SAN FRANCISCO – As the California Supreme Court weighs the legal arguments over same-sex ”marriage,” pro-family coalitions are continuing in their efforts to collect signatures to pull forward the “California Marriage Protection Act.”
While over 61 percent of California voters voted on Proposition 22 back in 2000 to “keep marriage between only a man and a woman,” the measure added language only to the California Family Code, not the state constitution.
And without an amendment to the state constitution specifying marriage between only a man and a woman, the institution of marriage cannot be guaranteed.
“The only fool-proof way to protect the traditional definition of marriage from the hands of legislators and judges is to place the language of Proposition 22 – passed by over 61% of voters – into the California Constitution,” the California Family Council, a coalition member of the petition drive, writes on its website.
As of April 2, the petition drive has gathered over 951,000 signatures and aims to collect 1.1 million signatures by the end of next week.
Organizers set an early deadline of April 1 to receive the signatures, but allowed several extra weeks to process stragglers and assess the final vote tally. All petitions need to be turned into county registrars by April 21, said Ron Prentice, primary spokesman for Protect Marriage, the coalition sponsoring the effort, to the Christian Examiner.
“The effort continues to look strong,” he said. “We will need every petition in order to meet our goals.”
In order for the petition to become law, 700,000 signatures will have to be verified as valid by the end of next month; California voters will then have the option of voting on the amendment during the next election in November.
If over 50 percent of California voters vote for the amendment, it will officially become law, nullifying all legislation and court rulings favoring same sex “marriage.”
So far, 26 other states have passed constitutional amendments banning same-sex “marriage.”
Massachusetts is currently the only state to allow same-sex “marriage.”
Comments
<<Let's get those petitions signed and sent in, they are within 5% of their goal, 1.05M of 1.1M signatures! >>
Mike234, so that's why you were providing ALL the misinformation, to get more petition signature? Is fabricating, hearsay, rumor and assumption a part of the so-called Christian Pro-Family Agenda? People aught to know that there is a proscription in the 10 Commandments about bearing false witness about the neighbors. Remarkably, your posts have all been FALSE WITNESS, is that Christ-like in your estimation?
Let's get those petitions signed and sent in, they are within 5% of their goal, 1.05M of 1.1M signatures!
<<How is it that a homosexual cannot do this? Are you saying homosexuals are automatically morally superior than heterosexuals? If not then your point does not matter. >>
Did I say that homosexuals can not do this? No. Did I insinuate homosexuals are morally superior to heterosexuals? No I did not. You are creating straw man arguments because because you couldn't articulate a proper answer to my counter about how you used "balance" and about where you found the information I proved had been discredited. I went to every website that claimed the study was done and the link was removed, it was removed as I found out, because it was a prevarication- it was a false study, and NARTH uses only discredited studies and dishonorable people to represent their prejudice against homosexuals.
<<Are you kidding me? The APA lists homosexuality a Sexual Orientation same as Beastiality, Pedophilia and Necrophilia.>>
No it does not! That is an outrageous accusation that is easy to disprove.
Since 1975, the American Psychological Association has called on psychologists to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with lesbian, gay, and bisexual orientations. The discipline of psychology is concerned with the well-being of people and groups and therefore with threats to that well-being. The prejudice and discrimination that people who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual regularly experience have been shown to have negative psychological effects. http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.pdf
Furthermore:
Sexual orientation is one of the four components of sexuality and is distinguished by an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual or affectional attraction to individuals of a particular gender. The three other components of sexuality are biological sex, gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female) and social sex role (adherence to cultural norms for feminine and masculine behavior). Three sexual orientations are commonly recognized: "homosexual", attraction to individuals of one's own gender; "heterosexual", attraction to individuals of the other gender; or "bisexual", attractions to members of either gender. Persons with a homosexual orientation are sometimes referred to as "gay" (both men and women) or "lesbian" (women only).
Sexual orientation is different from sexual behavior because it refers to feelings and self-concept. Persons may or may not express their sexual orientation in their behaviors.
Sidebar:
Homosexual orientation is not limited to a particular type of person. Gay men and lesbians are of all ages, cultural backgrounds, races, religions and nationalities. They work in all occupations and live in all parts of the country. http://www.gps.org/Papers/apa_stand.htm
<<You obviously haven't looked into the adoption racket that this country has either, Me and my wife are unable to have children, yet to adopt it will cost us somewhere in the neighborhood of 85K dollars to adopt (including legal fees, adoptions fees and such) to adopt 1 child,>>
Oh yes I have, and yes the adoption process is expensive. But instead of "Family Values" organizations lobbying for legislation that makes it easier for heterosexuals and homosexuals who want to adopt children they are lobbying against same sex couples with lies and propaganda.
FWIW, I know of several obese heterosxual couples who attempted to adopt from organizations in both Asia and The Chezch Republic but were denied because they were obese and considered a risk that they'd die before the children grew up.
<<so think about that before you call all heterosexual couples "child abusers". >>
I never said ALLheterosexual couples were child abusers. My comment was directed to the ridiculous presumption that homosexual couples provide no balance- some might consider abuse, neglect, torture etc. "balanced" I don't. I think it's fair to agree that the statistics prove more heterosexual couples abuse their children than homosexual couples do- at least that's what I'm reading on the pediatric psychology websites.
>>There are bad parents out there, both Straight and Gay, don't stereotype straight couples because of your own biases... >>
Your accusation is preposterous, I was defending my point with what I believe to be facts- I was not stereotyping heterosexual parents.
By the way though, who is FACTUALLY responsible for the high rate of fetal alcohol syndrome? Who is responsible for the crack addicted infants removed from their mother at birth? Who is responsible for the unwanted child born into poverty? Oh, that would be the heterosexual couples who conceived these children. Do not accuse me of stereotypes when I present the facts-- I'm not making up these problems, I am not the one out breeding children just for kicks.
So why aren't the Pro-Family people lobbying to reduce unwanted pregnancy, fetal alcohol syndrome, drug addicted conceptions etc.?
Oh, it's because they're busy trying to block the equal rights of homosexuals.
Half of all marriages ending in divorce. . . kids growing up abandoned by one or both parents. . . couples running off to Vegas on a whim to get married. . . Frankly, I commend these pro-family groups from wanting to protect gay citizens from the likes of heterosexual "marriage."
myTmuus,
"And I like all the denial about the truth about abuse, neglect etc. A family member worked for the DPSS, the stories about heterosexual couples who tortured, maimed, abused, raped and did all sorts of horrible things to their children and after "some rehab" got them back, only to have the cycle repeat until Child Protective Services had to make sure the children were placed in suitable homes. It's obvious you haven't researched the statistically high rate of damage heterosexual couples have done over the centuries."
How is it that a homosexual cannot do this? Are you saying homosexuals are automatically morally superior than heterosexuals? If not then your point does not matter.
"So if there is only complete balance in heterosexually coupled parenting situations why is the ABNORMALLY high rate of child neglect, child abuse, poverty, spousal abuse etc. in our faces in the news every day? In a parallel universe balance equals all those negative affects, right?"
Because the Media is biased towards all the bad stuff that happens in society, for giggles look at Fox News.com and count the number of uplifting, goodfeeling stories on that site, I can answer that now, 0, the media is biased and sensation sells. That is why you only hear about the abuse and neglect because that is what sells, or I should say that they think sells.
"And I like all the denial about the truth about abuse, neglect etc. A family member worked for the DPSS, the stories about heterosexual couples who tortured, maimed, abused, raped and did all sorts of horrible things to their children and after "some rehab" got them back, only to have the cycle repeat until Child Protective Services had to make sure the children were placed in suitable homes. It's obvious you haven't researched the statistically high rate of damage heterosexual couples have done over the centuries. "
You obviously haven't looked into the adoption racket that this country has either, Me and my wife are unable to have children, yet to adopt it will cost us somewhere in the neighborhood of 85K dollars to adopt (including legal fees, adoptions fees and such) to adopt 1 child, so think about that before you call all heterosexual couples "child abusers". There are bad parents out there, both Straight and Gay, don't stereotype straight couples because of your own biases...
Child neglect is the exception, not the rule. What I am saying is your logic is faulty. You are taking a special group (parents who tortured, maimed, abuse, rape ,ect) and associating it with the parenting ability of the general group of heterosexual parents. For you point to make sense torture, abuse, rape would have to be a characteristic of every heterosexual parents. And what exactly is abnormally high rate of child neglect relative to? Or, what is the normal rate of child neglect?
<<Child neglect is the exception, not the rule. It occurs when people care more about themselves than there child.>>
And that "proves" your point HOW? So why are these heterosexual people having kids if they care more about themselves? Your point makes no sense at all.
<<Kinda like the gay activist who care more about getting social acceptance for their sexual behaivor than helping children. >>
And you can prove gay activists are factually working for acceptance while being unconcerned with the abused, abandoned, drug/fetal alcohol conceived babies born to heterosexual couples who have children JUST because they can. PROVE it!
<<I really like the one about how we need gay marriage so that the homosexuals will adopt the hard to place children. Yeah, right. >>
And I like all the denial about the truth about abuse, neglect etc. A family member worked for the DPSS, the stories about heterosexual couples who tortured, maimed, abused, raped and did all sorts of horrible things to their children and after "some rehab" got them back, only to have the cycle repeat until Child Protective Services had to make sure the children were placed in suitable homes. It's obvious you haven't researched the statistically high rate of damage heterosexual couples have done over the centuries.
"So if there is only complete balance in heterosexually coupled parenting situations why is the ABNORMALLY high rate of child neglect..."
Child neglect is the exception, not the rule. It occurs when people care more about themselves than there child. Kinda like the gay activist who care more about getting social acceptance for their sexual behaivor than helping children. I really like the one about how we need gay marriage so that the homosexuals will adopt the hard to place children. Yeah, right.
<<But a heterosexual relationship can be completely balanced, with a mother and a father.>>
So if there is only complete balance in heterosexually coupled parenting situations why is the ABNORMALLY high rate of child neglect, child abuse, poverty, spousal abuse etc. in our faces in the news every day? In a parallel universe balance equals all those negative affects, right?
<<A homosexual relationship cannot be this balanced. Even if both raise children well, the one cannot attain the standard the other can. Little boys and girls need to learn how to relate to both fathers and mothers. This isn't always met, but it is ideal.>>
Indulge me if you will, but prove it. Prove it with REAL scientific information and facts from the AMA, APA, the AAofP and any other qualified, medically acredited, licensed and certified peer reviewed study that hasn't been discredited.
<<Strange according to IMAP, Sweden had some slightly different results.>>
Are you referring to IMAPP the blog site or The NARTH site which references the blog? NARTH by the way had to remove the actual study because it appears they were messing with the figures. The Institute for Marriage and Public Policy is an anti-gay blog site which doesn't use credible, peer reviewed or scientific studies. NARTH has been discredited for their unethical use of these studies, so I'd never believe a word they say. But it doesn't surprise me in the least to witness the use of discredited information, happens here on these comment sections ALL the time.
<<So you are saying that same-sex parenting does not affect children? I just want to be sure that is what you are saying.>>
Same-sex parenting does not negatively impact or affect children. The American Psychiatric Assn. and a variety of child welfare groups holds that "the research has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are every bit as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents."
The American Academy of Pediatrics, in a 2002 review of the literature, also found no negative effects. "Compared with heterosexual fathers, gay fathers have been described to adhere to stricter disciplinary guidelines, to place greater emphasis on guidance and the development of cognitive skills, and to be more involved in their children's activities," the group wrote.