Thursday, October 23, 2008

Hitting the Big Time

I found out this morning that my blog had been linked to by a site called lezgetreal.com. It was in a section called the "Yes on Prop 8 Blog Roll". I was told about this in a comment to a previous post on my blog who said that my blog was on a 'black list' for my support of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative to restore the voice of the people to restore and preserve traditional marriage. I had hit the big time! I was excited to be on the 'black list'. Then I found out that it wasn't a black list at all. Rather it was a listing of bloggers who, in the words of the website author:
"These bloggers have no problem telling us we are sexual deviants, fake families, social misfits and what have you. With Election Day so close, the LGBT community can't afford to let these people believe their own BS any longer!"
So I reread all of my posts to see if I had written, or even implied, that anyone was a 'sexual deviant' or 'social misfit', or lived in a 'fake family'. Not surprisingly, I wrote nothing of the sort - not even any BS. Should I be 'offended' for being mischaracterized in this fashion? I'm not. Sorry, I just don't have time to be offended. Actually, I guess it is more accurate to simply say that I choose not to be offended.

Just to make certain that my views on Proposition 8 are accurately represented by the only person who is an expert on the subject (uh, that would be me - possibly the only thing in the world that I am an expert on) I will discuss some of them here.

First, I must admit that I don't understand same gender attraction. I have never experienced it in any manner. I don't believe that anyone is 'born that way'. There have been a multitude of studies that have attempted to prove that a same gender attraction is genetically determined, but none have ever been successful at doing so. A couple that I am aware of thought they had some evidence to the contrary, but could never be replicated in an unbiased, controlled environment. Same gender attraction seems to be mostly a matter of choice.

Now for my views on Proposition 8. I believe that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God. It's primary purpose is to provide a framework for people to be obedient to the commandment God gave to Adam and Eve to 'mulitply and replenish the earth'. I know that there are instances where couples are infertile or have other issues that make it impossible for them to bear children, but that doesn't preclude them from participating in God's plan for us.

Based on this belief alone, I will always work to support and promote marriage between a man and a woman. However, there are social and cultural reasons to promote traditional marriage which are very compelling.

Teaching children in public schools that same sex gender relationships are the same as a traditional marriage is not just a matter of teaching diversity or tolerance. There is an agenda of the LGBT community to promote and perpetuate their lifestyle. They realize that the best way to accomplish this is to indoctrinate children while they are young - which, by the way, overrides parental rights to teach their children about morality. What happened in Massachusetts following their legalization of same gender marriages is proof of this. While opponents of Proposition 8 are doing their best to convince the public that only 'radical fear-mongers' bring up this argument, the reality speaks for itself. I won't go in to any further detail here, because Brian Camenker wrote an excellent exposé by entitled "What Same-Sex 'Marriage' Has Done to Massachusetts". I would suggest that interested readers click on that link and read it.

While I have many other concerns about what will happen in California and around the United States if Proposition 8 does not pass, I won't discuss them here at this time. An excellent source for that information is at the web site http://www.truthaboutprop8.com/Fact-Fiction.html. In fact, I think it is the best source for information that I have seen on the internet.

The last thing I want to address is the 'fear-mongering' issue that keeps being thrown about. If recent history has demonstrated anything, it is that we can't leave it to the judiciary to decide societal values. (See my previous post "The People's Republic of America?") I can illustrate this with another hot topic, not only in society, but on the November ballot in California. That being the topic of abortion.

This illustration is valid regardless of your personal stand on abortion.

On 22 January 1973 the United States supreme court ruled that a woman's right to privacy, vaguely afforded in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, gave women a fundamental right to an abortion. On the 21st of January of that year, had I argued that this ruling would lead to case law granting a 15 year old girl the unmitigated right to an abortion, without parental notification, paid for by the state with no exceptions, I would have been called a 'fear-monger'. My opponents would have stated, correctly, that there is no case law, or any legal precedent for this to happen.

Fast forward 35 years to 2008 and it is very clear to see what a slippery slope leaving it to the judiciary to decide has become. The courts have not shown sufficient restraint to lead me to believe that even the worst case scenarios offered up by Proposition 8 supporters are well within the realm of reason.

Incidentally, I do not favor a total ban on abortion. I was told several years ago by a colleague that I am actually 'pro-choice' because I don't believe that abortions should be illegal in all cases. I think he was right. I am pro-choice. I just believe that the choice is not exclusively that of a pregnant woman and that the correct choice would be LIFE in the overwhelming majority of the cases. For this reason I am also supporting Proposition 4, 'Sarah's Law', on the November ballot.

I know that if Proposition 8 passes there will be many people that will be very hurt. I have empathy for them. I really do. That empathy, however, does not override my belief that society will be stronger, and children better protected if marriage is legally defined as between a man and a woman.


Links in the post:
http://www.protectmarriage.com
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html
http://www.truthaboutprop8.com/Fact-Fiction.html
http://1raddad.blogspot.com/2008/09/peoples-republic-of-america.html
http://www.yeson4.net

11 comments:

beetlebabee said...

Congratulations on hitting the big time!

You're right, gay marriage is not a civil rights issue. It's a children's rights issue. Children are entitled to a mother and a father. To intentionally deny them this basic right is wrong. They are people too, not prizes. Set aside self interest and recognize what family, REAL family is all about. Children.

I like what France had to say when they went through this two years ago, I found it interesting:

"MONTREAL, March 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In late January, a 30 member parliamentary commission of the French National Assembly published a 453 page Report on the Family and the rights of Children, which rejected same-sex marriage.

DeSerres, told LifeSiteNews.com “Referring to the rights of children as a human rights issue, the report argued that children ‘now have rights and to systematically give preference to adult aspirations over respect for these rights is not possible any more.’”

In the report, the commission says that “the child represents the future of society.” The commission asks legislators to make sure that “children, confronted with mutations in family models, be fully taken into account and not suffer from situations imposed upon them by adults.” It adds: “The interest of the child must take precedence over adults’ exercise of their freedom (…) including with regards to parents’ lifestyle choices.”"

There are consequences to our choices and actions, and our families and societies will suffer. The kids are our future. The entire article is here:

http://beetlebabee.wordpress.com/2008/10/23/childrens-rights-before-adult-preferences/

abby said...

Homosexual Relationships Are Statisically Very Unstable With Anti-Marriage Partner & Sex Habits. Check Out The Hard Core Research Statistics Yourself. Then Vote Yes Prop. 8. For REAL Marriage…Here’s the original article containing massive research from a lot of independent researchers: Publication “Homosexual Marriage: A Social Science View” Here: http://www.journeychristianministries.org/CPA-SSA-marriage.pdf

http://www.abbyearth.wordpress.com

Left Coaster said...

Good post, Keep blogging. We are sprinting towards Nov 4. Vote yes on Prop 8!

The Skinny on Schools and Prop 8.

1 - Public schools in California are not required to teach anything about marriage.

2 - 96 percent of California public schools teach a Health and Sex Ed Curriculum, which is my understanding is required under law (but I cannot find that online yet from the State, I am still looking).

3 - If a public school teaches Health and Sex Ed, they are required to teach the following :

“Instruction shall be appropriate for students of all genders, sexual orientations, and ethnic and cultural backgrounds…Instruction shall encourage communication between students and their families and shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.


4 - This means that schools that teach Heath and Sex Ed will now be required to teach that Gay Marriage is the same as Marriage between a Man and a Woman.


http://standingfortruth2008.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/prop-8-and-schools/

busywithconviction said...

Wow to be found. The opposition to Prop 8 is working hard raising money and telling lies. I can only hope people looking to be educated about Prop 8 will be able to see through the lies and half truths. Thanks for the insightful post. Good luck fighting the good fight.

http://busywithconviction.wordpress.com/

emily said...

awesome! i love your analogy to the abortion issue. thank you!

A. said...

It seems to me that gay rights activists have an agenda, they say that gayness is not a choice, it’s genetically driven, but statistics show that children raised in a gay environment are much more likely to choose the gay lifestyle themselves. While there may be some genetic component, the consensus is that it is most likely a combination of genetics and societal influence. For instance, one of our high schools is having a rash of homosexual type experimentation because it’s become the edge thing to do. That has everything to do with environment and nothing to do with genetics.

abby said...

How & Why Did France DENY Same Sex Couples Marriage?
France Says Marriage Is Strictly Reserved For Heterosexual Couples!

Why? The Answer Will Probably Surprise You!

Please Read It & Place Your Vote With A Clear Conscious For YES! On Prop. 8… http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006_docs/Francesummary.pdf

Anonymous said...

One of my favorite yes on prop. 8 blogs is http://www.beetlebabee.wordpress.com

It's extraordinarily well done with great pictures, too!
Check it out!

emily said...

as i've studied this issue, i've realized that the state really does have a responsibility to protect its children.

France took a year studying the issue BEFORE they decided. They rejected same-sex marriage because of the rights of children.

Every child has a right to a mom and a dad. This is how they grow and learn best. While homosexual parents can't equal a mom AND a dad.

society has an obligation to provide this basic and natural/biological right to its children.

there is a cool discussion going on here:

http://prop8discussion.wordpress.com/2008/10/29/children-matter-society-has-a-moral-obligation-to-protect-them-children-have-a-right-to-a-mom-and-a-dad-day-3/

Anonymous said...

You say: First, I must admit that I don't understand same gender attraction. I have never experienced it in any manner.

But also: I don't believe that anyone is 'born that way'. [...] Same gender attraction seems to be mostly a matter of choice.

So, it is your belief that people chose to be homosexual. Therefore, it must follow that you yourself have chosen not to be homosexual. And yet, you say you have never experienced any kind of homosexual attraction. So, at what point did you choose not to be homosexual, and how did you make that choice?

RadDad said...

EDITORS NOTE:

The comment by anonymous exhibits the fuzzy logic exhibited by those promoting same gender marriages. Heterosexuals are 'born that way', homosexuals are not. Those of us who are heterosexual choose what nature has built into each of us.

Why is it that man is considered the most intelligent of the animal kingdom, but we are the ones who can't figure this out.