural or ethnic divirsity. You are now discriminating against religious freedoms, a Church is being sued for not allowing a gay marriage to be performed at their facility? who protects their religous beliefs, what happen to state and religion being seperate? you want to impose your beliefs on religious organizations? not cool. This country was founded because of Freedom for religon. All persons have rights, anyone can marry if they want to, the defination of marriage was only between a man and a women until 4 judges got involved,. IF YOU CHOOSE a lifestyle that differs from the defination then you CHOOSE not to have the perk of getting married. But you have the right of getting married. You always have. Polygimist maybe should get Civil rights too and be able to marry everyone whom they love, oh but you would discriminate against that, because its wrong.... And maybe the 34 year old man and the 13 year old girl, they love each other tooo... Maybe we should let them get married as well, Marriage for all with no definition... YEAH!!!! Well maybe this lifestyle is wrong too. You think we should allow 4 people change marriage and alter religious freedom so you can have a License and Ceremony at a religious Building where your beliefs will be shunned upon regardless, and if they wave there religious freedoms and say no, find another venue, lets sue the church, the religious orginizations need no rights. Because thats what you think america should be about. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of religious belief and worship, freedom of America. To those on the fence, Consequences will follow in a no on 8 Vote, Every action has an immediate reaction. it is more than just allowing 2 people to get married that love each other. It is about the American Dream the Dream of the Pilgrims, the Dream of the Founding Fathers, and the Dream of religous freedom. Nowhere in the United States Constitution did they write it is OK for same gender marriages. But they interperet it that way. If the founding fathers would have wanted that they would have put it in writing. Protect what his country was built on. Vote YES on prop 8.

I donated again to No on Prop 8. It felt even better the second time I gave to defeat the misinformed.
My husband and I married on September 27 at our home in Pinole with over 180 guests present. People of all religions and professions celebrated with us. It was the happiest day of my life and no one can take that away from me, NO ONE.
My name is Frank Dardon, my husband is Flavio Gonzalez and we are very respected by friends, family, parish, neighbors and co-workers. Marriage should only be about love and commitment between two people, no matter what gender combination. How can people hate love? Feel free to see our picture at http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=1544282&op=1&o=all&view=all&subj=25383552676&aid=-1&oid=25383552676&id=1534370195
You can't take our wedding day away from us, it lives on forever in our memories and the memories of our many guests.
Vote NO on 8. Equality for all! Vote no on 8.

This issue was brought as a proposition by the right wing religious Zealots. This money wouldn't even be an issue. Do you think that the no on prop 8 folks put this to a ballot measure? It was the extreme right zealots so they could raise money and keep 60% for themselves. Check the public records for yourselves unless you are already brainwashed by your Zealot leaders.