Saturday, September 6, 2008

More on California Proposition 8

I wanted to clarify a couple last things regarding the California Proposition 8. I am urging a YES vote.

In the year 2000 the people of California passed Prop 22 by a 61% voice of the people, which made the following words the law, this is the entire law:

"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California."

Recently the California Supreme Court overturned the law (prop. 22) and the voice of the people. Proposition 8 will restore the law that was already past by making the above words part of the state Constitution.

Here a link to the official web site: You can donate there, or download fliers and other materials.

One of the reasons I home schooled my children was because of Project 10 in the Los Angeles City Schools. Where the schools were mandated to teach homosexuality to ALL grade levels. And they had mandatory meetings with junior high schools kids and informed them that ten percent of them were homosexual, that they should consider if they may be homosexual, and provided information how to integrate into the homosexual community.

In California we have domestic partnership laws, that give homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples regarding medical benefits, medical rights, property and inheritance rights, and so on. I don’t know anyone opposing these rights. Because hurting homosexuals is not the point of Prop. 8. What is at issue is third parties rights in relation to homosexual marriages. Please see my last post.

If Proposition 8 does not pass there will be a devastating effect on schools, adoption agencies, churches, and some businesses. No matter where you live, we need your help.

By the way - this is my 100th. post!


Anonymous said...

In California we also vote on whether or not the state's Supreme Court Justices stay in office. If voters approved the judges, how are those judges overturning the voice of the voters? If the voters didn't want those judges speaking for them, they shouldn't have kept them on the bench.

.............. said...

I am so grateful to live in a country where individuals freedoms are valued and respected, and I hate to think that some individuals feel that this freedom is not being given to them. However, if Prob 8 is not passed I feel like the larger percetage of Californians will have their rights manipulated. This is a moral issue, and I must stand by what I feel to be right. I will
be voting YES on Prop 8.

RWW said...

However, if Prob 8 is not passed I feel like the larger percetage of Californians will have their rights manipulated.

Preemptive manipulation in the name of self-defense is disingenuous.

This is a moral issue, and I must stand by what I feel to be right.

If you're voting for Proposition 8 because homosexuality is wrong, then just say so.

David Littlefield said...

Thank you all for your comments!


David Littlefield said...


Your new blogs looks great!


David Littlefield said...

Here is a nice article by Gary Lawrence: MERIDIAN MAGAZINE

And, I don't relate to this, but I guess younger people do. Here is a link geared towards the younger crowd:


The Contractor said...

Those who hate God do not like the following and consider God's words Hate Speach

Gen. 19: 1, 4, 24, 28
1 And there came atwo angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
• • •
4 ¶ But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
• • •
24 Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven;
• • •
28 And he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace.

20 And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;

But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.

MerlintheMad said...

Prop 22 wording is so out of step with the required secular approach to civil and legally binding contracts. The ONLY sphere of influence The Law should be involved in is the legal and civil rights side: anything remotely smacking of religious or moral legislation should be right out.

Where the "gay" lobby go too far is expecting The Law to specially recognize THEM. Any wording must be such as to include all persons. The way Prop 22 and 8 work is to leave out literally every other relationship as a legal contract (e.g. "civil union") that is not between a man and a woman: monogomous heterosexuality.

Now, we can angst over keeping the barn door barred, to prevent even further manifestations of odd human behavior, by trying to limit "marriage" to monogomous heterosexuals only: but the rising tide of civil rights movements will not rest with that.

The best approach is to word The Law such that all matters of religion and morals reside with the religious in private life. Hopefully, the so-called moral majority will cause The Law to reflect their concepts of justice and mercy, as it has always been.

Anonymous said...

This position ignores science. Joseph Smith taught that we should embrace truth. Science has revealed many truths about this topic that are being ignored by conservatives. Homosexuality appears to be a developmental disorder that involves both genetics and the role of same-sex friends and parents during upbringing. Once the brain becomes wired for homosexuality, it is usually wired for life. As a developmental condition it is NOT a choice, and not easily changed, most gays can not change even with much effort. Homosexuality is essentially a sexual disability that leads to natural discrimination in society. Therefore this is a group that deserves rights and protections. Marriage helps protect their rights.

Gay marriage is not in any way an attack on the family or an attempt to destroy society. Who would want that? Maybe a few extremists feel that the family is obsolete, but the gays seeking marriage are obviously not part of that group. That is a paranoid viewpoint that is not factual. In fact gay marriage will create a stable family structure for many people who currently have no hope of sanctioned family life. Do these people matter to any of you? Are they less important to God than you are? I doubt it.

And liberals are not anti-family, if they were none would live in the family structure. Folks, get in reality here. If a church does not want to host gay members, or marry them, they are not required to under any law, per separation of church and state.

The irony here is that there already is and will be gay marriage with or without Prop. 8. The only technicality is whether it is licensed and acknowledged by individual US states. Gay marriage, like homosexuality, is here to stay.

Homosexuality is common in nature, it was created by God. Anti-gay prejudice through the ages is not a sign of divine will. Fear tactics will not change the reality that gays are a group with rights.

And consider this, if the state does NOT acknowledge this group, then there will be no standardized view, and your children will find out about gay marriage from the street. But it will exist either way.

--A Liberal Mormon Scientist

MerlintheMad said...

I am not convinced that most cases of homosexuality are driven by environment and upbringing. I tend toward the hypothesis that actual same-sex attraction (genuine, as compared to learned, homosexuality) is genetic and more or less determined at birth, and therefore (probably) untreatable. Now, upbringing can "imprint" a great deal of behaviorial expectation and compliance: but inclination will always be toward same-sex attraction in such cases: I believe these are comparatively rare (I would hazard a guess at 1% or less of the population at large).

The greater numbers of "homosexuals" are actually bisexuals with stronger leanings (habits) toward their own gender, for a complex of reasons. These cases are treatable, with the cooperation of the individual.

I am interested in the theory, that at birth most babies are neutral biologically, i.e. bisexual: and that only the natural predominance of heterosexual family life "imprints" this set of sexual mores on them as they mature. This would fit in with what I said above: about the great majority of "homosexuals" actually being bisexuals. Even many who are convinced that they are same-sex attracted only, could, with treatment, come to realize that the choice is largely their own. Not an easy conclusion to live with in most cases, I am guessing! But that is true of any ingrained habits of thought and behavior: the brain AND body are set in their ways and not easily moved.

David Littlefield said...

Dear Liberal Mormon Scientist and Merlinthemad:

Thanks for the comments. I want to debate a few of your points, but am pressed for time right now.

I think I have made my political points already in this blog, but let me for now leave you with a summery of my spiritual views regarding homosexuality (and other such sins) which I believe can not only be healed, but instantly healed.


I will respond to your comments further as soon as possible.

Thank you,


dancetothemusicxxx said...

You people are very ignorant. There is something called the separation of church and state. Didnt you learn that in school? Religion has absolutely no business in government. These are all lies too! Religion isnt even taught in public schools and with good reason. What you are doing is discrimination. Its the same as racially discriminating against someone. The bible says a lot of things that are not true. Slavery isnt okay and this is very unamerican.

MerlintheMad said...

"You people" doesn't suit everyone posting on this board.

Prop 8 passing ensures the "battle" will continue.

The homosexual lobby isn't going to quit or go away. Neither are the less popularized "others", riding this wave of protest that the same-sex "marriage" lobby has created: polygamists, those who want to marry their consanguinous relations, etc., are all waiting to see this hit the Supreme Court level, and go down in defeat: which it most surely will do, sooner or later.

The issue, as I said, is one of equal recognition not one of rights. People in this Nation do not have a RIGHT to get married: that's the fallacious aspect of the protesting by the homosexuals and their allies.

The majority have rights too. But although they have the right to not have to endure any legalese which they find offensive, vis-a-vis, turning the word "marriage" into legally meaning something that traditional ("moral majority") marriage is not; the majority do not have the right to also make the legalese prejudicial against a minority.

The compromise that will eventually be worked out will include wording that covers EVERYONE, with no religious conotations at all (before the fact, at least). That will probably mean that "civil union" or somesuch, and not "Marriage", will be used in the finalized form.

Make no mistake: Prop 8 does not guarantee any future existence in Law, of the definition of "marriage" only one way: or even the future existence of the word "marriage" in the legalese employed in the Law.

MerlintheMad said...

That's very hate-filled speech you've posted. I have to wonder if the "Mormon Mystic" will leave it up.

By your "logic", all sex drive should be lumped together: it seems that you believe that same-sex attraction equates with bestiality, or even child molestation.

Imho, every hate-filled in-your-face protester is exactly alike.

Anonymous said...

Santa Clause has a List of who is naughty and nice,
Seems that the Gay Elves are also creating a list of Churches, Businesses and individuals that supported a "YES" vote on prop 8 , If you are on the naughty list expect a boycott, protest, harassing phone call and emails. Is it not wonder this love, tolerance and respect? Intolerance, Intimidation, Threats and Gay Terrorism.

God and his people will not take this offence or laying down or bent over. Wake up this Lion and pull the lions taill and you will wish you could hide in hell.

This ObomaNation will turn on Its Pink Panthers and rip them to shreds.

Not only will the Holy Ones the angels seek you out, but the evil will torture you and dispose of you. Your cause will be turned against you. You will be banished and utterly wasted.

Pick us a History book. Open your eyes if you have not yet been smitten blind. And stop your Gay threats. I suppose no other opinion other that Gay Science should be allowed to be posted here.

MerlintheMad said...

You should realize, that the loud, rude, bellicose element that protest in front of Mormon temples, threaten extreme legal action, etc., is a puny percentage of the homosexual demographic. Like the Fundy Christians, equally loud against sin, they do not represent the moderate, tollerant, mainstream of our society. Most religious and non religious people get along with each other just fine.

As I said, all "in-your-face", hate-filled protesters are alike and cause all the trouble.

The solution to the marriage definition (legalese) issue will not be brought about by such persons. They only inhibit solutions. Their agenda is to get attention and power and popularity, not seek real-life solutions.

MerlintheMad said...

Death is the ultimate answer to SIN,...

We all die, so we're all toast down here. It's a good thing "God" defines SIN and not man.

Forgetting that there is a purpose and plan for Life and of Life Pro life and reproducing Life....(etc.)

So reproduction is the only criteria for sexual enjoyment? What of infertile couples (c. 10% of all married couples are infertile for one reason or another, even though one or both people are not of themselves infertile)? What of marrieds who are past the child-bearing years? What of private practices between marrieds that, if you were to know, would disgust you?

The point is, SEX is supposed to be enjoyable. Like anything else, it can be abused and be an evil rather than a joy.

I don't want to know what two people do when alone. It would be best if everyone felt the same way.

Those who "march" in protest on either side are not really talking about equality: they want to control the sexuality of the whole of society.

MerlintheMad said...

Now the CA Supreme Court will overturn Prop 8. I don't mind saying, "I said it would happen."

This battle is all about a segment of society imposing their definition of sexuality on all of society. And the irony of that is that control is not what this is about!

Right now, as the Law works, any two adults can go get a lawyer and work out a contract defining their relationship to be exactly the same as marriage contracts are: and recognized throughout the Fifty States, and even the world at large. Legal rights, properly documented. It isn't easy and it isn't cheap: but any pair of adults can arrange inheritance, ownership, and even the resulting tax "benefits." Virtually no difference from having a marriage licence.

The DIFFERENCE is at the heart of the inequality: it should be just as easy for any two adults to do this as a man and a woman getting married. So it isn't about sex at all: it is about equality under the Law. The Law, as it stands, does not give fairness to everyone: it penalizes all relationships outside of a man and a woman.

Getting all worked up over the sexuality of other people is revealing an unhealthy curiosity and (implied) revulsion. Nobody putting this issue on a sexual basis is approaching it correctly.

The fact that it all started with homosexuals fighting for recognition and acceptance colors the issue into a sexual differences one, when it is really only about contractual fairness.

Civil Rights advocates are already defending the rights of homosexuals to not be discriminated against in the workplace and public places, etc. They have a right to live privately as they wish, since nothing they are doing is forcing themselves on anyone else (none of the old sexual prohibition laws are upheld anywhere, so nobody can claim that homosexuality is illegal: as modern court findings have proven every time in their favor).

Prop 8 will be overturned. There is no "battle" of sexuality differences here. The sexuality aspect will be entirely overlooked (ignored) as irrelevant, as it should be.

What groups of people, who feel the need to protest each other, will do with their angst, is totally outside the issue of contractual equality (fairness).

Those, for instance, picketting outside Mormon temples, are not protesting in favor of contractual equality: they are protesting a religion's public position against homosexuality. These are two entirely unrelated issues: even though the contractual equality issue was jump-started by the homosexual lobby.

David Littlefield said...


With all respect you are just wrong on each point.

Here in California no one needs to go “a lawyer and work out a contract defining their relationship to be exactly the same as marriage contracts…” All they have to do is go file a “Domestic Partnership” which has the same ease as a marriage license. California law clearly provides them will all the same rights as a married heterosexual couple.

The only difference between them is that thirds parties are not forced to recognize the marriages. For example religious adoption agencies won’t have to close in the state. Parents will be able to op-out have having their children indoctrinated into a homosexual lifestyle at school, etc.

Sorry, but you have bought into the homosexual lobby’s propaganda, none of which is true.


MerlintheMad said...

Here in California no one needs to go “a lawyer and work out a contract defining their relationship to be exactly the same as marriage contracts…”

I was referring to a worst-case possible scenario, not speaking to CA specifically.

Sorry, but you have bought into the homosexual lobby’s propaganda, none of which is true.

So you say I am "wrong on each point." Then you finish up saying I've "bought" their propaganda.

If I am wrong on "each point", show it.

I believe that my last post makes clear that I am not excusing either sides' virulent protesting the other side's sexuality. It is clearly arguing an issue which does not tie into contractual equality, at all. Sex is not part of this. It is about equal contracting rights.

Now we can argue that marriage is not a guaranteed right: I will argue that it is not, otherwise there would be no licencing required.

But other than the vociferous demagogry spouted by the homosexual lobbyists, this has nothing to do with marriage at all.

To resolve this issue (kill it, lay it rest, whathaveyou), it needs to be removed entirely from, "the homosexuals versus the rest of the world". The rest of the world is not to be lumped into a single category.

I dare argue, that MOST people want to be left alone to go their own way, and allow others the same privilege. That means that if "The People" come up with the legalese to allow a contract between two adults, that it apply to everyone. The legalese will not cater to nor specialize any minority, or even the majority. It will simply state the non-gendered, non-religious criteria applying to the type of contract between the State and the two adults.

It ends there: no rewriting of text books, no special pleading about equal time in schools to promote agendas, etc. If the parents disaprove of the way their children are being taught, then they act on those specific cases, be the outcome what it may.

I disagree utterly with "laws" attempting to bar the door against future potential trouble: that smacks of control.

Anonymous said...

Prepare ye Prepare ye, to behold the Lion to defend His people,and thrash among the enemies of the Lord, the Lord's people went forward into battle and the Lord's sword is now drawn.
God will take up this battle and lay waste the Evil in the land, pray grace and mercy for the Evil that they may repent, for a heavy Judgement is about to fall on this land, separate yourself from the evil and stand in Holy places that you partake not of the Plagues.

Anonymous said...

Is it not interesting that "The Law of Latches"
and licenses is at the Door?
Plural Marriage / Gay marriage?
It will be rather interesting to have 6 men wishing to enter into Marriage.
How about 6 Women?
Why not 2 Gay men and 4 Gay united as One? husbands and wive?
Why stop there, the More the Marry"er?
Consulting Adults?
It all about LOVE Peace and harmony anyway.
Who gave the Rights, the peoples rights to the Government anyway.
Plural Marriages gave th U,S, the excuse to take over control of The church property.
Now all the Gays can call into Question the arguements against Government control and License's.
It will be a rather interesting turn of events to see how all of this transpires. In the end the Mormons and the Gays might be walking Hand in Hand in defeating Government control.
WOW what then ? The courts have been put into a corner that is not easy to escape.
This one is not Going Away easy. It is like the Gays will fight the Battle to the End. So if plural marriage and open marriage wins, in the End who really Wins and Loses