Petition backers embarrassed; Lash out at hearing.

Evidently, no matter how deceitful and unscrupulous these out-of-state, buck-a-signature petition circulators are in perpetrating fraud, any unsuspecting Massachusetts citizen that falls for their tricks "has the IQ of an eggplant."

That's what Chip Faulkner of Citizens for Limited Taxation said, anyway, as he sat on a panel with Kris Mineau of the The Massachusetts Family Institute at the Joint Committee on Election Laws hearing on Tuesday.

This he exclaimed while only a few eggplants away stood an 18 year old Northeastern freshman who had just finished describing how her first experience as a registered voter had been to be bait-and-switched into signing the anti-gay marriage petition. She was on a panel with eight other bait-and-switch victims.

Rep. Philip Travis, one of the 30 original signers and the only legislator to speak as a witness, stated that he ALWAYS reads everything before HE signs a document.  When asked by the committee what he had to say to the Northeastern freshman, he responded, "Once bitten, twice shy, so I guess she has been bitten."

Kris Mineau, spokesman for the petition sponsors, claimed that the fraud allegations were nothing more than the result of a conspiracy by "ho-mo-sexual activists" and admitted that his organization has made no effort to check into the allegations of fraud by monitoring what is going on in the field. You see, according to Kris, his organization just doesn't have the resources -- despite being backed by the $130 million dollar Focus on the Family organization and $20 million dollar Alliance Defense Fund.

When asked by Senator Augustus how much Arno Political Consultants, the California signature collection company hired by petition sponsors, was being paid, Mineau refused to give a dollar amount. Pressed by Senator Augustus that his refusal was inconsistent with earlier statements that the initiative system belongs to the people, Mineau still refused to answer directly, saying only that the firm had been contracted "at fair-market value."  Mineau also claimed to have no idea of the ratio of volunteer to paid signature collectors.

Arno Political Consultants owner, Michael Arno, also testified claiming no culpability for the widespread fraud reports. He also tried to discredit the characters of former petition worker Angela McElroy and fraud specialist Jeannie Berg who had been flown in from Oregon to give expert testimony. 

McElroy gave a detailed account of how easy it is to commit petition fraud in Massachusetts and even gave a live demonstration of the bait-and-switch process that had been taught to her by her employers and that she used personally to steal signatures from several hundred voters. 

Jeannie Berg's testimony confirmed what had been said by McElroy, and then some, as she provided a litany of shortcomings in our State's initiative petition system.

The witnesses and victims who took time out of their busy lives to go to the State House and explain how they had been deceived into signing the anti-gay marriage petition felt they had an obligation to report on how their rights had been violated.  KnowThyNeighbor.org thanks each one of them for standing up and speaking out -- our Democracy depends on people like you.

However, Kris Mineau and his allies used this very important forum to once again divert attention from the real issue: the widespread fraud allegations and their current and prior knowledge of the underhanded techniques used by Arno Political Consultants and its subcontractors. Instead, they chose to attack KnowThyNeighbor.org, the Gay Lobby, MassEquality, the Joint Committee on Elections and even the good people who presented testimony of how their signatures had been stolen from them.

KnowThyNeighbor.org applauds Senator Augustus and Representative Petruccelli, Joint Chairs of the Elections Committee, for addressing this very serious issue and we look forward to initiative petition reform measures to be proposed in the immediate future.

Tom Lang & Aaron Toleos, Directors
Contact: (978) 335-0477, info@knowthyneighbor.org

Comments

[FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION]

WOW - WHAT A SURPRISE OUTCOME, ROFL !!!!

Imagine that, they came in, dragged their knuckles on the ground, and proceeded to attack the victims, and their former workers who could not tolerate the stench of their injustice and their immoral and illegal tactics.

It has always been the "fault" of minorities in asking for equality with the protected majority class.

Like Oliver Twist, they approach the refectory mentor, and ask, "More, please, sir"!! only to be slapped across the face and the bowl hurled from his frail and trembling hands.

It is my hope that this struggle represents the "Last Hurrah" for this coalition of oppressors. All have a "payoff" for their actions, be it economic, political or religious, or any combination thereof.

Politics do make strange bedfellows!!!!

[FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION]

Thanksgiving is such an important holiday - and so much more meaningful in the Commonwealth.

On that day, the petition effort will end. KTN will post the names when the Secretary of State posts the names.

It would be wonderful for every SS couple in this state to peruse the names for family and friends. Many will have been duped into voting for red and white wine and beer and against equal justice under law.

It will be informative to note the names of persons who have formerly claimed friendship and support who willingly signed the petition.

The lowest point in our Inferno is the self-loathing gay homophobe who votes against himself and his community.

The economic power of the GLBT minority is substantial, and if one weekend was devoted to boycotting the most egregious violators of our freedoms, it might have the same impact that Ghandi realized when he did the salt and cloth boycotts, or MLK did the bus boycott. They won.

[Bobbie Chase]

I continue to be amazed at the bigotry, sneakiness, and viciousness shown by the anti-gay forces. What they still do not understand is that gay marriage does not cause any harm, has no effect on anyone else's marriage, and benefits people who are in a monogamous loving relationship and need legal protection for their relationship. What I do not understand is why the anti-gay forces feel so compelled to mind other peoples' business. The anti-gay forces remind me of various evil forces such as the Ku Klux Klan, white supremacists, and "prolife" nuts. (Prolife - what a weird twist on words and what about the mother's life as opposed to the fetus's...?) Also, the anti-gay forces used the procreation of children as a excuse for their views. My husband and I chose not to have chilren. Is our marriage now not valid? Further, gay couple can have children if they wish, by various means.

[John Hosty]

Nice to see you made it into the blog Bobbie. I congradulate Tom and Arron on a job well done at the state house. If you were not there I can say I say them in person and their testimony was truly awe inspiring. We are very fortunate to have both of them working so hard to help this cause.

One thing I would suggest is that we need more media exposure. I was dissappointed when I saw no cameras from the news and didn't see much in the paper. All those who are reading this who want to help, ask you r local news why they are not following the issue of petition fraud. If we get enough people asking about it we could get the spotlight on these rats that are lying to our citizens and lining their pockets with their ill-begotten monies. Everyone needs to do their part and make their voices heard no matter where you are in the country, now is the time to act. Equality will not be handed over.... Freedom isn't free.

[Sam]

If anyone tries to break up my cousin's family, I'll kick their ass personally.

[Mo]

I had the distinct pleasure of hearing the brave and eloquent testimony of those who had been duped by the fraud. I was also then extremely fortunate to have heard the lovely Kris M's testimony decrying the fact that "homosexual activists" had sent "homosexual periodicals" to his home. The giggles coming from the gay marriage supporters in the back of the room as a reaction to that comment were fantastic. At least we can find a little humor in this situation.

I unfortunately had to leave before the rest of the testimony. I thank Tl and AT for their eggplant-themed update. The two of you are doing a fantastic job. Thank you both infinitely.

Maybe this is just because it is a beautiful day and we're going into fall, my favorite season, but really, I'm feeling optimistic. Their tactics are dirty, and the media isn't covering the issue as it should be, but WE WILL PREVAIL. And there so many smart and passionate people on our side -- the good side -- the side of love. That means something.

I am so glad that there was a hearing and that Sen. Augustus kept prodding Kris M. to give up dollar amounts of what he's paying Arno. THe whole thing is so filthy.

It's going to be great in 2008, when after all this, THEY LOSE and WE WIN. Let's keep fighting until that day. And then we can have a real party.

[Alex]

I, for one, am positive that this initiative, should it get on the ballot, will go down in flames in 2008. In fact, if people were voting today it would be unlikely to pass, although the margin of victory could potentially be slim.

Voters should not be able to vote away the rights of a minority group, but let's look at the bright side. If this thing is brought up for a vote in 2008, it will go down in defeat and give Massachusetts representatives in the U.S. Congress powerful ammunition against the Federal Marriage Amendment. Namely, that Massachusetts voters FAVOR gay marriage and a Federal Amendment would be contrary to the WILL OF THE PEOPLE and trample states' rights.

How will you anti-marriage, anti-family people respond to that? How will you continue your campaign of hate?

[FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION]

Raymond Flynn was once a liberal Democrat - a man at the forefront of liberal core values of equality and justice.

Clinton, a Protestant with a Jesuit education, named him ambassador to the Vatican.

Flynn is very close to Ratzinger. He is a member of Opus Dei, and is a Knight of Malta. He is also a Knight of the Supreme Order of Christ, a Knight of St. Pius IX, a Knight Commander of Saint Gregory the Great with Star, a Knight of St. Sylvester and a Knight of the Holy Sepulchre.

In short, he is the most Papally-decorated American since the late Grand Master of the Knights of Columbus.

I find this hilarious, or ironic. The fundy Prots hate the Catholics, and are actively converting Americans and Latinos here and in Latin America. And yet, he is actually in bed politically with the enemies of his own Church, and the enemies of ostensibly, his own core political values.

Flynn has decided to scapegoat the gay priests and lesbian nuns, even the celibate ones, to cover the pedo scandal that has damaged their rep, and especially, the eighth sacrament for all Catholic bishops $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Papal knighthoods have always been the way to thank huge contributors and lay supporters of the Church.

For clergy, it is one of the three levels of monsignori.

[John Hosty]

I wonder when Pope Hubris the XVI is going to remember his battle with homosexual urges and depression that followed and step down as he has asked all the other gay priests? Notice how hard it is to get his old biography since he ascended the thrown.

[Ghengis Cohen]

If anyone tries to break up my cousin's family, I'll kick their ass personally.

Posted by: Sam | October 21, 2005 at 12:55 AM

Isn't it "convenient" that Tom and Aaron have provided you with a convenient little list and names and addresses, "for your convenience," Sam. And yet they play innocent on other threads as if there isn't any threat of violence.

Yes, after reading the misleading accusations on this site, you'd think that this vote was about "breaking up families."

Way to go, Tom and Aaron. Take a few guys like Sam, tell them a few lies, give them names and addresses, and then play innocent when people get hurt.

[John Hosty]

You can make your personal attacks all you want, but it isn't going to get you anyone's respect here. Reader's of this blog are savy and they know to listen to the content of our words, and the value therein.

Have a view on why gay marriage shouldn't be if you want. That's what we are here for is to discuss the reality of gay discrimination.

[Ghengis Cohen]

Let's not kid ourselves, John. Your readers don't respect anyone who takes a different position on ssm. It hardly matters what I say. This is a Jihad site, and you've put the Fatwa out on ssm unbelievers. Your site is filled with hate-rousing labels against your enemies. It's almost as if you took lessons from Phelps. Look I'll try, but I doubt you'll listen to anything I say:

While same-sex couples can obviously benefit from MOST of the rules of marriage, some of the rules are plainly heterosexist, such as the presumption of paternity, and various presumptions regarding adoption.

For example, when a man and woman adopt, they usually prefer to not know the identity of the birth parents, and almost always want to keep that information from the child. The reason is plausible parenthood -- they'd rather the child grew up as much as possible thinking of them as mom and dad. This is even more likely to be true with sperm donation -- Daddy doesn't want baby to know he's not the biological daddy.

Same sex couples, particularly lesbian couples, are much more likely to want to know the birth parents of kids they adopt.

Obviously sperm donation won't affect MM couples, but FF couples (unlike FM couples) usually prefer to know who the sperm donor is, and often want the kid in on it. Many lesbian couples actually would prefer to get a donor who was gay, but as I understand, most of the banks won't go along with that sort of request.

Finally, in a situation that's virtually unique to MM couples, we have surrogate mothers and their rights. What happens if M1 gets surrogate pregnant, and then M1 dies. Under what facts is M2 the presumptive father, have custody and/or responsibility for child support?

The reproductive reality is that THREE different sets of rules would be best -- marriage with its presumption of paternity for MF couples, and similar sets of rules but different reproductive rules for FF couples, and yet a different set of rules for MM couples. If you really gave a damn about same-sex couples and their families, you'd would not want to impose on them sets of rules that were specifically designs for the typical wants and needs of male-female couples.

But that's not really what this is about, right?

[Edgar Decelles]

Genghis Cohen - Oh, how clever. Where do I start. Yes, how about the fact that I am SS married and have two children we are raising.

John Hosty - Many different individuals, with both experience and training, have told you that these trolls have but one purpose, and that is, to " bait and switch (words or petitions), engage in reverse victimization ("gay families are evil and are hurting marriage and our lives), Orwellian newspeak ( unwillingness to use proper psychosexual terminology - preferring to continue the myth of hets choosing to be gay, and ergo, the rationale for opposition), and selective and arbitrary quoting of the Hebrew Scripture Holiness Code or Pauline texts out of conquest with contextual meaning.

I am a first-generation US citizen born of Canadian parents. It is not difficult to read the tea leaves.

Tom and Aaron are men of courage. They know that these opponents work in deception and heat. They use all forms of deception, including the ruse of "reasonableness". They NEED heat and not light.

The "allies" are usually men and women in the political arena who are afraid to stand up for our constitutional secular rights. Yes, they are men and women who ultimately betray us.

Or, they are "gentrified activists" for whom nothing is important to stand up, say that they are mad, that they will not tolerate the loss of their rights for themselves and their children, and stop trying to appease those who want to destroy your families. You are fighting a protected class of person and family - legal or discordant - who are here - willingly or part of the organized effort.

The trolls say that they are the "average joe" and you must listen to the freeper spin from them. This bullshit about adoption and gays and lesbians is ignorance coupled with arrogance.

Appeasement is deadly. Silence equals death.
Larry Kramer was right recently when he called our community accomodationists with persons and ideas bent on the complete reversal of all our rights and freedoms.

I don't know what makes me madder. The trolls or the individuals who play "chess" with them.

My spouse is a WASP, a MA WASP - who unlike me was raised in a Republican Eastern Establishment home. He loves this country, and this state.

Our children are in elementary school, but I fear the future in the US when our enemies are well-funded, and seemingly unwilling to end the legal strategies to codify their hatred. I am tired of the groups like HRC or LRC or the gay apologists.

If the referendum passes, we are going to take our professional certificates north. The True North. We will stop all this bullshit, and live our lives in total equality. My grandparents, aunts and uncles and cousins in New Brunswick and PEI will welcome us with true liberal hearts and minds.

Tom and Aaron, you are truly courageous guys. You not only have to fight the enemies of freedom, but also tolerate the gay guys who kiss both sets of cheeks of these fascists.

If you are not mad as hell, you do not deserve full equality and freedom. They will NEVER surrender justice freely. There is too much $$$$$$ in fighting us. The political payoff is not bad either.

[John Hosty]

To try and use language that would equate the gay community to a Islamic enemy is transparent and vulgar. People here reading are on both sides, not just mine. Don't you want to call them eggplants now?

[Edgar Decelles]

Larry Kramer said it, and said it wisely. Tom and Aaron have had to fight gay accomodationists and critics as well.

I don't know where you get the Islamic jihadist terminology, but we for two, are sick and tired of individuals in our community who never stop trying to convince those bent on your destruction.

This is not new, or limited to our minority. Oppressed minorities are often those who are fearful of outright activism. Larry Kramer's ACT UP was condemned by the gay gentrified activists of his early days. The NAACP opposed Martin Luther King when he stood up for Rosa Parks.

The incremental game is also the same. If you have marriage, and that is only here in MA, they say " you should have civil unions", when you say, as in VT and CT, they say " no marriage, and those RDP's should not exist". They then come back with :No marriage, no civil unions, no RDP, just legal estrangement. And finally, we have recriminalization of the entire "lifestyle choice." (their words).

Tom and Aaron have been attacked by gentrified gays as well as straights. So have gay activists and civil rights activists who dare not "step'n'fetch it".

Sorry, Uncle John....

[Ghengis Cohen]

How funny. You folks equate "orwellian newspeak" to refual to use the latest trends in pop psychology terms? Orwell would be amazed.

Even Edgar just admitted that Tom, Aaron, and John here don't represent the opinions of all gays in Massachussetts. John shows his delusions of grandure when he turns my specific criticism of this site into some sort of slur against the whole "gay community."

If you are not mad as hell, you do not deserve full equality and freedom.

Good night, Edgar, calm down. You sound like Pol Pot when you say things like that. Threatening the freedoms of others just because they don't share your opinions, is undemocratic, but it's simply demented to bluster against those who aren't as "filled with passionate intensity" as you, to borrow a phrase from Yeats.

I never challenged anyone's courage. On the contrary, I think you are foolhardy and dangerous to yourselves and to others. You don't need to prove yourselves on that front. I beg you not to.

[FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION]

Edgar, Edgar, welcome to Freeper Troll Central !!!! In this forum, they are encouraged to use steel or satin gloves, and they always have those of our brothers willing to turn both proverbial cheeks.

The organization has their angry white het males out in force this weekend.

They are here to discredit the work of Tom and Aaron and KTN. These guys are worth twenty uncle toms and fifty gentrified lobbyists at HRC or LCR. These guys act and sound like the individuals that scare fascist neocons - because they have the balls to call hatred and bigotry- no matter how stated - for what it is.

Yes, Ed, you are right. Oppressed minorities always have members who are afraid to seek their rights boldly and forthrightly. You spoke about MLK and the NAACP. Right on, it's true.

There are gay apologists who truly believe that if you coddle and appease the fascists, they will respect you and give you some form of lesser rights. That is platinum -covered bullshit. More, they respect you less, and fear guys like Tom and Aaron more.

I CAN'T WAIT TO READ THE NAMES OF THESE FASCIST BASTARDS. I WANT TO AVOID THEM. I WANT TO BOYCOTT THEIR BUSINESSES AND ASSOCIATE WITH OUR ALLIES, AND SUPPORT THEIR BUSINESSES AND OUR COMMON DESIRE TO CREATE A LEGALLY EQUAL SOCIETY.

[Edgar Decelles]

HEY GENGHIS, HENRY, AND ALL LURKING TROLLS.

I thought that since you have come to KTN to "learn" about us, I thought that I would return the favor and go and "learn" more about your talking points.

Wow - guys - what an EDUCATION that I have received going to freeper neocon fascist sites...

Here is an example for my gay brothers and sisters to "enjoy" and better UNDERSTAND your real motives,

You can show the brass knuckles under that satin glove now boys.....

READ THIS AT YOUR OWN RISK. IT MAY MAKE YOU VOMIT AT FIRST, BUT MAYBE AND HOPEFULLY, YOU WILL STOP KISSING THESE TROLLS' ASSES.
THEY REALLY HATE YOUR GUTS, AND HATE THE FACT YOU HAVE A LOVING RELATIONSHIP AND RAISE CHILDREN. HAVE NO DOUBT, THE ACTIVISTS WHO ARE FIGHTING US UNTIL 2008 ARE THESE GUYS AND GALS.

The November 2003 decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Court that gave homosexual couples the constitutional right to marry has intensified debate about same-sex marriage. There are currently six different court cases concerning same-sex marriage. The topic of same-sex marriage will be in the news and part of popular discussion. Therefore, here are a few key talking points on the subject of homosexual marriage.

1. Right vs. privilege: Gay activists talk about the "right" to get married. Yet in the next sentence they talk about obtaining a marriage license. Marriage is a privilege, not a right. Therefore, the state must have a standard for issuing a license. We don't give a license to anyone who wants to drive a car. You must know basic information and demonstrate an ability to drive. We don't grant a medical license to just anyone. Someone must demonstrate a level of competence. Marriage isn't a right, it is a privilege that the state can and should regulate.

2. Devalues marriage: Giving same-sex couples the right to marry devalues true marriage. Imagine if at the next awards ceremony, everyone received an award. Would anyone value the award if everyone received one? Any adult is permitted to marry another adult of the opposite sex. But you can't marry a child, you can't marry a blood relative, you can't marry someone already married, you can't marry someone of the same sex.

3. Basic biology: Homosexual relations deny the self-evident truth that male and female bodies complement each other. Human sexuality and procreation is based upon a man and a woman coming together as one flesh. Marriage between a man and a woman promotes procreation and makes intimate sexual activity orderly and socially accountable.

4. Public health: Homosexual sex is dangerous and destructive to the human body. The International Journal of Epidemiology reports that the life expectancy at age 20 for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 10 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, researchers estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently 20 years of age will not reach their 65th birthday.

5. Counterfeit: Arbitrarily granting a marriage license to a same-sex couple doesn't constitute marriage. It is a counterfeit of true marriage. It is like trying to tape two same-sex electrical plugs together to form an electrical current.

6. Monogamy/fidelity: Same-sex marriage will not be monogamous. One lesbian writer calls gay marriage "monogamy without fidelity." Another homosexual columnist writes of "a broader understanding of commitment." A recent Dutch study found that homosexual relationships last, on average, about 1-1/2 years and that men in those relationships have an average of eight partners per year outside their main partnership.

7. Children: Marriage between a man and a woman is the ideal family unit. It promotes procreation and ensures the benefits of child rearing by the distinct attributes of both father and mother. Two research papers by Timothy Dailey for Family Research Council (Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk and Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse) document concerns about children raised in gay marriages.

9. Majority rule: A recent poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that public opposition to gay marriage is increasing. In July, 53 percent opposed same-sex marriage. By October 59 percent were opposed to same-sex marriage.

10. Popular vote: States legislatures have already spoken to the issue of same-sex marriages. Thirty-seven states have already passed a Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) stating that marriage is between a man and a woman. In 1996 Congress also passed a national DOMA.

11. Religion: The Bible teaches that homosexuality is not natural and is wrong (Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10). Other religions also concur with this judgment.

12. Emotional: Gays and lesbians are relationally broken people. Just as in heterosexual marriage, two broken people cannot produce a whole, healthy unit. However, heterosexuals can get help for their brokenness and repair the relationship, but the relationships of homosexual couples are intrinsically and irreparably flawed.

[Edgar Decelles]

OKAY, NOW, TROLLS....MAYBE YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOUR TALKING POINTS TORN INTO SHREDS...

and, it would be easy for many GLBT professionals, friends and family to do so. It is so patently vile and fraudulent and unprofessional positions, it is tiring to deflect them.

If you want to teach the good people who lurk here, and have heard this verbal violence, have at it.

You can ask by ordering by numbers. Watch the trolls bait and switch, ad hominem attack, claim victimhood, and never address their verbal and physical violence.

[Edgar Decelles]

Here is the penis-holding executive director of Concerned Women's group.

Since our Trolls are disingenuous and say that they love us, and that it's just their opinion, and don't get mad and hurt us, we are so sick and tired of " straightbashers".

THIS IS ONE OF THEIR TOP LEADERS AGAINST YOU, READ AND "ENJOY" AND MAYBE, MAYBE, YOU WILL STOP BENDING OVER WILLINGLY TO THEIR RAPACIOUS VERBAL VIOLENCE.

REMEMBER TO WASH YOUR HANDS AFTER READING THIS.

Talking Points on Marriage
By Robert H. Knight
Marriage is of such importance that it is uniquely protected in the law and culture. It predates the law and the Constitution, and is an anthropological and sociological reality, not primarily a legal one. No civilization can survive without it, and those societies that allowed it to become irrelevant have faded into history.

The Meaning of Marriage
Marriage is the union of the two sexes, not just the union of two people. It is the union of two families, and the foundation for establishing kinship patterns and family names, passing on property and providing the optimal environment for raising children.

The term “marriage” refers specifically to the joining of two people of the opposite sex. When that is lost, “marriage” becomes meaningless. You can no more leave an entire sex out of marriage and call it “marriage” than you can leave chocolate out of a “chocolate brownie” recipe. It becomes something else.

Giving non-marital relationships the same status as marriage does not expand the definition of marriage; it destroys it. For example, if you declare that, because it has similar properties, wine should be labeled identically to grape juice, you have destroyed the definitions of both “wine” and “grape juice.” The consumer would not know what he is getting.

Marriage, the Natural Family, and the Best Interests of Children
Marriage is the union of the only type of couple capable of natural reproduction of the human race—a man and a woman. Children need both mothers and fathers, and marriage is society’s way of obtaining them.

But even childless marriages are a social anchor for children, who observe adults as role models. Besides, childless couples can be “surprised” by an unexpected pregnancy, and they can adopt, giving a child a mother-and-father-based family. Single parents can eventually marry. And marriage is a stabilizing force for all. Even when a couple is past the age of reproduction, the marital commitment may keep an older man from fathering a child with a younger woman outside wedlock.

Children learn crucial things about family life by observing our crucial relationships up close: interactions between men and women; husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, and parents to children of the same and opposite sexes. Human experience and a vast body of social science research show that children do best in married, mother-father households. It is wrong to create fatherless or motherless families by design. The effort is being driven by the desires of adults, not the needs of children.

The drive for homosexual “marriage” leads to destruction of the gold standard for custody and adoption. The question should be: “What is in the best interests of the child?” The answer is: “Place children, whenever possible, in a married, mom-and-dad household.” As homosexual relationships gain status, marriage loses its place as the preferential adoption family option.

Defining Marriage is not “Discrimination”
Marriage laws are not discriminatory. Marriage is open to all adults, subject to age and blood relation limitations. As with any acquired status, the applicant must meet minimal requirements, which in terms of marriage, means finding an opposite-sex spouse. Same-sex partners do not qualify. To put it another way, clerks will not issue dog licenses to cats, and it is not out of “bigotry” toward cats.

Comparing current laws limiting marriage to a man and a woman with the laws in some that once limited inter-racial marriage is irrelevant and misleading. The very soul of marriage – the joining of the two sexes—was never at issue when the Supreme Court struck down laws against inter-racial marriage.

Requiring citizens to sanction or subsidize homosexual relationships violates the freedom of conscience of millions of Christians, Jews, Muslims and other people who believe marriage is the union of the two sexes.

Civil marriage is a public act. Homosexuals are free to have a “union” ceremony with each other privately, but they are not free to demand that such a relationship be solemnized and subsidized under the law.

Homosexual activists say they need legal status so they can visit their partners in hospitals, etc. But hospitals leave visitation up to the patient except in very rare instances. This “issue” is a smokescreen to cover the fact that, using legal instruments such as power of attorney, drafting a will, etc., homosexuals can share property, designate heirs, dictate hospital visitors and give authority for medical decisions. What they should not obtain is identical recognition and support for a relationship that is not equally essential to society’s survival.

The Legal and Social Fallout
If same-sex relationships acquire marital-type status in the law, several things will occur:

Businesses that decline to recognize non-marital relationships will increasingly be punished through loss of contracts and even legal action. This is already occurring in San Francisco and in Canada.

Other groups, such as bisexuals and polygamists, will demand the right to redefine marriage to suit their own proclivities. Once the standard of one-man, one-woman marriage is broken, there is no logical stopping point.

As society rewards homosexual behavior, more young people will be encouraged to experiment and more will be discouraged from overcoming homosexual desires.

Popular understanding of what marriage is and what it requires will undergo change. Homosexual relationships, which usually lack both permanence and fidelity, are unlikely to change to fit the traditional model of lifelong, faithful marriage. Instead, society’s expectations of marriage will change in response to the homosexual model, thus leading to a further weakening of the institution of marriage. Some homosexual activists have acknowledged that they intend to use marriage mainly as a way to radically shift society’s entire conception of sexual morality. See appendix.
Conclusion
“Marriage” for same-sex couples (or the counterfeit equivalent under pseudonyms such as “civil unions” or “domestic partnerships”) are being promoted as an extension of tolerance, equality, and civil rights. But they are really wedges designed to overturn traditional sexual morality and to win official affirmation, celebration, subsidization and solemnization of behavior that is harmful to the people who engage in it and to society, and that is still viewed as morally wrong by a majority of the American public.

For the well-being of children and of society, we must not allow the creation of government-imposed counterfeit “marriage” by any name. Marriage is civilization’s primary institution, and we tamper with it at our own peril.

-- Robert H. Knight, director, Culture & Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America. Mr. Knight was a draftsman of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the current law that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for all federal purposes and allows states to resist demands to recognize counterfeit “marriage” licenses. Some references were drawn from “Questions and Answers: What’s Wrong With Letting Same-Sex Couples ‘Marry?’” by Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council InFocus Number 256, August 14, 2003.

[Henry]

Edgar, I do NOT having ANY talking points, I did NOT start a website againt gay marriage. So please stop with your prejudgice against me and others. Those are someone elses points NOT mine. Please stop with the black and white, us againat them mentality. Just because someone says it doesnt mean everyone thinks that. Come on get a clue.

[Edgar Decelles]

Henry - your nose is growing.....notice that he doesn't discuss these points. He just wants you not to have your rights, period...what platinum bullshit.

[Henry]

You know Edgar, foe and a&r. Maybe if you took the time to stop and actually listen to some people instead of assuming what their intentions were you might actually get something out of it and help. Whatis it you want? Do you want gay marriage legalized only? Or do you want people to stop and learn what being gay is and accept it. You can have all the marriages you want but if you continue with this kind of attitude towards people then their will always be hate towards you. The first step starts with you, we have heard many compare this to the racial civil rights movement and talk about MLK. Take a page from his book and stop the hate.

[Henry]

NO, if you have read my posts you would have seen I have said many, many times. Rights need to be given. Pay attention and stop with your lies.

[Edgar Decelles]

I was wondering where I had read some of these similar points read on KTN. The victim thing IS a talking point. So are all of the reasons that Henry, Genghis and other trolls came here to witness to.

HYPOCRITES, SOLID BRASS HYPOCRITES.

Same-Sex Marriage: Talking Points That Can Break the Silence
Lori Borgman
Columnist & Speaker

The silence is deafening.

Same-sex marriage activists have the bullhorns, the microphones, the ears of the politicians and the adoration of the media. Meanwhile, those who think gay marriage is just plain wrong, have . . . well, not much.

Kinda quiet around here, don't you think?

To some degree, I understand. Speak out against homosexuality and you run the risk of being labeled a homophobe. Bam! Just like that, they stamp an imprint across your driver's license that says, "Would have worn brown shirts and followed Hitler if lived in Germany during the 1940s." Of course, that's not true, but those are the kind of thoughts that feed our fear.

Nobody wants to be seen as a hate-monger. The last thing we need are more television images of God's faithful spewing wild-eyed hatred from behind placards with Bible verses scrawled in red Magic Marker. Not exactly a winsome witness or particularly stimulating on the intellectual front.

Still, there's a conversation happening out there. It's a conversation about marriage and family that will alter the very face of this nation and every family within it. It's a conversation that will affect you, your kids and your grandkids. The conversation is about an institutional change so huge that no culture throughout the entire span of history has ever embraced it. We need to join the conversation and join fast. Like yesterday.

February 12, 2004 marked "Freedom to Marry" week in San Francisco. Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered the city clerk to issue marriage licenses to more than 3,000 homosexual couples. May 17th, Massachusetts plans on following suit -- or wedding dress, as the case may be.

Since the conversation has been going for some time now, maybe it's best to listen to what's being said and consider how to respond: Talking Points. Politicians and broadcast journalists have long used talking points. Talking Points keep you focused, on track and equipped to join the conversation. Here's how the conversation has been going:

Nobody should be denied the right to marry.

Marriage has always come with restrictions -- age restrictions, familial restrictions, and for thousands of years it has been restricted to one man and one woman. Those restrictions are what give marriage definition.

Redefining marriage to include two men or two women isn't going to change things.

Actually it will change things, as it will reconfigure the institution of marriage. If it becomes "wrong" to limit marriage to one man and one woman, then it would become "wrong" to limit it at all. Remember Heather Has Two Mommies? Heather could have three mommies, four mommies or even two mommies and one daddy.

The talk about same-sex marriage leading to polygamy is hype.

Bad information, friend. According to Evan Gerstmann, author of Same Sex Marriage and the Constitution, the leading legal scholar promoting same-sex marriage, society will probably have to get used to the idea of threesomes, foursomes, etc. Gerstmann says it would be seen as discrimination if we deny anyone the right to marry. The ACLU Utah affiliate is already challenging that state's laws against polygamy. Gerstmann also suggests we might have to learn to live with consensual incest. Not exactly the sort of future many of us have been hoping for.

Two men or two women who want to commit for life, and become a family, are no different from a man and woman who want to commit for life, and become a family.

They are very different. Marriage is both a religious covenant and a social contract designed to produce future generations, e.g. the pitter patter of little feet, upon which the welfare and continuation of society depends. Homosexual couples have a natural reproduction rate roughly that of the Shaker community, which is now down to one or two elderly women living in Maine. Homosexuals may become "one flesh" but that "one flesh" will never result in a trip to the delivery room. Further, homosexual and lesbian couples are very different from married heterosexual couples in that they are at far greater risk for contracting life-threatening diseases, including sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS.

Heterosexuals haven't done such a hot job with marriage. Divorce rates are terrible. Allowing homosexuals to marry will strengthen the institution of marriage, not weaken it. How can you be against strengthening marriage?

Good point. Heterosexuals do have a dismal divorce rate. But you don't alter the standard to accommodate the people; you help the people reach the standard.

Recent research on same-sex unions shows that homosexuals have an even higher "divorce" rate than heterosexuals. Sweden, which sanctioned same-sex unions during the 1990s, found that male homosexual "marriages" have a divorce rate 50 percent higher than their married heterosexual counterparts, while lesbian couples have a divorce rate 167 percent higher!

Christians quote the Old Testament to prove homosexuality is wrong. The Old Testament also says children should be stoned for talking back to their parents and that you shouldn't eat pork, but you seem to ignore those.

The admonition against homosexuality in the Old Testament is repeated in the New Testament, unlike some other points of Old Testament law. Romans 1:26-27: "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."

Jesus did not condemn homosexuality. Jesus was loving.

Jesus was loving (and still is), and He did condemn homosexuality. He condemned homosexuality by never contradicting God's law. He came to fulfill the law, not destroy the law. Furthermore, Jesus specifically sanctioned heterosexual marriage in Matthew 19:4-6: And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ' for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?

"So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."

Denying homosexuals who love each other the right to marry is cruel and unloving.

I'm sorry it looks that way. Homosexuals are not my enemies. Homosexuals, some of whom I have known as friends, co-workers and relatives, chose alternate lifestyles that cannot be reconciled with the orthodox tenets of faith. When I die and give account for my life, I will not stand before a jury of my peers, I will stand before One, the great I Am who, although forgiving and merciful, is also rather fastidious about principles and moral absolutes.

We are a people of principle and a nation of laws (or at least we were until all these mayors, governors and judges started suspending them willy-nilly). The conversation about same-sex marriage is about honoring and preserving the God-ordained institution of marriage between one man and one woman, an institution that has served nations for thousands of years.

On some levels, this stir over homosexuality is not new. We Internet-shopping, latte-sipping folks like to think we are forever new and cutting edge, but we are not. Homosexuals and homosexuality can be found throughout the pages of time. But this much is new: for the first time ever homosexuals are on the verge of normalizing and codifying same-sex marriage. The collapse of the Roman Empire was preceded by the demise of the family and loosening of sexual mores. This flap we're in now is actually an old story with a new twist.

The time to speak up is now. Join the conversation. Join the conversation with your friends, your family, your pastors, your local newspaper, your state lawmakers and your national representatives. Above all, join it with truth and love.

Take Action! For more information on the same-sex marriage debate and resources on how you can have an impact visit: Culture Shock Monday: A Same Sex 'Marriage' Resource Guide.

GOTTA GO WALK THE BOYS AROUND THE POND AND WALK THE POOCH AS WELL. YOU KNOW, JUST PLAIN OLE WEEKEND ACTIVITIES OF A YOUNG DAD ON A SATURDAY FALL AFTERNOON.