Recently neighborhoods in the Chino and Chino Hills areas have been attacked by vandals’ intent on limiting free speech. Numerous political yard signs in support of Proposition 8 are disappearing from private property overnight. The well funded campaign in opposition to Proposition 8 may be unaware that some of their supporters lack respect for free speech and personal property rights, but such mischievous late night activities certainly stand in sharp contrast to the “Equal Civil Rights” that is central to their campaign strategy. The basic argument they put forth is that their behavior should be protected as a civil right. Should the theft of yard signs be included in these protected behaviors?
Throughout this campaign those opposed to Proposition 8 have shown that they are willing to go to any length to secure their so-called “Civil Right” for same sex couples to marry. Jerry Brown, in an attempt to bias voters, re-titled the proposition from "limits marriage between one man and one woman" to "a constitutional change to eliminate the right of same sex couples to marry". No doubt Jerry Brown has more than one agenda here, as our state Attorney General he is well aware that the rights that are being fought for in this battle are already granted to same sex couples under current laws.
Also are you aware that “Brides” and "Grooms" are no longer allowed to marry in the State of California, that privilege is only extended to individuals who allow themselves to be called “Party A” and “Party B” on marriage licenses. According to Pacific Justice Institute, a young couple's marriage license was denied by the Placer County Clerk/Recorder because it failed to comply with California State registration laws. Their offense? Writing "bride and groom" next to the license's "Party A and Party B." Writing the gender-specific terms was an "unacceptable alteration" to the new ambiguous marriage licenses. One wonders, what's next? Will the State of California force ministers to use the terms "Party A" and "Party B" in the ceremony itself?
Man-woman marriage is the only natural way to build families, which in turn builds a society. In the United States, same-sex couples are free to live as they choose. It is dangerous, however, to treat marriage as a "social construct" that is changeable. Husband-wife unions are the basic source of society. Because society is not the source of marriage's definition, it cannot change the accurate description of marriage by its own will. Voters should hear alarm bells ringing when radical judges act as they did this year to “redefine words”, especially words that do not find their definition in the courts.
To correct this injustice Proposition 8 adds 14 words to the constitution of California:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California.”
Throughout this campaign those opposed to Proposition 8 have shown that they are willing to go to any length to secure their so-called “Civil Right” for same sex couples to marry. Jerry Brown, in an attempt to bias voters, re-titled the proposition from "limits marriage between one man and one woman" to "a constitutional change to eliminate the right of same sex couples to marry". No doubt Jerry Brown has more than one agenda here, as our state Attorney General he is well aware that the rights that are being fought for in this battle are already granted to same sex couples under current laws.
Also are you aware that “Brides” and "Grooms" are no longer allowed to marry in the State of California, that privilege is only extended to individuals who allow themselves to be called “Party A” and “Party B” on marriage licenses. According to Pacific Justice Institute, a young couple's marriage license was denied by the Placer County Clerk/Recorder because it failed to comply with California State registration laws. Their offense? Writing "bride and groom" next to the license's "Party A and Party B." Writing the gender-specific terms was an "unacceptable alteration" to the new ambiguous marriage licenses. One wonders, what's next? Will the State of California force ministers to use the terms "Party A" and "Party B" in the ceremony itself?
Man-woman marriage is the only natural way to build families, which in turn builds a society. In the United States, same-sex couples are free to live as they choose. It is dangerous, however, to treat marriage as a "social construct" that is changeable. Husband-wife unions are the basic source of society. Because society is not the source of marriage's definition, it cannot change the accurate description of marriage by its own will. Voters should hear alarm bells ringing when radical judges act as they did this year to “redefine words”, especially words that do not find their definition in the courts.
To correct this injustice Proposition 8 adds 14 words to the constitution of California:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California.”
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment