So-Called "Marriage Equality" Activists Are Sounding The Alarm
There is a smile---in some cases a smirk on the faces of many who pushed through legislation to redefine marriage in Washington State.
Last month SurveyUSA showed the state at 38% Reject R-74 and 56% Support R-74.
Reject R-74 = Preserve or Protect Marriage.
Approve R-74 = Redefine marriage or legalize homosexual "marriage."
A more recent Elway Poll shows, 37% Reject R-74 and 51% Approve. Those seeking to redefine marriage have raised almost 5 times more money than those seeking to protect it.
With less than 30 days before election day, those seeking to redefine marriage have it in the bag. Right?
Everyone on that side isn't smiling or smirking.
Dominic Holden, an activist for homosexual causes and a writer for Seattle's "The Stranger" told his readers yesterday, "not so fast." "Hold the celebration."
He points out that Maine was in almost the same position 4 weeks before their vote on redefining marriage.
Then everything changed.
He says Frank Schubert showed up. And the voters rejected the homosexual's efforts to redefine marriage.
"And," Holden says, "He's coming to Washington."
Indeed he is.
Television ads asking people to support marriage and Reject R-74 will begin running next Monday, the 15th.
Holden calls Schubert, "The bigot who always comes from behind." "The man who has never lost a campaign to crush gay marriage."
Others, myself included, see Frank Schubert quite differently. He and his firm "Mission, Public Affairs" has never lost in a vote to reject an attempt to redefine marriage. He is not a bigot and he isn't trying to "crush" anyone or anything. He is a man of faith who believes deeply that marriage is between one man and one woman. And he is smart.
And Schubert will be spending about a million and a half dollars on ads, telling voters why they should Reject R-74---reject the notion of redefining marriage.
Holden says Schubert uses fear and is dishonest.
I have seen some of Schubert's TV ads. He tells the truth about the homosexual lifestyle and how homosexual "marriage" impacts the culture, the children, education and local communities. And in every case so far, a majority of people believe him and vote to Reject the effort to redefine marriage.
Will it happen in Washington?
What Holden and others in his camp miss is the spiritual aspect of protecting marriage.
Biblical teaching, from Genesis to the New Testament, including Jesus' teaching, affirms God's model for marriage. One man and one woman.
However, by God's design, we make choices.
If marriage is redefined, it will indeed have negative consequences in both the short and long term.
One thing is certain. Come November 6 and the votes are counted, we will know.
A number of organizations and individuals are encouraging people to set aside time every day to pray for the upcoming election---with a focus on marriage in Washington State.
I am personally setting aside a prayer time each day. I encourage you to do the same.
In the end, the matter of marriage is not about how much money is spent, nor is it about conventional polls and politics. Or personalities.
It is a spiritual matter.
May God help us.
TV Ads already airing on KOMO 4 this morning.
Oshtur Vishanti 9:41 AM, October 11, 2012
Thanks for the heads up. I love how they now champion the R71 changes as a reason against marriage equality.
Thanks for the encouragement! The battle is the Lord's, and we are his army. God's design of marriage is SO good - too bad our sinful nature always tries to mess it up.
Matt - Bellevue voter
Well God has stacked the cards against your side:
Presidential year
High youth vote probable in Washington
Mail in ballots so the tactics that Schubert uses will be blunted, ie. trying to cast a doubt through propaganda just before the vote is cast.
And, if he is a Christian, his standard tactics are majority blunted. We already let same sex spouses register with the state, albeit via a different contract. But kids are already and still will be told that some kids have two mommies and two daddies, that all the books about it will still be read in the classes, and nothing really changes in that regard whether R74 is approved or rejected.
But then truth isn't on the reject side already - I watched the 'Call to Pastors' videos and the lies it contained. How can they be on the side of the angels and bear false witness at the same time?
One example: Boston Catholic Charities had been placing children with gay people since their equal rights amendment requiring no discrimination due to sexual orientation was passed 18 years earlier (1987) , in that time they had placed a total of 13, less than one a year. 4 Bishops complained, the 42 member lay board voted to continue adopting, the Bishops over ruled them. United Way, which provided 1.2 million of the 1.3 million spent on adoptions said they would review their future contributions and the Catholic Charities, rather than doing what private adoption services do and funding themselves, voluntarily shut down. No one was forcing them to adopt to gays, it has nothing to do with their marital status.
Yet it was presented as if it had some connection - there was none.
And this is just one of the easily researched deceits in it, Schubert has used these lies and others himself in his ads.
Is it possible to lie and be on the side of the angels? You tell me.
Gary, this is a strong word of encouragement that we have needed. It seems like there is ambiveance on our side and arrogance from their side with the media so all out for same sex marriage. Thank you.
oster. I suppose gay marriage will have no affect on what is taught in the class room either. Question- how do people who call themselves Christian take a stand against what is so clear in the Bible and promote gay marriage when homsexual relations is sin according to the Bible?
Good Question: they already teach about people registering a marriage and domestic partnership with the state, right? Exactly what would be changed by just talking about they all just register with marriage? What exactly is different when they talk about two parents in class. I mean unless things have changed a lot, all parental relationships are only mentioned tangentially anyway - there is no 'marriage' class.
As to your interpretation of the Bible, have at it. What all Christians do know is that neither you nor I understand the Law - Jesus told us that. All references to homosexuality are contextual; rape, idolatry, infidelity, in which cases heterosexuality is just as much a sin. And Christians who have accepted Christ's gift of Grace are bound by Christ's Law which tells us what we should do, not what we shouldn't.
As the letter we got about R74 from the ministry says for a Christian 'the act of compassion trumps the runic of judgement' every time.
And the unanswered question - can you lie for good ends? Aren't the deceits in the video and in the ads that Schubert has run in other states 'taking a stand against what is so clear in the Bible?' Sex doesn't exist in heaven, we will all love each other completely so how important it is in the long run can be debated - but lying - you really think that can even possibly be part of God's plan?
Vishanti. I don't think God has stacked the cards against His own truth. As Gary said, we make choices. Political process has given us the current circumstances. I am always amazed at how your side operates. You say kids are already taught some kids have two mommies and two daddies, but it is your incremental undermining of the traditional family that has gotten us to where we are. Every time you people pass another little law, you declare it will have no effect on the children or culture, then you build from that little nothing law to the next little nothing law. I think the Seattle Times praised Ed Murray for his expertise in doing this when he got the marriage bill passed.
I don't think God has either, I think you don't understand His truth. Christians who follow Christ's Law support marriage equality. Virtually every religion of the famous 'founding fathers' that we learned in school supports marriage equality.
And R74 does nothing against 'traditional families", they will keep going strong, its just that now a single contract will be the one used by all parents and families. As we know in other nations, the many that support marriage equality have seen a rise in the number of marriages, beyond the mere number of same sex ones issued.
Being able to hold Marriage up as the gold standard for everyone promotes it, trying to say it is unsuitable for some married couples just makes it seem optional to everyone.
Of course allowing two men or two women to be "married" (something I find just plain silly) will change things. It means that we must tiptoe when using the words "mother or father." It means the state must change all wording in laws to exclude "mother" "father" "husband" "wife." It means that using "husband" "wife" in everyday language will gradually become a thing of the past, unfortunately, as in our PC world, there will be fear of its usage. It means that instead of marriage being child-centered, it becomes adult-centered and focused on love rather than creation of the child-centered family unit. It means that children will not have a male/female parent as role models -- as I watched my son turn to his father at 16'ish, I was so very aware of the developmental stages children pass through as they mature. And it will most certainly impact on our businesses, who will have to recognize a male or female as a spouse in benefit programs. And it will mean faith-based charitable organizations will have to recognize two mean or two women as spouses. This is not about marriage. It never has been. It's about making it normal to be a man who can marry a man and a woman who can marry a woman. The legal benefits have already been granted with past legislation so there is no other reason for this to pass. It's easy to play on the heart strings of Washington state voters. But what many will not ponder is the after-effects in the long term. If you are at home with your own family, an employee, and someone without faith, it will most likely have no impact on you. But for those who are not part of that group, there will be an impact. The legal consequences that will affect others will become apparent in years to come.
I remember a female friend of my son's in high school who I learned was having intimate relationships with both boys and girls. I was shocked. But I asked her why, wondering how she got there. She told me that it was not about bi-sexuality. She told me that she had been taught in school that it was perfectly fine for girls to have sex with girls and boys to have sex with boys. So she wanted to try it out..as it was, well, fine!
I don't believe for one second that in time we'll have more youth experimenting -- as we continue to teach it's normal. I don't believe for one second that in time we'll see multi-people marriages. Why not?
No, we should be emphasizing character-building, self-control, respect for everyone, manners, politeness, and every anti-bullying method we can teach.
But marriage. No matter what law is passed, I believe it's impossible for a man to be married to a man or similarly or woman. They simply, well" can't "merge" and become one.
Sarah Lloyd 3:52 PM, October 11, 2012
There are plenty of ways to merge, but this might not be the appropriate forum for educating anyone on that topic.
Also, what is this about "wife" and "husband" and "mother" and "father"? Two mothers! Two fathers! Her wife! His husband! None of that changes. And it's not like it becomes taboo to be straight!
Oshtur Vishanti 10:16 PM, October 11, 2012
Your concerns are unnecessary, male and female spouses will still be called husbands and wives, male and female parents will still be called mother and father.
As to your child rearing fears, they don't have anything to do with R74 - you are talking about children who will have the parents they do regardless of how the vote on this goes. All the vote will do is decide if they can have parents who have registered via the state Marriage contract with the state.
And similarly business already have to cover Domestic Partnerships, nothing changes.
One thing R74 does do if approved though is say those religious non-profits need not pay attention to any legal marriage they don't want to - interfaith, interracial, divorce remarried, same sex spouses - whatever - the legislation if approved says that those legal relationships can be ignored.
And this is only about letting all citizens license with the state contract that is most widely recognized and transferable, example Massachusetts will honor a Washington marriage license, they won't a domestic partnership.
Simple equal treatment of all married citizens so they can register with the state via the same contract the same way if they choose. Its best for them and best for you too.
Vishanti. I think you are the one who doesn't understand God's truth. You are deluded by your own passions and have come to believe a lie.
Oshtur Vishanti 10:50 AM, October 11, 2012
Well that and $5 will get you a latté, These are the views of entire sects of Christians, among the oldest and most prominate in our nation's history.
Seriously, my 'passions' really had nothing to do with their coming to this understanding.
But rather than just 'state an opinion'. please explain where you think the lie resides?
Can't be the old testament - we've been through the real meaning of the word mistranslated as 'abomination' before in these forums. Is it the new? Paul's contextual description of idolatrous sexual activity by straight people? Explaining to the Corinthians that the traditional 'exceptions' to marital fidelity no longer apply? Where exactly is 'the lie' that you see that all these other Christians don't?
Anyone God-fearing is pretty arrogant to think they fully understand God's truth.
Vishanti is owning everyone on here, btw.
Glad you think so, Sarah. Oshtur and I have been round and round on the Bible's denunciation of sexual relations outside of God's purpose for them.
God defined what marriage is in Genesis and Jesus reaffirmed it in the Gospels. The 'lie' is the same one Satan told Eve, "Did God really say...." and "you will surely not die".
There were never any traditional exceptions to marriage infidelity, still aren't.
There is no mistranslation, 'abomination' is exactly what God meant. Romans is clear about leaving the natural use of the woman for illicit sex, mano y mano, or woman y woman either. You guys can dance around this all you want. The marriage covenant is clear, man and woman, period.
Craig in Lacey
You must reject R74, if you do not, then thousands of people will lose their jobs. I.E. : Perserve Marriage Washington, will have to lay off all their employees since they will not have anything else to fight for.
Well, that certainly added to the discussion. Quite a thoughtful response.
This is about as silly as it gets (10:46am 10/11/12). I sure hope your intent was the most extremely ridiculous comment possible because that is exactly what you've achieved. No matter who wins or loses, jobs may be lost, but to use that as a way to get your religious agenda passed is uninformed bullying and I think you know it.
I won't spend time feeding the trolls.
Reject R74 because it is wrong to try and normalize sin and debauchery. Do not buy into the lie that affirming man-woman marriage is somehow bigoted or hateful. It is discernment.
Not telling someone they are wrong is not loving, condoning sin is not loving, true love must be tough and hold fast to the truth, in love.
Gary, you must be making some headway on this topic or you wouldn't have detractors trying to obfuscate God's truth here.
Keep up the good work, we are by you.
What you missed, apparently, is that Ref-74 concerns civil marriage, not religious marriage. And last time I checked, the Bible (rightfully so!) had no place in civil law.
The Bible is the basis for all civil law, has been since the pilgrims landed. So much for public education in this country.
Craig our laws are based on British law which was based on pagan Anglo-Saxon and Roman law. The majority of the 10 commandants 1-4, 9, and 10 would be completely unconstitutional to even try and implement in the US.
I won't disparage your education but its hard to see how any American could think that our Law was based on the Bible.
Iridius 6:58 PM, October 11, 2012
Denying equal rights for all is bigotry.
bigot: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial, ethnic, or sexual minority group) with hatred and intolerance.
Since those of you who feel you simply MUST try to force your religious beliefs on us are clearly bigots, you should at least own up to it.
I wonder how many of you would say it would be fair if someone who was Muslim was trying to force you to participate in Ramadan. or that you have to allow your dead to be eaten by vultures as with Zoroastrianism.
My point is, this country is built on secular laws and thanks to the separation of church and state, you have no legally valid reason to deny the right to marriage.
There are many heterosexual marriages in our society that are examples of terrible parenting. When discussing child welfare, this issue should be decided by human integrity, not by what gender a parent is. How many of you who tout biblical references against gay marriage can actually quote a definitive passage (everything said so far is vague and open to personal interpretation)? If the children are being cared for and being raised to be decent human beings, why should it matter what gender or faith the environment that fostered it is? Above all, our aim as fellow human beings on this planet should be to live in peace and harmony. It seems like many christians are saying 'love one and all... unless they don't agree with me.' What happened to tolerance of other people's beliefs?
You've already LOST!
I love the new ads displayed on the F&F website.
"Protect Traditional Marriage"
I believe that people are increasingly seeing that this is just a big lie. Traditional marriage is not threatened at all and any credibility you had just goes down the drain when you claim it is. So, have at it.
10:57 The big lie is that men and women are interchangable. Each was created for special and unique purposes. The big lie is that gener means nothing in marriage. It means everything. The blending of male and female is the essence of marriage for the sake of the spouses and for sure the children. Two men or two women living together, playing house and pretending, may be a loving lonterm relationship, but it isn't marriage. Thankls Gary for putting the new ads on your website.
Great, put all that in an ad and it might mean something and be effective, unlike the very obvious lie that traditional marriage is THREATENED in any way at all.
And I agree with you, thanks Gary, for putting the ads on the website - but, obviously for a different reason.
If we are in a poor position right now, it is because the leaders of this effort, Joseph Backholm and Joe Fuiten. I started off volunteering with the petitions and other things but I just could not in good conscience continue after what they did to Steve Pidgeon and I-1192. This is not a campaign being run on Christian values. It is a slick political operation that is benefiting the leaders primarily.
The latest ad from Backholm and Fuiten proudly shows the rainbow (homosexual) flag flying and tells people that the homosexual domestic partnership law is good. This is the very same law that Gary and all of us worked so hard to stop 3 years ago! And we all remember who was undermining us at every turn. Joe Fuiten! Are Christians supposed to donate money to pay for ads that run the homosexual flag? Are we supposed to support a campaign that is now in favor of R71, domestic partnerships?
After this campaign is over, how are we going to have any credibility, having supported pro-homosexual advertising? All of those Christians who donated now have their names publicly disclosed as funders of a pro-homosexual ad campaign. Did they believe that this is what they were funding?
As for me and my house, we stand with the Lord. We will NOT support the Reject 74 campaign financially or in any way other than voting on election day. If these 2 scoundrels should lose, let that be a lesson to all of us, including Gary, who were duped into putting political goals above unchanging and unyielding Godly principles.