Emergency Marriage Alert (4/15/04)

[Exton1]

PLEASE FORWARD THIS URGENT MESSAGE TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW IN CALIFORNIA

CAMPAIGN FOR CALIFORNIA FAMILIES (CCF)
Randy Thomasson, Executive Director
www.savecalifornia.com

"HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE" BILL SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 20 HEARING AT 8 A.M.

Emergency Action Alert: AB 1967 Needs Phone Calls, Emails, Faxes, Letters Immediately

Under the cover of the big workers' compensation issue at the State Capitol, the Democrat-controlled Assembly Rules Committee today sent AB 1967, the full-blown homosexual "marriage" bill that rejects the vote of the people, to the Assembly Judiciary Committee for a vote early Tuesday at the unusual early time of 8:00 a.m.

This controversial "gay marriage" bill has been unassigned for nearly two months now due to public pressure, but the Democrats who rule the Assembly apparently want to "test" the voters as they push to impose full-blown homosexual "marriage" upon California as a role model for the children. They want to pass AB 1967 through two committees and bring it to the Assembly floor. Don't let this happen. Stop and realize that AB 1967 is only going forward because the ruling Democrats have not heard from you or your friends loudly enough. Now is the time for action!

AB 1967 is scheduled for a hearing on Tuesday, April 20 at 8 a.m. (new early time) in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, which will meet in Room 4202 of the State Capitol.

Please take personal action right away. Don't think of your involvement as optional. This is the time to fight for marriage and morality, and AB 1967 needs a FLOOD of pro-family opposition today, Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday. Pray and work to stop AB 1967 at the Assembly Judiciary Committee. We have a fighting chance if you and thousands of others take renewed action right now.

There has never been an official committee hearing on a "civil unions" or homosexual "marriage" bill in the history of California. Don't let history be changed or the definition of marriage be destroyed. Do your part now to protect marriage! Raise your voice with phone calls, emails and faxes! Use the AB 1967 Action Flyer to activate others!

PLEASE TAKE ANY OR ALL OF THESE IMPORTANT ACTION STEPS:

1. Send a Brand-New Email Message
2. Print and Distribute the AB 1967 Action Flyer
3. Call the Assembly Speaker and the Committee Members
4. Fax Your Opposition Letter (Sample Letter Provided)
5. Come to Tuesday's big hearing

1. CCF has a brand-new message for you to email to every state legislator saying "OPPOSE AB 1967." Even if you've used CCF's email system this year, please act today to send another powerful "Stop AB 1967" email message to the Judiciary Committee members and to every state legislator in Sacramento. Click here and for easy instructions: http://www.savecalifornia.net/index.php?id=gaymarriage

2. Help generate a flood of phone calls and email messages opposing AB 1967. Download and distribute the AB 1967 Action Flyer at your church this weekend: http://www.savecalifornia.com/actioncenter/ab1967_0304.cfm

3. Call Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and the 12 members of the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Tell them "How dare you even THINK of trashing my vote to protect marriage for a man and a woman. Stop AB 1967 right now. Marriage is for a man and a woman, and the people of California voted to keep it that way!"

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D-downtown Los Angeles)

916-319-2046 / fax 2146
213-620-4646 / fax 213-620-6319

Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro), committee chair
916-319-2018 / fax 2118

Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara)
916-319-2035 / fax 2135

Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley), AB 1967 Co-author
916-319-2014 / fax 2114

John Longville (D-San Bernardino Co.), AB 1967 Co-author
916-319-2062 / fax 2162

Sally Lieber (D-San Jose), AB 1967 Co-author
916-319-2022 / fax 2122

John Laird (D-Santa Cruz), AB 1967 Co-author
916-319-2027 / fax 2127

Cindy Montanez (D-San Fernando), AB 1967 Co-author
916-319-2039 / fax 2139

Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), AB 1967 Co-author
916-319-2009 / fax 2109

Tom Harman (R-Huntington Beach)
916-319-2067 / fax 2167

Robert Pacheco (R-Walnut)
916-319-2060 / fax 2161

Todd Spitzer (R-Orange)
916-319-2071 / fax 2171

Patricia Bates (R-Oceanside)
916-319-2073 / fax 2173

4. Write a brief letter opposing AB 1967 on personal, business, church or organizational stationery. Fax it to the Assembly Judiciary Committee at (916) 319-2188, and fax a copy of your letter to CCF at (916) 848-3456. You may also fax your letter to other members of the Judiciary Committee by changing the addressee and salutation. Here is a sample letter to edit, or copy and paste if you wish:

(Date)

The Honorable Ellen Corbett Chair, Assembly Judiciary Committee State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: AB 1967 -- Oppose

Dear Chairwoman Corbett:

(Name of organization) strongly oppose AB 1967, which will usher homosexual "marriage" into California, violating the will of the people and the state constitution that prevents the Legislature from amending or rejecting the vote of the people on Proposition 22.

This radical bill would allow any two persons  two men or two women  to receive a government-approved gender-neutral marriage license. Completely destroying the uniqueness of marriage for a man and a woman, AB 1967 trashes the vote of the people to protect marriage and turns this sacred institution upside down.

AB 1967 would create same-sex marriage in California, violating Proposition 22 and the will of 61.4 percent of the voters who demanded that the sacred rights of marriage be protected for a man and a woman, a husband and a wife.

I urge you to protect the rights of voters and resist this bad bill which would completely destroy the uniqueness of marriage in California. The state should strengthen and protect marriage between a man and a woman, not weaken or eliminate the distinction of this sacred institution.

Just four years ago, 4.6 million Californians went to the polls and demanded that marriage rights be protected for a man and a woman only. AB 1967 goes directly against the voters and the state Constitution:

Marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman. - Arnold Schwarzenegger on the nationally-syndicated Sean Hannity radio show, August 28, 2003

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. - Proposition 22, the Protection of Marriage Initiative, approved by 61.4 percent of California voters (4,618,673 voters) on March 7, 2000

The Legislaturemay amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without their approval. - California State Constitution, Article II, Section 10(c)

Because the voters have overwhelmingly spoken and have stated that marriage should only be for a man and a woman, please oppose AB 1967. This bill would destroy the uniqueness of marriage, reject California voters, and reject and our state Constitution. Marriage is only for a man and a woman!

Sincerely, (Signature) (Name) (Position) (Organization)

5. Come to the committee hearing in Sacramento to add your voice at the hearing. There will be an opportunity for you and your friends to come to the microphone and state your name and that you are opposed to AB 1967. Bring your friends to Room 4202 at the State Capitol at 8 a.m. (new early time) on Tuesday, April 20. The State Capitol Building is on the corner of 10th and L Streets in Sacramento.

# # #

CAMPAIGN FOR CALIFORNIA FAMILIES (CCF) is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, nonpartisan family issues leadership organization serving families in this state and across America. Sign up today for CCF's free email updates at www.savecalifornia.com. Your partnership empowers CCF to work to restore family-friendly values to government and society. Please join with us by sending a gift of any size to:

Campaign for California Families
Randy Thomasson, Executive Director
Fighting to Restore Family-Friendly Values P.O. Box 782, Sacramento, CA 95812
(916) 443-1410
www.savecalifornia.com

One hundred percent of CCF's resources can be used to boldly influence government on your family's behalf; therefore gifts are not tax deductible.

[goldstategop]

The Democrats' contempt for the will of 60% of Californians is breath-taking. They're trying to slip gay marriage under the radar cause people don't take lightly to a law they voted for being overturned by the politicians. The Democrats can proceed with a repeal of the man-woman only marriage law here at their peril.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping + California Freepers turn to take some action!

The state government in CA is so repulsive that I don't know what to say.

They don't even pretend to care that the PEOPLE of California voted two to one against "gay" marriage two years ago. We are less than nothing to the liberal elitists in Sacramento.

Damn their eyes.

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.

[OutInTheColdAgain]

You are entitled to your opinion, heck in the USA we all have the right to free speech. I personally support Gay Marriage, and not even just civil unions, full gay marriage. Although the polls may show recently that most people do not want to have marriage rights for gays, the issue is divided along generational lines. The younger generation in fact overwhelmingly supports gay rights, including gay marriage. To them it is no big deal.

I am the mother of 2 gay children. My daughter has a wonderful partner, she is a teacher and her partner is a physician and they are having a wedding next Easter. It is a shame that their commitment to each other will be ceremonial and not legally biding. I guess I just don't understand why everyone is so interested in what goes on in other people's bedrooms. Live and let live. It's not for me, and obviously not for you either, however I assure you they are a very nice couple and contribute a lot to their community. They just want to be left alone basically. They want what everyone wants, a life partner, a happy family, children. They jsut happen to want it with the same sex. I don't see how that is a threat to anyone.

[shekkian]

I feel sorry for you.

No grandchildren, and your daughter in such a self-destructive lifestyle.

[OutInTheColdAgain]

Thanks for your concern. Perhaps I am just naive, but I really felt that you did express sincere regrets. It is hard to tell you the truth. It is hard because there are so many people who are not accepting of gays.

However her lifestyle is not destructive. She in fact has a wonderful life, simply wonderful. She is really in love, they have a monogamous relationship and they will have children, so there will be grandchildren.

I guess what we (gays and families of gays) do is what blacks did prior to the civil rights movement. Just ignore the hateful people, and not everyone who is not accepting of gays are hateful, and not let it affect your life. The key is to ignore the hate. Believe me there are more families in my position than you would imagine. I think the reason is because the younger generation is so much more accepting so that the younger generation of gays don't stay in the closet. Staying in the closet does more damage than being gay is IMHO.

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

My daughter is "gay" too but I am unalterably opposed to her pursuing it as well as her marrying another woman. I pray for healing for her each day, and these yoyos aren't making it easy for those of us who aren't willing to give our kids up to the gay culture.

[OutInTheColdAgain]

Before we get into the discussion. What is the 10th amendment? I notice it is on your tag line.

I feel sorry for you, for the turmoil that is in your family. Of course initially I was opposed, who wouldn't be? But the more I thought about it and the more we talked about it the more I accepted the fact that she really is just plain born this way. Even when I look at family pictures when she was a kid, she just wasn't a "girlie" girl. She is always wearing neutral gender clothing. And I am talking from age 4 on. You can literally see it in the family pictures, year after year.

Everyone who has to deal with this in their family deals with it uniquely. BTW are you "unalterable opposed" because of religious reasons? I don't think of it as "giving up my kid" My daughter is in her late 20's I truly don't believe that this is a "choice." I don't choose to be heterosexual, I just am. I don't think she chooses to be gay, she just is gay. Say the tables were turned and suddenly Gay was the norm and I would be encouraged to turn away form the "destructive heterosexual lifestyle" and become gay. Could I do it? No way, I am heterosexual. I think it is exactly the same for her.

[Chani]

"They want what everyone wants, a life partner, a happy family, children. They jsut happen to want it with the same sex. I don't see how that is a threat to anyone."

And they have the same ability as everyone else to want and have these things. IMO, it's not the 90% of homosexuals that are just regular people that are the problem. It's the 10% (and my percentages are off the top of my head) of the homosexual leaders/activists/socialists/communists that want to redefine a basic American/Judeo/Christian value. This will affect ALL of American society, in the long run. It's not about a threat to just your marriage, or mine. It's just another step in the undermining of our cultural values. I also believe that 90% of the homosexuals CHOOSE this behavior/lifestyle, and I believe it's abberrant behavior. Not good for society (AIDS). I certainly believe that everyone has a right to choose what life they want to live, and not be persecuted for it, (unless it's against the law), but they go tooo far in demanding recognition, forced acceptance and redefining our values. They can have legally binding contracts (power of attorney, wills, etc.) to get alot of the benefits they require. One of the reasons your 2 children have become homosexual, is BECAUSE it's become easier to choose this lifestyle. Why should we who believe that it is not in the best interest of our society make it easier for people to choose this lifestyle? Persecute them....NO. Approve and make it easier.....Also NO! Just my take on all this. :)

[OutInTheColdAgain]

Believe me I agree with you about the 10%, they embarrass me. I don't think gays "choose" that lifestyle. Why would they? I mean why would you choose something that is going to bring you hate and ridicule? To be honest with you I don't understand either how they get satisfaction with a same sex partner. I just know that they do. I am probably prejudiced because I do believe that my eggs and my husband's sperm make gay children, I know for a fact that they were raised in a good Christian family, church on Sunday's Lutheran school and all that. Just a regular upbringing with no big huge traumatic even that caused them to be gay so I don't think based on my experience that it is chosen. I do believe them when they say they were just born that way.

I do not think that they should have to pay a lawyer and draw up civil contracts to get "almost" the same rights that every heterosexual couple gets on their wedding day. As for it not being good for society (AIDS) my son will be going in the Peace Corps this summer to fight AIDS in Africa. It is a horrible thing that there is so many gays with AIDS and that they spread it by having a promiscuous lifestyle, however there is also a lot of heterosexual behaviors that are a cost to society, that are not good. Look at obesity in America, unhealthy lifestyles that is bad for society. I don't think ALL the values in the Bible are accepted in society today. The Bible has many passages relating to slavery, telling slaves to obey their masters etc. You reject that don't you? I do understand people who approach the topic based on their closely held religious beliefs. However I thought we were supposed to have a separation of church and state. Your religious beliefs are not my religious beliefs. Why should the right to my daughters marriage be denied based on your religious beliefs? I am probing here don't' read this as an "attack: type of reply. It is hard on the Internet because it is hard to relay the inflection of the words written. Well at least for me anyway.

[Chani]

"I don't think gays "choose" that lifestyle. Why would they?"

I can tell you that they do.....I was one. It's a form of 'rebellion'.....or actually, it became and probably is more so after 30 years of 'brainwashing' a 'cool thing to be'. Like I said, if you make stealing or murder 'acceptable', more are likely to do it. If you make something harder to be......then there will be fewer that do it. I see you have been fed the mantra, and were/are looking for reasons/rationalizations/absolutions. That's ok. I don't blame you. I just am sorry you've become an 'enabler'. Sigh.

[OutInTheColdAgain]

Perhaps I am just tooooo Heterosexual to "get" it. I can't "see" how you can change your sexual preferences as an act of rebellion. Well maybe some might do that for a time (and it is a big stretch for me to even think that) but I mean eventually you are what you are, right?

I don't think that I am an enabler. As a matter of fact I am simply a realist. When confronted with the situation and listening to my children I am a realist and just accept a spade for a spade. So it is not much of a rebellion if your parents after much internal conflict, love you anyway just the way you are, then the rebellion is pretty much over isn't it? It is far more logical to me to accept the fact that some people just genetically prefer the same sex.

I logically have to allow that perhaps a small small percentage might, might, might just do it for a while as rebellion but I think this is a small minority of gays. And those that are doing it for rebellion certainly do not "do it" for the rest of their life like that.

[weegee]

I mean why would you choose something that is going to bring you hate and ridicule?

I choose to be a conservative yet I feel I must shelter my politics for fear of the outburts of hate and ridicule that leftists I know would rain down on me. I hear how they talk of ex-friends and accomplished musicians who make the "mistake" of being conservative (and by musicians, I mean Jimmy Vaughan types more than Ted Nuggents).

Do you think that every woman who appears in lesbian porn is a lesbian by birth? Do you also believe that every heterosexual woman in porn actually finds any attraction to some of the men that she is paid to have sex with? It's a job. Some people do "choose" to participate in these acts.

[OutInTheColdAgain]

Porn is different. People do that because they get paid. Nobody pays people to date others of the same sex. I so much HATE pornography. Isn't it ironic that pornography is legal but tow professional people who love each other and want to get married, that is not legal??? If you could wave a magic wand and either eliminate pornography or absolutely prevent gays from ever having the right to marry which one would you choose?

[Chani]

I hope that you and yours remain as happy, as you seem to be trying so hard to convince us that you are. :) Good nite.

[OutInTheColdAgain]

Thanks, good night to you to. And yeah, I am happy. My family is not typical, however with the openness of today and with the younger generation being much more accepting I don't feel like an island. Plus the success of my gay children in their lives makes me very proud to be their mom.

[heleny]

Marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman. Arnold Schwarzenegger on the nationally-syndicated Sean Hannity radio show, August 28, 2003

So, can we count on Gov. Schwarzenegger to veto AB1967 if/when it passes?

In the past, when a bill got too much negative public attention, the Democrat legislators simply found a stagnant bill, gutted the original text, and inserted the text of the controversial bill; they then quickly voted, often without much public debate or notice. They may try this same tactic on AB1967.

Unfortunately, they will keep introducing related special rights bills, even if they become a part-time legislature. Several homosexual legislators seem intent on making special rights legislation the hallmark of their careers.

CCF has a brand-new message for you to email to every state legislator saying "OPPOSE AB 1967."

What if the legislators simply set up a keyword filter to delete (or shunt into a folder) all emails with that subject line automatically? Maybe I'll have to borrow the alternative spelling techniques some spammers use to evade my email filters.

I appreciate that CCF keeps an eye on these subjects so that we are warned before the legislators finish debating.

[BriarBey]

Not destructive? Amazes me how people condon gays if they aren't violent. The destruction lies in the fact, such a lifestyle does not produce LIFE!! Has everyone forgotten the fact marriage was not based on a foundation of pure sex, it speaks of FAMILY? Children? and the fact it takes a male and a female to raise those children because it takes a male and a female to produce those children. We will pay a penalty for spitting in Gods face, may take 50 yrs. to see but I sure am glad I'm not gonna be here. By the way before the flaming begins I have no problem being friends with gay people...I am..but they know where I stand, and that their bedroom life as a basis to achieve their political agendas is disgusting.