Claims by No On California Proposition 8 Campaign Growing More Desperate?
Posted by Flap in Gay Marriage
This pledge card was signed by a kindergartener at Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, CA last week. Teaching children to be accepting of others should be commended, but forcing children to sign pledges that include references to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community when these children can barely write their own names and when parents are not allowed to opt out of these class activities, is deplorable.
“Clearly, this is nothing more than a floundering campaign grasping at straws to save its effort,” said Chip White, Protectmarriage.com – Yes on 8 campaign spokesman. “It’s quite sad because those who are hurt most are voters. We invited the No on Prop 8 campaign to debate Proposition 8 this weekend in a live, televised format, but it declined our invitation. If the No campaign is so confident in its arguments, why refuse the debate?”
Claims reporting Proposition 8 has nothing to do with schools, to Proposition 8 will cause a high-tech brain drain, are being passed off as fact. These claims are nothing but noisy rhetoric and last minute campaign stunts aimed at confusing voters instead of educating them.
Claim: Proposition 8 has nothing to do with schools
A few weeks ago children in a 1st grade class attended their teacher’s gay wedding in San Francisco on a school-organized field trip. The principal called it a “teachable moment.” That sure sounds like same-sex marriage instruction in schools.
This week kindergartners at Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, CA, were asked to sign pledge cards saying they would not use anti-LGBT language. Parents who felt their children were far too young for such a discussion, most at an average age of 5 who are just learning the basics of reading and writing, were not permitted to opt-out, but instead had to keep their children home from school.
As we have clearly demonstrated, California Education Code Section 51933 states schools “shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.” According to the California Department of Education website, 96% of schools teach this curriculum. And under the Supreme Court’s ruling, current California law means marriage instruction includes instruction on gay marriage. Thus, gay marriage is already part of the curriculum. Perhaps because of these simple facts, Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell refuses to debate.
Claim: Proposition 8 would have no effect on a church’s tax-exempt status.
The No on 8 campaign used a classic lawyer trick, rolling out a group of lawyers yesterday to falsely state our concern about the impact of same sex marriage on religious freedoms, and then saying our concerns are false. For the record, the Yes on 8 campaign has never said that churches, acting as churches, would be forced to perform gay marriages. However, it is clear that where churches interact with the public square, in providing social services or even conducting business, their tax exempt status is at risk.
In one well publicized case, Catholic Charities in Boston ran adoption facilities that managed 700 cases since 1987, most involving children with special needs. Catholic Charities placed such children into parents in traditional marriages, according to their faith. After gay marriage was legalized in Massachusetts, the state told Catholic Charities it had to place children with gay marriage couples as well. Faced with such a decision, Catholic Charities reluctantly decided to stop providing adoption services.
Another religious non-profit, Ocean Grove Campground in New Jersey, lost a portion of its tax-exempt status on a rental pavilion because it refused to rent the facility to a lesbian couple for a civil commitment ceremony.
Claim: Proposition 8 discriminates against gays and lesbians
Under California’s current domestic partnership law, (Family Code Section 297), gay couples are awarded the same legal rights and privileges as married couples. California has the strongest civil union/domestic partnership law in the nation, and Proposition 8 does not take away any of those rights.
Claim: If Proposition 8 passes there will be a brain drain to gay-friendly Massachusetts.
Gay marriage has been legal in Massachusetts for five years and California still remains the epicenter of technology, biomed and other science-based industries. If a “gay brain-drain” was going to happen, shouldn’t it have started 5 years ago?
Flap learned at the blogger conference call yesterday that indeed the No on Proposition 8 campaign has replaced many of their staff and the campaign may be at the last minute replacing all of their television ads. There was even talk that the No campaign was going to put You Tube ads on broadcast television.
Good luck with that.
But, at least today, Flap has had an opportunity to sunshine some of the false claims being made – new campaign staff or not.
Update:
Why is the No on 8 sending out disingenuous e-mails to decline the debate challenge?
Letter below:
Technorati Tags: California Proposition 8, Gay Marriage Tags: California Proposition 8, Gay Marriage




Entries (RSS)
Pingback: Articles you should Right Now « Sweat Tears Or The Sea: Prop 8 Edition