Yes on 8 Supporters Threaten Children

I’m just curious, if the Yes on 8 Supporters are so bent and worried that schools will teach children about gay marriage, then why are the Yes on 8 Supporters putting their children to work by carrying their signs for them that say “Yes on 8:  Marriage Between a Man and a Woman”?

So-uh-basically the Yes on 8 supporters are bunch of fucking liars then?  They’re already teaching their kids about gay marriage and the differences.  This is already going in the history books.  They fucked up, but what do you expect from a bunch of low life dumb fucking idiots who are still living in the stone age and pioneer days, god they’re so fucking stupid it kills me.

On the November 4th Ballot: Religion versus Reason

by Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D.

For a decade I’ve been studying the exploits of the Christian Right, especially their pathological need to deny gay and lesbian American equal civil rights. In their campaigns against gay people these so-called “Christians” have distorted research, employed bogus stereotypes, used the most heinous scare tactics, concocted illogical, irrational arguments and, more often than not, simply lied when all else failed.

But that’s probably to be expected. Western religions – especially fundamentalist versions – are predicated upon US vs. THEM thinking. For the holier-than-thou the ends always justify the means, even if those means are antithetical to the basic principles of the religion they say they’re following and defending.

Needless to say, when the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled on October 10, 2008 that all citizens have the civil right to a civil marriage, the usual cast of characters immediately bellowed their nonsensical rhetoric. James Dobson, the big kahuna of Christian bigotry who, in his 2004 book Marriage Under Fire claimed God would destroy the earth – “as it was in the days of Noah” – if gay people were allowed to marry, regurgitated his usual rant:

Today’s ruling by the Connecticut Supreme Court to impose same-sex ‘marriage’ adds another tragic example of runaway judges trampling on citizens’ right to decide public policy for themselves. In doing so, the court has placed the desires of adults over the needs of children, who, social science research proves, do best when they are raised by their married mom and dad living in the same home.

We decry this decision by justices unelected and unaccountable to the people, and will do whatever is necessary to oppose it. Not only have these judges knowingly deprived Connecticut children of a mother or a father, but they have usurped the role of the legislators to create law. … [italics added]

“Impose”? On whom? Does Dobson really think heterosexual men and women will suddenly feel compelled to marry someone of the same sex? That was also the nonsensical notion conservative commentator Bruce Fein posited in 1990 when he wrote, “Crowning homosexual relationships with the solemnity of legal marriage would wrongly send social cues that male-female marriages are not preferable” for anyone considering getting married.

“Runaway judges.” A slight chance of vocabulary here. Dobson and the rest of the leaders of the Christian Right had previously dubbed them “activist judges” and “black-robed tyrants” except, of course, when they handed down a ruling Dobson et al agreed with, then they were “heroes.”

“The court has placed the desires of adults over the needs of children.” The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the rights of adults to marry. They were not hearing a case that involved children. But Dobson et al love to beg the question by injecting “children” into what is a matter involving the civil rights of adults. That’s also the scare tactic – and bogus argument – of choice being used by those campaigning in California to take away an existing civil right by passing Proposition 8, also known as the “Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Act.” The official title and summary prepared by California’s Attorney General reads as follow

ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.

Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

Summary of Legislative Analyst’s Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact: Over the next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly from sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments.

In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments.

Who would have thought that in the first decade of the twenty-first century Americans in the populous state would be voting on whether or not to eliminate an existing civil right from some of its citizens. Only bigots want to that, right?

The first definition in the Oxford English Dictionary for “bigot” is “a religious hypocrite.” A “hypocrite” is “a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion; a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.” A “good Christian” is supposed to tell the truth, right?

The Christian Right’s “Yes on 8” campaign has been flooding Californians’ television screens with ads claiming that if the Proposition fails, kindergarten children will have to be taught about homosexuality and gay marriage. Therefore, people must “protect children” by passing Proposition 8.

A lesson about Prop. 8: Despite what proponents say, its defeat would not change what California’s schools teach

Californians tend to be an open-minded crowd that wouldn’t take kindly to a campaign attacking homosexuality or attempting to strip away people’s rights. So the well-financed and savvy backers of Proposition 8 have produced waves of advertising aimed instead at making voters believe that supporters of same-sex marriage are intent on stripping away everyone else’s rights, and that this ballot measure is the only way for traditionally religious people to retain them.

With the defeat of this proposed ban on gay marriage, they say, schools would begin indoctrinating children as young as kindergartners to be wholehearted supporters of such marriages. …

This is emotional stuff for many parents. But the dry reality of California education law tells a different story. Under SB 71, which passed in 2003, the Legislature set out the framework for comprehensive sex education, which includes the brief reference to marriage from which these dire Proposition 8 warnings are drawn: “Instruction and materials shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.” Schools aren’t required to teach comprehensive sex education, but if they do, this is one of many rules they must follow. The law also gives schools the option of discussing gender, sexual orientation and family life, though that’s not required as part of the more comprehensive program.

Most important, the law contains paragraph after paragraph guaranteeing parents the right to review the material being taught and to have their children excused from all or any part of it. …

Proposition 8 would change none of that. The measure would do one thing: use the state Constitution as the device to take away an existing, fundamental right from a particular group of people, so that a loving adult in that group could not marry the person of his or her choice. …

On October 21, 2008, California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell and former Superintendent of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin further exposed the deceptions – and lies – being propagated by the Christian Right:

State Education Officials Slam New Ads For Prop. 8

State education officials spoke out Tuesday against a series of ads released by the “Yes on 8” campaign that claim same-sex marriage would be taught in public schools if the statewide initiative fails. …

California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell and his predecessor Delaine Eastin spoke out against the campaign today, along with California State Board of Education president Ted Mitchell, saying the proposition is not tied to public schools.

“There is nothing about Prop. 8 that is connected to public education in any way,” Mitchell said. “There is nothing in California state law that would require the teaching of marriage in any of its forms.”

Mitchell said state law allows parents to opt students out of lessons they find to be out of keeping with their personal beliefs. The “Yes on 8” advertisements suggesting that students will be taught about same-sex marriage if the proposition fails are untruthful, he said.

Mitchell said he is “disgusted” by the “Yes on 8” campaign, “in particular this misleading set of advertisements about the impact of Prop. 8 on education. This is political campaigning at its worst,” he said.

According to Ballotpedia.org, the largest contributors to the pro-discrimination “Yes on 8” campaigns in California are all religion-based, so-called “pro-family” organizations:

National Organization for Marriage, $785,750.

James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, $411,000. Don Wildmon’s American Family Association, $500,000 Knights of Columbus, $1,300,000

The “pro-family” lie is among the most offensive. While these organizations claim to be “pro-family,” they do everything in their power to disenfranchise and hurt the families of gay and lesbian Americans. An estimated 52,000 children are being raised by two mothers or two fathers in California.

New York state Justice Lucy Billings said it well when she wrote in her ruling, “When partners manifest the commitment to their relationship and family, by solemnizing that commitment elsewhere, through one of life’s most significant events, and come to New York, whether returning home or setting down roots, to carry on that commitment, nothing is more antithetical to family stability than requiring them to abandon that solemnized commitment.” In that case the legal minions of the Christian Right – the Alliance Defense Fund – were trying to stop the state of New York from giving benefits to same-sex couples and their families. How very “Christian” of them: trying to prevent families from having heathcare.

“Social science research proves [children] do best when they are raised by their married mom and dad living in the same home.” Dobson’s Focus on the Family as well as Don Wildmon’s American Family Association, “Lucky Louie” Sheldon’s Traditional Values Coalition and Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council have been known to cite as legitimate “social science research” the writings of Paul Cameron, a discredited “psychologist” who was expelled from the American Psychological Association and condemned by the Nebraska Psychological Association and the American Sociological Association. Cameron has advocated facial tattoos for AIDS victims and the castration, deportation to a former leper colony, and even the extermination of homosexuals:

At the 1985 Conservative Political Action Conference, Cameron announced to the attendees, “Unless we get medically lucky, in three or four years, one of the options discussed will be the extermination of homosexuals.” According to an interview with former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, Cameron was recommending the extermination option as early as 1983.

– News-Telegraph, March 10, 1995

James Dobson is notorious for misrepresenting legitimate social science research and for ignoring or dismissing academic studies that disprove his arguments, such as that conducted by Dr. Armand Cerbone and the study done by Dr. Virginia Patterson that demonstrate children reared in same-sex households do as well, and sometimes better, than children reared in opposite-sex households. The American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association, as well as the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association, have all stated that the children of same-sex parents develop just as well as those of opposite sex couples and that a parent’s sexual orientation is irrelevant to his or her ability to raise a child.

“Justices unelected and unaccountable to the people.” In many ways that’s a good thing. Judges should not be in the pocket of political parties, nor should they be governed by the whims of public opinion. Civil rights are not a popularity contest. In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all laws barring interracial marriage. A nationwide Gallup in 1968 poll found that 72 percent of Americans opposed interracial marriage and wanted it recriminalized. Should the Court have revered its decision based on popular opinion?

I recently had a conversation with a colleague about the marriage issue. He couldn’t understand why gays weren’t happy with “civil unions.” I sent him this article about the Connecticut Supreme Court’s ruling.

“Interesting argument” he replied, but then called civil unions a “magnanimous compromise.” I found those words arrogant and condescendingly offensive. As Richard Just, managing editor of The New Republic, noted, the Connecticut Supreme Court laid “bare the absurd illogic at the heart of civil unions.” Separate but equal always separates, but is never equal. To repeat the obvious: Civil rights are not a popularity contest. And civil unions are not a “magnanimous compromise.”

“Not only have these judges knowingly deprived Connecticut children of a mother or a father.” What is Dobson talking about? All children have a biological mother and a biological father. If he’s referring to the tens of thousands of children awaiting adoption, then he should be attacking their absentee heterosexual, biological parents rather than the same-sex couples who are willing to adopt and give homeless children a loving home.

Often it is divorce that, as Dobson put it, deprives a child of a mother or a father. On September 8, 2004 – during the height of a previous pre-election campaign to “save traditional marriage” – the Barna Group, a Christian marketing-research organization, issued a report titled “Born Again Christians Just As Likely to Divorce As Are Non-Christians.” It documented that “among married born again Christians, 35% have experienced a divorce. That figure is identical to the outcome among married adults who are not born again: 35%.” Barna also documented that “nearly one-quarter of the married ‘born agains’ (23%) get divorced two or more times.” No doubt more than a few of those divorced “born-again” parents had children.

Dobson regurgitated yet another of the Christian Right’s bogus arguments when he claimed the Connecticut Supreme Court “usurped the role of the legislators to create law.” The Court interpreted and ruled based on existing law, in this case the Connecticut state constitution. How does that usurp “the role of the legislators to create law? It doesn’t, no more than judges “create” laws. Legislatures create laws. The courts interpret and rule based on existing laws.

Dobson and the rest of the leaders of the Christian Right never had any legitimate arguments against same-sex marriage. They argue against civil equality based on a cobbled together, jaundiced version of religion. According to Time magazine, James Dobson has absolutely no theological training or credentials. But many of those who do are speaking out against Dobson and the pro-discrimination Christian Right that’s campaigning for a constitution amendment to ban same-sex marriage in Florida, even those such unions are already illegal in that state:

“Hatred and bigotry are the motivations behind this [Amendment 2],” said Father Frank Corbishley, an Episcopal Chaplain at the University of Miami, during a conference call with reporters Thursday [October 16, 2008] morning. “It’s sending a dangerous message about intolerance.” …

“To pass Amendment 2 is to use religion to demonize another human being,” [Rabbi Jack Romberg of Temple Israel in Tallahassee] said. “That is simply unjust and immoral.”

“Unjust and immoral.” Pastors in California are saying the same thing, but “unjust and immoral” are indeed appropriate descriptors for Dobson, Perkins, Sheldon and their pseudo-Christian organizations’ campaigns against gay and lesbian Americans. Another appropriate descriptor would be “fanatical, fear-mongering bigots.” Enter Don Wildmon, founder and chairman of the grotesquely misnamed “American Family Association”…

In his latest e-mailed rant, Wildmon once again used “the children” scare tactic and screeched,

Please vote! Our children’s future depends on it!

If the liberals win the upcoming election, America as we have known it will no longer exist. This country that we love, founded on Judeo-Christian values, will cease to exist and will be replaced by a secular state hostile to Christianity. This “city set on a hill” which our forefathers founded, will go dark. The damage will be deep and long lasting. It cannot be turned around in the next election, or the one after that, or by any election in the future. The damage will be permanent. … [italics added]

Love it or not, the United States was not “founded on Judeo-Christian values.” More than a few of America’s Founding Fathers – Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Samuel Adams and Thomas Jefferson to name but a few – were Deists, not Christians. Then as now, Deists accept the notion of “a Creator” and respect Jesus as a teacher, but do not believe in the second-hand, politically-motivated “revealed word” attributed to Moses and Old Testament prophets, or New Testament authorities such as Peter, Paul and John.

Moreover, in the eighteenth century Deists and all students of the Enlightenment were particularly skeptical of “God given” dogma created by politically motivated church leaders and propagated by their willing sycophants in political positions. They were also keenly aware of how the bigotry and hate that underwrite theopolitics had ravished Europe. Hence, there is absolutely no mention of “God” in the U.S. Constitution. None. Zero. Nada. In fact, the first treaty entered into by the new United States – completed by John Adams and ratified by the Senate in 1797 – explicitly stated “the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.”

“A secular state hostile to Christianity.” America has never been “hostile to Christianity.” What America and all Americans should be is hostile toward is the bastardized version of Christianity Don Wildmon and James Dobson use to further their own self-serving agendas.

Wildmon claimed “this ‘city set on a hill’ which our forefathers founded, will go dark.” Perhaps he was referring to Jerusalem as the “city set on a hill,” but more likely he was referring to Civitate Dei – the “City of God” – a concoction of St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 C.E.), perhaps the most influential of the early Church dogmatist and the one largely responsible for setting Christianity on its bloody path of “convert them or kill them.” Augustine contrasted his “City of God” with an earthly city. The two roughly equate to the Church Militant (on earth, filled with imperfect people) and the Church Triumphant (in heaven, where everyone is perfected through God’s love). Of course, with Augustine’s non-stop emphasis on predestination, not everyone is going to gain entry to the City of God. In Wildmon’s view, only his type of pro-bigotry “Christians” are worth of the City of God. Damn everyone else. The definition of “bigot” again applies.

Ironically, Wildmon’s “city set on a hill” reference has an American counterpart. San Francisco is our city set on a hill by the bay. It shines and welcomes all, especially the disenfranchised… something Jesus was fond of doing. Its mayor had the nerve to stand up to religious bigots and declare all citizens have equal civil rights, including the civil right to a civil marriage. The Pharisee of the Christian Right, true to form, tried to crucify him. But he, his city, and America are moving in another direction: equality for all citizens and their families regardless of their religion, race, or sexual orientation. Wasn’t that supposed to be the promise of America?

Not any more if the Christian Right has its way. They want America to be a theocratic state based on beliefs and superstitions right out of the twelfth century:

“Support for the right of gays to marry is a move against Christians by the homosexual lobby, the devil’s strategy to destroy the church, a confrontation between light and darkness.”

That was the view from the pulpit at a “Protect Marriage” rally on Sunday night [October 19, 2008], hosted by Skyline Church near San Diego. It was beamed via satellite to 170 churches and thousands of voters across California.

In her October 21, 2008 article in the Los Angeles Times, Sandy Banks recorded some of the other statements by “believers” at the Protect Marriage rally at Skyline Church: “‘We love them as people, but it is sin,’ one speaker told the crowd. ‘When same-sex marriage becomes legal, a lot of us become illegal,’” said another.

How same-sex marriage makes anyone “illegal” is beyond me. And the other assertion – “We love them [homosexuals] as people, but it [homosexuality] is sin” – represents the epitome of “Christian” irrational doublespeak. If they “love” homosexuals as people, why are they trying to cause them as much mental, emotional and physical harm as possible?

New findings uncover harms that ballot initiatives and marriage-denial can cause…

Denial of marriage and exposure to negative messages during ballot initiatives affect all gays and lesbians – not just those seeking marriage – say new findings released today by the Sexuality Research and Social Policy journal, a project of the National Sexuality Resource Center.

Three research studies, two of which were to be published in March 2009, came to striking conclusions that moved the authors to release the data early. Findings show that same-sex couples want marriage more than other forms of partnership; that exposure to negative messages in states in which marriage amendments are on ballots negatively impact all lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons; and that the lack of legal recognition for same-sex relationships creates fears for and uncertainty about the future among lesbian and gay persons – both single and coupled.

The outcomes of marriage amendment votes may have an impact beyond just restrictive legislation; they may serve to alienate persons from democratic participation and serve to impair public health. “The absence of recognition for same-sex relationships conveys a sense of second-class citizenship and a stress associated with such an unwelcomed status,” concludes journal editor and contributor Dr. Brian deVries. “All gay, lesbian and bisexual persons – not just those who want to get married – can experience negative impacts when initiatives like this get put on the ballot.”

Without marriage, the choices of committed same-sex couples are not necessarily or automatically respected. Brian deVries’ article, “State Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships and Preparations for End of Life among Lesbian and Gay Boomers,” established that without marriage, fears of the future and one’s independence for gay men and lesbians far exceed national averages. In states in which same-sex relationships are not formally or legally recognized, gay men and lesbians were more likely to have created a will and living will. They were also more likely to report fearing a death in pain, and fear of discrimination at the end of their lives because of their sexual orientation. These effects were evident for both coupled and single gay men and lesbians – an important finding highlighting the role that relationship recognition has on one’s sense of well-being as lesbian or gay person whether or not one is in a relationship.

· Negative messages become even more pronounced during state elections in which there is voting on constitutional amendments that restrict marriage rights. “Marriage Amendments and Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Citizens in The 2006 Election,” by Ellen D.B. Riggle, Sharon S. Rostosky, and Sharon Horne, reveals that lesbian, gay and bisexual persons report higher levels of exposure to negative messages about lesbian and gay issues with associated higher levels of reported negative affect, stress and depressive symptoms. Anti-gay and lesbian and marriage initiatives have a negative impact on the well-being of lesbian, gay and bisexual state residents. Lesbian, gay and bisexual state residents report increased political participation and increased voting behaviors, and simultaneous feelings of political alienation. …

One survey respondent decried effects of initiatives, saying that “These amendments make you feel like less of a person. They make you a second class citizen and make it seem that you aren’t worthy of having the same rights as other people,” and NSRC Director Gil Herdt agrees, “The physical and mental health benefits of marriage for heterosexual adults have been firmly established – benefits derived, at least in part, from the tangible resources, federal benefits and legal protections offered to spouses by society. Clearly, society favors marriage over other forms of intimate relationships – and all gays and lesbians suffer without it.”

Is that what Jesus would want? Is that what America is all about now? Schadenfreude?

Sandy Banks also noted something else most telling: “The loudest applause came when action hero Chuck Norris appeared by video: ‘I’m angry that four judges overturned the will of the people.’ He lauded Proposition 8 for ‘maintaining the union between man and woman’ and promoted his book, ‘Black Belt Patriotism,’ featuring a photo of him clad in martial arts gear” [italics added].

Chuck Norris? What are his credentials, academically or theologically, to be an “authority” on these matters?

But his promotional video appearance did confirm one thing: the business of religion and theopolitics IS the business of hate and bigotry. A marriage made in hell.

Will America embrace religion-based bigotry or reason-based equality?

We’ll know on November 4, 2008.

If religion-based bigotry wins the day in California and Florida, you might want to ask yourself, “What group will be next to be singled out and targeted,” and then recall the words of Rev. Martin Niemoeller. Quote this article on your site

Yes on 8 Proposition Costliest Ever!

The Yes on 8 Supporters have donated a whopping near 75 Million towards taking Rights away from Americans.  I’VE NEVER SEEN SUCH FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY PLACED ON THE BACKS OF INNOCENT TAX PAYING CITIZENS OF CALIFORNIA!

This is histories most disgusting display of anti-human behavior ever existed.  And to think how many children this 75 million could’ve helped wasted away on some stupid signs.

California Loses Millions Over Proposition 8

Proposition 8 proponents and foes raise $60 million.  Because of the Yes on 8 supporters donations California is faced with a financial crises.  The money went to the wrong place.  Meaning the Yes on 8 group of supporters basically just shot themselves in the foot for a ridiculous cause that if it passes or doesn’t, in the long run the Yes on 8 can’t win.

The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 have raised nearly $60 million so far, making the ballot measure campaign the most costly in the country this year. And contributions have dwarfed those of previous same-sex marriage initiatives. Between 2004 and 2006, 22 such measures were on ballots around the country, and donations to all of them combined totaled $31.4 million, according to the nonpartisan National Institute on Money in State Politics.

Full Page Signature Ads in Gay Press

Activists Step Up Campaign

Against Award to “America’s #1 Hater of Gays”

 

CHICAGO – The November 8th visit of Focus on the Family’s James Dobson to this city is being met with a wave of revulsion from a who’s who of local gay organizations and activists, with the three main LGBT papers in the city running full-page signature ads against Dobson in this week’s editions.

 

The Chicago Free Press, Windy City Times and Gay Chicago each have ads denouncing Chicago’s Museum of Broadcast Communications for honoring Dobson with an award on November 8^th.  The signatories encourage the LGBT community and its allies to protest at 5:30 PM that night in front of the building where the award will be given, the Chicago Renaissance Hotel, 1 W. Wacker Drive, Chicago.

 

“It is unconscionable that any public institution would honor someone who has devoted his life to denying a whole section of the community legal equality, and promotes slanders against that community,” said Bob Schwartz of the Gay Liberation Network, which along with TruthWinsOut.com, are the principal organizers of the protest.  “Someone who does that is a hater, pure and simple, no matter how much they try to excuse their pro-discrimination rhetoric with so-called ‘Christian’ rationalizations.”

 

A pdf of the ads can be found at the following URL:

http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display/84402/index.php

 

For more information about the ads, call the Gay Liberation Network (www.GayLiberation.net) at 773.209.1187  More information can also be found at www.DumpDobson.com and www.TruthWinsOut.com

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Here is the text of the ads, with signatories at the bottom:

 

Keep Focus on the Family’s

HATE

Out of Chicago

 

An Open Letter to Members and Friends of the LGBT community

 

Many have worked towards making the Chicago area a better place for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people.

 

Unfortunately Chicago’s Museum of Broadcast Communications proposes to stain this record of progress on Saturday, November 8 by honoring one of the nation’s leading haters of LGBT people ― Focus on the Family’s James Dobson. 

 

Here is a sample of Dobson’s hate expressed in his own words:

 

“For more than 40 years the homosexual activist movement has sought to implement a master plan that has had as its centerpiece the utter destruction of the family.”  March 24, 2004 Focus on the Family radio broadcast

 

“Homosexuals are not monogamous. They want to destroy the institution of marriage. It will destroy marriage. It will destroy the Earth.” The Daily Oklahoman, Oct. 23, 2004 

 

And James Dobson is not a lone, deranged hater crying in the wilderness.  He is a dangerously powerful person who controls a broadcasting empire with over 3000 outlets, 1300 employees, and a $150 million annual budget.  He uses this empire to advocate the denial of our equal access to employment, housing and public accommodations. 

 

These attacks are the centerpiece of a concerted drive to rollback all of our gains of the last four decades.  For example, an offshoot of Focus on the Family is the leading organization pushing a referendum to overthrow marriage equality in California. 

 

Focus on the Family controls the nation’s highest profile “ex-gay” ministry, which futilely tries to “convert” LGBTs to straight by “praying away the gay.” In so doing,  they reinforce self-hate and psychologically harm the very individuals they claim to help.  Such “ex-gay” programs are roundly condemned by every respected medical and mental health organization in America.

 

After years of gradual progress in public acceptance of LGBTQ people, Dobson’s long-standing campaign against us may soon start to get much greater traction.  The US economy is tanking, people are worried about losing their life savings, and the search for scapegoats may begin to be the order of the day, generating higher waves of hate and violence against us. 

 

In this context, it is foolish for anyone concerned about LGBT freedom to be complacent about the danger that Dobson represents.

 

What you can do

 

1.  We encourage all readers of this ad to contact the Museum of Broadcast Communications and ask them to rescind this award to one of America’s leading haters.   Send the message that it is irresponsible for any institution to promote a scapegoater of any minority.  E-Mail the Museum of Broadcast Communications‘ Bruce Dumont:  brucedumont@museum.tv

 

2.  Express your 1st Amendment rights by protesting this disgusting award.  The protest will be:

 

5:30 – 7:30 PM

Saturday, November 8^th

at the Renaissance Chicago Hotel, 1 W. Wacker Drive (Wacker & State)

 

Jeanne Adams

Amigas Latinas

APOC: Autonomous People of Color, Chicago

Marshall Arnold

Association of Latino Men for Action

Michael Bauer

Wayne Besen

Robert Castillo & John Pennycuff

Char Cepek

John Cepek, National President, Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG)

Chicago Coalition of Welcoming Churches

Chicagoland Pride At Work

Andrew Ciscel

Peter Alex Dreier

DumpDobson.com

Equality Illinois

Edward Farnham

Mel Ferrand

Sam Finkelstein & Mark Banashak

Jeff & Libby Frank

Roger & Patricia Fraser, GLN

Scott Free

Katherine Freeman, Mother of 4, Proud Lesbian Woman

Dan and Jackie Frett, PFLAG Hinsdale

Rick Garcia

Gay Liberation Network

Chris Geovanis

Thomas Goree

Jeff Graubart

Art Gursch

William W. Greaves

Jan Grillos

Janice Grimm

Rep. Greg Harris, 13th District

Brent Holman-Gomez

Nilsa Irizarry

Cat Jefcoat

Art Johnston

Danny Kopelson

June LaTrobe

Catina Lowery

Michael Maltenfort

Deborah Mell

Ellen A. Meyers

Joe Murray

Ifti Nasim

Darlene Nava Munoz

Renae Ogletree

Orgullo en Accion

Rep. Harry Osterman, 14th District

George Pappas

Rev. Thom & Joan Parrott-Sheffer, Burr Ridge, IL

Nicole Perez

PFLAG Aurora

PFLAG Glenview

PFLAG Hinsdale

PFLAG of Woodstock / McHenry County

Rainbow Sash Movement

Dick Reilly

Dean Richards

Carol Rogers, Past President, Chicago Gender Society

Bob Schwartz & Ruffin Robinson

Caroline Staerk

Craig Teichen

Andy Thayer

Truth Wins Out

Bonnie Wade

Tom & Toni Weaver, PFLAG

Chad Weiden

Rich Wilson

Women & Children First Bookstore

Guy Zakrzewski

Silicon Valley Leaders to Denounce Prop 8 in Newspaper Ad

Silicon Valley Leaders to Denounce Prop 8 in Newspaper Ad

High Tech Business Executives, Venture Capital leaders to

Urge Californians to Stand Up for Equality

Santa Clara, Calif. – 10/30/2008 – The leadership of the nation’s high-tech industry feels so strongly that Prop 8 is wrong and unfair, that a coalition of key leaders is running a full page advertisement in a major daily newspaper urging Californians to vote NO on Prop 8. The ad, running in Friday’s San Jose Mercury News, includes a list of “Who’s Who of the Silicon Valley”, including the founders and CEOs of Google, Yahoo!, Adobe Systems and Cisco Systems.

Prop 8 would eliminate the fundamental right to marry for same-sex couples in California by amending the state’s Constitution.

Jerry Yang, co-Founder of Yahoo! Inc. said, “Silicon Valley has always been an example for the rest of the country of how diversity and openness help to drive innovation and value creation.  This divisive measure is the antithesis of those values that make Silicon Valley so unique.”

Chuck Geschke, Founder & Chairman, Adobe Systems Inc, said, “Equal rights under the law is one of the cornerstones of our California constitution and one of the guiding values for Silicon Valley leaders. Prop 8 would take the extreme step of amending our constitution to strip rights away from one group of people.”

 “Today prominent leaders from across California – and around the nation – have become part of the NO on Prop 8 campaign,” said Geoff Kors, a NO on Prop 8 Executive Committee Member. “We welcome the support and leadership of these technology and business leaders who believe Prop 8 is unfair and must be defeated and we look forward to seeing that number grow.”

Below is the text of the ad:

Silicon Valley Leaders Urge You to Stand for Equality.

Vote No on Proposition 8.

As Silicon Valley leaders, we are committed to equality and fairness. We are opposed to Proposition 8 because it would change our state constitution to take away rights from one group of people. It would set our state, and our country, back in the fight for fundamental fairness and equal rights. 

Please join us by reaching out to friends and neighbors and asking them to stand for fairness: Vote No on Proposition 8 on November 4th.

————————————

Silicon Valley Leaders Say NO on Proposition 8: 

(titles are for identification purposes only)

HONORARY CO-CHAIRS

Sergey Brin, Founder, Google, Inc.

Bill Campbell, Chairman, Intuit Inc.

David Filo, Founder, Yahoo! Inc.

Chuck Geschke, Founder & Chairman, Adobe Systems, Inc.

John Morgridge, Former CEO & Chairman, Cisco Systems, Inc.

Pierre Omidyar, Founder and Chairman, eBay Inc., Founding Partner, Omidyar Network

Sheryl Sandberg, COO, Facebook

Eric Schmidt, CEO, Google, Inc.

Jerry Yang, Founder, Yahoo! Inc.

LEADERS (partial list)

Deborah Barber, Principal, Jackson Hole Group

John Battelle, Chairman & CEO, Federated Media

Larry Birenbaum, Former Senior Vice President, Cisco Systems, Inc.

Lorna Borenstein, President, Move, Inc.

Larry Brilliant, Executive Director, Google.org

Owen Byrd, President, Byrd Development

John Chisholm, Chairman & CEO, CustomerSat, Inc.

Barry Cinnamon, CEO, Akeena Solar

Tod Cohen, Director of Government Affairs, eBay Inc.

LaDoris Cordell, Administrator, Stanford University

Sue Decker, President, Yahoo! Inc.

Jack Dorsey, Chairman, Twitter

David Drummond, SVP, Corporate Development & Chief Legal Officer, Google, Inc.

Donna Dubinsky, CEO, Numenta, Inc.

Alan Eustace, SVP, Engineering and Research, Google, Inc.

Naomi Fine, President & CEO, Pro-Tec Data, Inc.

Rachel Glaser COO/CFO, Reunion.com

Carl Guardino, President & CEO, Silicon Valley Leadership Group

Andre Haddad, CEO, Shopping.com

Jeff Hawkins, co-Founder Palm, Handspring, and Numenta

David Karnstedt, Investor

Scott Kaspick, Managing Director, Kaspick & Co.

Steve Kirsch, Serial Entrepreneur

John Koza, CEO, Third Millennium

Ross LaJeunesse, Head of State Policy Western US, Google, Inc.

Gary Lauder, Managing Partner, Lauder Partners Venture Capital

Laura Lauder, General Partner, Lauder Partners Venture Capital

Len Lehman, Investor

John Luongo, Former CEO, Vantive Corporation

Roger McNamee, Managing Director & co-Founder, Elevation Partners

Ken McNeely, President, AT&T California

Michael Moritz, Partner, Sequoia Capital

Susan Packard Orr, CEO, Telosa Software, Inc.

Randy Pond, Executive Vice President, Cisco Systems, Inc.

Amy Rao, Founder & CEO, Integrated Archive Systems

Jana Rich, Managing Director, Russell Reynolds

Miriam Rivera, Former Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Google, Inc.

Dan Rosensweig, Investor

Dan Rubin, Partner, Alloy Ventures

Hilary Schneider, Executive Vice President US Region, Yahoo! Inc.

Len Shustek, Chairman, Computer History Museum

Jeff Skoll, Former President, eBay Inc.

Stephanie Tilenius, SVP, eBay North America

Joy Weiss, President & CEO, Dust Networks

Steve Westly, former California State Controller & former SVP eBay Inc.

Evan Williams, CEO, Twitter

For a complete list of NO on 8 endorsements, visit www.noonprop8.com.

###

Live Nation Donates $50,000 to Urge Voters to Vote No on Prop 8

Live Nation Donates $50,000 to Urge Voters to Vote No on Prop 8

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – 10/30/2008 – Live Nation, the world’s largest live music company, donated $50,000 to the NO on Prop. 8 campaign today. The company opposes Prop. 8 because the measure takes away individual rights.

“Live Nation has always offered equal rights and benefits to our employees’ same-sex partners,” said John Vlautin, Senior Vice President of Communications for Live Nation. “It is in this spirit that we have made the decision to donate $50,000 to the No on Prop. 8 campaign.”

“We are thrilled that Live Nation has joined companies like Apple and the founders of Google along with other businesses throughout the country who oppose Prop 8,” said Geoff Kors, NO on Prop 8 Executive Committee Member. 

For a complete list of NO on 8 endorsements, visit www.noonprop8.com.

Live Nation is the largest producer of live music concerts in the world, annually producing over 16,000 concerts for 1,500 artists in 57 countries. The company sells over 45 million concert tickets a year and expects to drive over 60 million unique visitors to livenation.com in 2008. Headquartered in Los Angeles, California, Live Nation is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Additional Information about the company can be found at http://www.livenation.com/investors.

###

NEW NO ON PROP 8 AD CALLS UPON CALIFORNIANS TO REJECT DISCRIMINATION

NEW NO ON PROP 8 AD CALLS UPON CALIFORNIANS

TO REJECT DISCRIMINATION

Ad is Narrated by Samuel L. Jackson

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – 10/30/08 – The NO on Prop 8 campaign today announced a dramatic new television ad, narrated by actor Samuel L. Jackson. The ad calls upon Californians to reject discrimination, and Vote NO on Prop 8.

The full text of the ad follows:

“It wasn’t that long ago that discrimination was legal in California.

“Japanese Americans were confined in internment camps.

“Armenians couldn’t buy a house in the Central Valley.

“Latinos and African Americans were told who they could and could not marry.

“It was a sorry time in our history.

“Today the sponsors of Prop 8 want to eliminate fundamental rights.

“We have an obligation to pass along to our children a more tolerant, more decent society.

“Vote No on Prop 8 it’s unfair and it’s wrong.”

The ad places Prop 8 in its appropriate historical context as a measure that would discriminate against certain Californians and treat people differently under the law. 

“We believe it is important in the final days of an unfair initiative attacking individual rights, to remind voters that there have been other times in our history when we stood at this threshold of fairness,” said Patrick Guerriero, NO on 8 Campaign Director. ”We know that most California voters do not want to wake up Wednesday morning to learn that we’ve taken a step back to a darker time. That’s why we believe on Tuesday, voters will resoundingly reject Prop 8.”

“Proposition 8 would take away fundamental individual rights, and I believe the historical analogies presented by the NO on Prop 8 campaign are completely appropriate,” said Congressman Mike Honda (D-Campbell). ”I am opposed to Prop 8, and I hope my fellow Californians will reject it.”

“California used to ban people of different races from getting married under the law. It was wrong then and it’s wrong now,” said Fabian Nuñez, Former Speaker of the California Assembly. “Proposition 8 is a lot like that unfair ban on interracial marriage. And even though people may feel differently about marriage, everyone ought to agree unequal treatment under the law is a bad thing.”

“Proposition 8 eliminates equal rights for one segment of the population while continuing to grant that right to others,” said Maria Armoudian, an Armenian-American radio personality on KPFK in Los Angeles. ”We Armenians have had to endure a century of discrimination. Let us now stand together calling for an end to discrimination for all people. Vote NO on Prop 8.”

Using historical footage, the ad reminds voters of three particularly bleak periods in state history:

– Japanese American Internment: Authorized by President Roosevelt in 1942, the Army ordered all people of Japanese descent, whether citizens or non-citizens, living in CA to be interned in permanent “relocation centers.” Those centers remained operational until the end of the war. Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, who was California Attorney General at that time, later wrote that the internment was “not in keeping with our American concepts of freedoms and rights of citizens.”

– California’s Ban on Interracial Marriage: In 1948, California became the first state in the nation to wipe away a state law banning interracial marriages. In the 1967 case of Loving vs. Virginia dealing with the remaining state bans, the United State Supreme Court ruled that: [T]he freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men. Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival.”

– Racially Restrictive Covenants: These covenants were widely enforced in the early 20th century to discriminate against African Americans, Jews and other ethnic groups by prohibiting the lease or sale of property. The covenants were widely used in the Central Valley against Armenians. They were declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948.

In 2007, on the 40th anniversary of the Loving vs. Virginia decision, Mildred Loving wrote: “I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving and loving, are all about.”

Television producers and reporters looking for a broadcast quality version of the advertisement can go to:

FTP Site Information: 

Cut and paste https://mail.perrycom.com:440

You will see a certificate error. Click “Continue to this website (not recommended)” to proceed. The next window you see will ask for the “User:” and “Password:”

User: prop8public

Password: pub!2008

(type in password rather than cut and paste)

Upon entering the login information, select the prompt for the Basic Web Client and click “ok.”

Click on “TV” then “Discrimination” to see the ad. You will need to have Quicktime installed on the computer you are using to view the files.

The ad can be viewed at www.noonprop8.com.

# # #

Speakers Announced for Rally Against Prop 8 in Downtown Los Angeles

Speakers  Announced  for  Rally  Against  Prop  8  

 

Los  Angeles,  Calif.  (October  31,  2008)  ‐‐‐ Roots  of  Equality  in  partnership  with  Out  in  Downtown  Los  Angeles  has  announced  that  Chastity  Bono,  Robin  Tyler,  and  Diane  Olson  will  be  speaking  at  their  Rally  Against  Prop  8.   The  Rally  will  take  place  at  1:00  pm  on  Sunday  November  2nd  in  Pershing  Square  in  Downtown  Los  Angeles.  

 

Chastity  Bono  is  an  out  LGBT  advocate,  writer,  actress  and  musician.   She  is  also  the  daughter  of  Cher  and  the  late  Sonny  Bono.   Robin  Tyler  and  Diane  Olson  were  the  first  and  original  plaintiffs  in  the  lawsuit  that  fought  and  defeated  California’s  same‐sex  marriage  ban  in  the  State  Supreme  Court.   They  were  granted  Los  Angeles  County’s  first  same‐sex  marriage  license.  

 

Other  guests  include  Jeff  Jacobberger,  Vice  Chair  of  Mid  City  West  and  former  member  of  the  Neighbor  Coucil  Review  Commission  and  Michael  Coulombe  who  will  do  a  pros  reading.   Other  speakers  are  being  added  up  to  the  date  of  the  rally.   The  program  will  also  include  a  “Tell  Your  Own  Story”  segment  where  participants  will  be  able  to  share  how  Prop  8  affects  their  lives.  

 

Guests  are  encouraged  to  keep  the  rally  peaceful  and  ignore  any  detractors.   The  rally  will  focus  on  the  ways  participants  can  get  out  the  No  on  8  vote  in  the  final  days  before  the  election.  

 

Pershing  Square  is  located  at  532  South  Olive  St.  in  Downtown  Los  Angeles.   Those  interested  in  more  information  can  contact  rootsofequality@gmail.com,  find  the  Facebook  event  by  searching  for  “Roots  of  Equality”,  or  check  www.outindowntownlosangeles.com.  

Roots  of  Equality  aims  to  organize  grassroots  efforts  to  combat  discriminatory  legislation,  initiatives,  and  laws  based  on  sexuality  and  protect  existing  rights.  Our  goal  is  to  motivate  like‐minded  individuals  to  join  us  and  provide  an  outlet  to  express  themselves  through  organized  visibility  and  individual  expressio.  

###    

 

 

Living Outrageously For Today (L.O.F.T.),

Ted Trent

877-4LA-LOFTs

Ted@LOFTlivingLA.com

Keller Williams Realty

213-891-9345 Desk

213-232-7778 FAX

L.O.F.T. living provides diverse solutions for people who want to live and work in creative environments.

L.iving O.utrageously F.or T.oday ®

 

– How are we doing? We want to know. Visit the link below and rate your customer service experience with us.

http://www.loftlivingla.com/questionaire.html

 

– Are we doing a great job?  Thank you for referring us to a friend or client.

http://www.loftlivingla.com/referrals.html

President Bill Clinton Asks California Voters To Vote NO

We are all lucky as Californians to have so many powerful people in Government and the Media to come out and urge voters to VOTE NO ON PROP 8, showing us that’s really these warped minds of repressed human beings that come here from the Bible Belt pushing their lame yellow signs around.

President Bill Clinton Asks California Voters To Vote NO

on Proposition 8

Tells Voters Prop 8: “Not What America is About”

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – 10/31/08 – In a telephone call to California voters, President Clinton delivers the following message regarding the unfairness of Proposition 8:

 

“This is Bill Clinton calling to ask you to vote NO on Proposition 8 on Tuesday, November 4th. Proposition 8 would use state law to single out one group of Californians to be treated differently — discriminating against members of our family, our friends and our co-workers. 

“If I know one thing about California, I know that is not what you’re about. That is not what America is about. Please vote NO on 8. It’s unfair and it’s wrong. Thank you.”

The calls from President Clinton went to millions of registered California voters overnight.

# # #