Tuesday, November 3, 2009

State Leaders Support REJECT R-71 Effort

I pulled the following from the website for Protect Marriage Washington, one of the groups leading the charge to reject Referendum 71 in Washington State. You can find the original source, plus more statements, here.

Citizen Gonzo will not be taking a position on R-71, but encourages respectful and constructive discussion on the issue.

"At the founding of our country we made the conscious decision to promote marriage between one man and one woman above all other legal unions because of its inherent value to children and society. Signing R-71 will help us preserve that decision for another generation."
-State Representative Matt Shea

"Those who think they can sit this battle out because they believe their values and their children will be safe in a private school or homeschool, need to think again. If the homosexual extremists are allowed to continue down this path, under expanded civil rights and hate crime laws, it will soon be illegal to speak out against homosexual marriage or the dangerous homosexual lifestyle. Please protect the time-honored tradition of ancient and modern society - one man, one woman in marriage. Protect the rights of children to have a mother and a father. Please do not hesitate to sign the R-71 petition."
-Pastor Ken Hutcherson, Antioch Bible Church

"Please Defend Marriage By Signing This Petition. SB 5688 was presented as a bill about benefits, yet a day after it was passed, those who sponsored the bill told the Seattle press that it was really part of a long term strategy to re-define marriage and legalize same-sex 'marriage'. The Seattle Times editorial board agreed and said homosexuals should also be given the name 'marriage' as a result of the passage of SB 5688. SB 5688 is the final step. If this bill is allowed to become law, partnerships will be elevated to the level of marriage with no legal difference. The Washington State Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) will be declared irrelevant and same-sex 'marriage' will be imposed on Washington State through the courts."

"SB 5688 is an attempt to deconstruct marriage as it has existed throughout all human history. This unique and exceptional relationship that connects a man and a woman to a child, genetically, is the cornerstone of every successful society in human history and is the master plan of the Creator. There is no other relationship that meets this criteria for marriage. Only natural marriage provides generational sustainability. Please defend marriage by signing the R-71 petition."
-Gary Randall, Faith and Freedom Network and Foundation

"One of our greatest founders, George Washington, said it well when he noted, "We can never expect safety for our nation and disregard the eternal rules of order." When our country was born over 230 years ago, our Founders made a point of acknowledging His laws in the Declaration of Independence. They understood that God was not only the giver of life, but also of order and standards of behavior, including standards regarding marriage. From the beginning, the Founders understood the importance of traditional marriage-that it is one man and one woman for life- and the dangers of trying to make changes to that standard, like the changes that the law we seek to overturn by this referendum has done.

How we respond to this latest attack on marriage will be a defining moment for Christians and those who believe in traditional values here in Washington State. We cannot afford to let this simply slide by. Future generations will be affected tomorrow by how we act today. Please sign R-71!"
-State Representative Jim McCune

"Please sign R-71 right away. SB 5688 is bad legislation for marriage, children, the public schools and the economy. It's a back-door way of legislating homosexuality marriage without the name--which will be next. That step would legitimize immoral behavior-- forcing many families and their children to leave the public schools, and costing the state millions of dollars on a crazy social experiment. People are free to live with anybody they want--but they don't have the right to change the bedrock of society--marriage--between a man and woman, producing, protecting, and nurturing children. We need to honor and strengthen marriage--not re-define it."
-Ron Boehme, US Renewal

"I heartily endorse the work of Protect Marriage Washington and the R-71 campaign. If homosexual 'marriage' becomes legal in Washington, every public school will be forced to teach that homosexual relationships and marriage are perfectly normal. This will greatly harm our schools and drive an irreconcilable wedge between the public school curriculum and the values and moral code of hundreds of thousands of parents. Those parents with deeply held convictions on this matter will have no choice but to remove their children. It is time for all of us to stand up for marriage in Washington State."
-Dr. Bruce Craswell

"A domestic partnership diverts rights and resources from a family to an unrelated adult. These include benefits for dependent children, end of life decisions by older children for elderly parents, and inheritance rights of all surviving family members, just to name a few. The homosexual community emphasizes the fact that they have biological children, yet no child is ever produced by a same sex relationship. There is always an opposite sex partner involved and they can lose their rights as well. Please support genuine marriage and sign R-71!"
- Senator Dan Swecker

"In 2006 the Washington State Supreme Court upheld the legislature's right to ban same sex marriages. The passage of Senate Bill 5688 this year makes same-sex Domestic Partnerships equal to genuine marriage in every practical way. It's passage has essentially overturned our Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and thus diminishes the value of traditional marriage between one man and one women. I urge you to sign R-71 and help us roll back this effort to undermine marriage in Washington State!"
-Senator Val Stevens

"Marriage has been defined historically, culturally and morally as the union of one man and one woman. It is an undeniable truth that families led by both a father and mother provide the best structure and support for children and communities. The recent hostile acts of redefining marriage by state legislators and Governor Gregoire have set the stage for Referendum 71. Their assault on marriage in Washington State must not go unanswered. Marriage is ground that cannot be surrendered and we urge every citizen to rise up and defend marriage by signing Referendum 71."
-Cindy Honcoop, Washington Eagle Forum

"SB 5688 was packaged and presented to the legislature as a Domestic Partnerships expansion of benefits. In truth, it will demolish the state's historical understanding and definition of marriage as Washington will immediately become subject to litigation by same-sex partners demanding the courts overturn our state's Defense of Marriage Act and impose "same-sex marriage" (as happened recently in California prior to Proposition 8). By signing Referendum 71, we will bring this society changing measure before the people of Washington State and let them make this monumental decision in November."-
-Larry Stickney, Washington Values Alliance

"HB 5688, together with other domestic partnership laws in Washington, represent the most radical rewriting of the statutory scheme in this state since the Code of Washington was first revised. R71 is your opportunity to reject the legislature's attempt to overthrow traditional marriage in Washington."
-Stephen Pidgeon, Legal Counsel, Protect Marriage Washington

Be sure to check out TheGonzoMama.com for more of Gonzo's musings!


The Gonzo Mama said...

Again, I'm not taking a public position on this issue, but this statement, by Gary Randall of the Faith and Freedom Network and Foundation, just got under my skin:

"This unique and exceptional relationship that connects a man and a woman to a child, genetically, is the cornerstone of every successful society in human history and is the master plan of the Creator. There is no other relationship that meets this criteria for marriage."

Maybe I'm reading it the wrong way, but it makes me feel slighted, as an adoptive parent - a woman whose children are not "connected... genetically."

Am I reading his statement wrong? Can someone give me an interpretation that makes a little more sense?

Opus #6 said...

LOL! That means you are NOT married!!! Just kidding.

This is a divisive issue. As a parent, I believe in full partnership rights for domestic partners. Call the partnership anything you want. Just not marriage. There IS value in promoting a male/female relationship over others. Some will disagree with that statement. We will have to differ. It is a deeply held belief of mine that the nuclear male/female family is the cornerstone of society. Not all kids will be able to achieve it, but it should stand as an ideal, at least.

Maybe mentioning the genetic relationship that person went too far. Even the most ultra conservatives I know fully approve of adoption and honor your commitment.

The Gonzo Mama said...

Thank goodness I'm "really" married, Opus!

When I worked in family law, I saw and followed and worked on cases where gay or lesbian couples were parenting together - either one adopted as a single parent, or one gave birth, whatever - and when the relationship failed, one partner did not have parental rights and had to fight for visitation as a third party; not a parent.

That, to me, is a terrible thing to put a child - or a parent - through. I haven't thoroughly read 71, so I don't know if it addresses the issue of children's custody or not.

Я -- R said...

Hi, I followed your link from GayPatriot, where I'm a semi-regular commenter. Reading through all the quotes you posted, the only one that really jumped out at me as being outrageously misleading (though not technically a lie) was this one:

"A domestic partnership diverts rights and resources from a family to an unrelated adult. These include benefits for dependent children, end of life decisions by older children for elderly parents, and inheritance rights of all surviving family members, just to name a few." -- Senator Dan Swecker

Technically, all of the above assertions are true (except maybe for the "benefits to dependent children" part) -- but they're JUST AS true of heterosexual marriages involving a divorcé(e) or a widow(er)! If Dad remarries (to a woman) after he and Mom divorce, his new wife becomes his next-of-kin, and if he dies without a will, all those "rights and resources" will be "diverted from the family" to "an unrelated adult" -- namely, the new wife.

Similarly, if Grandma remarries after Grandpa dies, then it's her new husband, and not her children, who is legal next-of-kin and has power-of-attorney (in the absence of a "living will") whenever it comes to making plug-pulling decisions if Grandma has a stroke and goes into a coma.

Thus, although "homophobic" is not a word that I use lightly, Sen. Swecker's statement about domestic partnership really does seem gratuitously homophobic because it implies that same-sex DP laws enable homosexuals to somehow parasitize on families.

The Gonzo Mama said...

Thanks for your comment.

As of right now (8:16 PM PST), we have 46.37% of votes to APPROVE R-71, and 53.63% to REJECT.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Since we are all mail-in ballots, I expect they will be counting for some time.