Agreed. I am of the opinion that voting Yes on Prop 8 makes you a certified official douche nozzle. I can think of no good reason to vote Yes. And obviously neither can the Yes on 8 people. Otherwise, they wouldn't have to lie their fool-fucking-heads off to get it passed. Assholes.

I've been seeing a banner ad for http://www.protectmarriage.com here at KJ's, so I thought I'd try to track them down.

The website is registered to an organization known as "California Family Council" based in Riverside, Ca., except they only have a P.O. box there. I cannot find a street address in Google for them in Riverside.
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/r ... rriage.com



They are Christian Fundies who oppose same-sex marriage, birth control, abortion, sex education, in-school health clinics because they include abortion counseling (or maybe because they would expose spanking wounds or sexual abuse?), stem cell research, and others, and they support religious history taught in public schools (and probably school prayer, but they can't talk about that just yet) and support Corporal Punishment (Spanking), and Prop 4, a State Constitutional Amendment requiring parental notification before performing an abortion on a minor. By all means, Support a Church-State!

http://www.californiafamily.org/Site/ch ... volved.asp

They are associated with the group "Focus on the Family" headed by Dr. James Dobson. Dr. Dobson talked for twenty minutes with Sarah Palin recently. They are a pair.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfa ... p_god.html

http://www.californiafamily.org/Site/gen_links.asp

The only thing amusing about this bunch is how well they can spell words, like at the bottom of this page:
http://www.protectmarriage.com/contact

This organization is a cancer that is taking the money over Prop 8 and will no doubt continue with their fundie red agenda. Does anyone know where their true address might be found? Somebody needs to video their driveway in the morning so we can check the number of new car finishes, fast.

So, I have always thought that if we just got all the liberal and supportive students at UCLA mobilized and ensure they ALL vote NO, it could tip the scales in our favor for sure.

Funny thing because I just got a call from higher up in the NO on 8 campaign that UCLA is going to be pivotal in defeating the prop and the YES side has realized it and is now spreading across campus in the last week making class announcements and undoubtedly lying. We are trying to gather a campus wide meeting of anyone and everyone gay and supportive to figure out how to combat them.

The contributions page for California Family Council asks "Are you a member of the clergy? (Yes/No).
Why are blatant religious appeals for political donations allowable?
Secondly, CFC accepts donations from outside of California.
https://app.etapestry.com/hosted/Califo ... ation.html

Third, this may not be relevant, but the website which appears to be running the donations page for CFC (etapestry) is located in Indiana.
http://etapestry.com/

Excuse the language, but I can't believe this crap is even close.

This must be poll spinning or media hysteria; it'll fall by around ten percent..which...remarkably...is still a lot nowadays.

The margin doesn't matter to me as long as it fails. It's a matter of acceptance. Once gay marriage is allowed, that's it. They will not be able to put the genie back in the bottle.

It'll fail, mark my words. I am apparently the pessimist on these boards and I still am 100% sure this prop. will fail to pass.

send a fake communique out saying u will be meeting somewhere, lock them in a room and gas them.

Duly noted.

I think the phrase is "You are being judged by God". For inserting their religious laws while ignoring State laws and decisions, I believe they are acting as a judicial body against the interests of the State, though the excuse is now one of a Constitutional Amendment.

In the State of California the general public cannot pass judgement in any legal capacity without being a standing Judge executing decisions based on the laws of the State. CFC's Church-State laws are clearly out of jurisdiction and constitute a foreign power. Even if they operate within a framework of state legality, say Ron Prentiss is a lawyer licensed under the California State Bar, he still must be sworn under Oath to abide by our Constitutions and Statutes (State Code).

The Civil Code of the State of California requires that the interpretation of all laws within the State shall be Liberally interpreted to affect the Objects of the laws, while in the absence of Statutes the English Common Law is applicable.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov



Our State Constitution guarantees the Right to Liberty, Justice, Privacy, and Happiness.

Just for fun, here is the California Code page on Judicial conflict which prevents the hearing of a case by any judge in conflict. It is too long to reprint here, but the first half of the page has the info.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisg ... n=retrieve

While I agree a YES vote on prop 8 is an act against liberty, I don't see how redefining marriage by the state as between a man and a woman, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman does any good to liberty either.

I am all for it when a small community decides to preserve the self-defined "sacredness" of marriage by voluntarily sanctioning only heterosexual unions. But when it comes to a state like California this big, any state action (including by democratic votes) governing who can/cannot marry will inevitably coerce one side or the other into supporting a belief system not of their own.

Delicensing marriage by the state is the way to true liberty. Maybe the state should now consider replacing "marriage" with a less sensitive and less meaningful word.

So this law would force people to get married to someone of the same sex?!!!!!

No.

I do not support any measures (such as Prop. 8) that allow the state to further dictate the definition of "marriage". Delicensing marriage is the way to go since not everybody agrees on the definition of marriage.

Oh SNAP....

Ok, so if you guys don't know, Jack O'Connell Superintendent of Schools in CA went on record in a NO on 8 ad saying it has nothing to do with kids. Of course, YES on 8 responded with their BS as usual.

Yesterday, YES on 8 publicly invited NO on 8 to a televised debate on Sunday to, well, debate assertions made on both sides regarding the school issue and refuting what Jack O'Conell has been saying.

NO on 8 just released their response to the debate...

http://www.noonprop8.com/downloads/FSchubert102808.pdf

You gotta love that last line.

And some more videos...

^Damn, I just read that letter!!

Go Feinstein!

My college and my work is pretty much a No on 8 zone, which makes me happy.

A Prop 8 spokesman at a rally today:

I may be slow, but I honestly did not understand what he said, what he meant by that analogy. Is he comparing us to Hitler? It makes NO sense.

Yes, he's comparing gays to Hitler. And of course it makes no sense. These people will say anything at this point.

its disappointing to see many racial minorities in the video.

Bill Clinton now joins the LONG list of those opposed to Prop 8. He recorded a telephone call message telling Californians to vote NO on 8.

And Samuel L. Jackson narrates the NO's latest ad...



HOLY SHIT!!! As I was re-watching that ad for posting it, I just realized they talk about Armenians!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This would be a small step toward erasing his horrible record of signing DOMA into law and DADT.

i like the Ugly Betty ad as well for No on 8.

Yeah. That one is pretty good and it's awesome that they have it in spanish and are airing on programs and stations where it can have an effect.