Prop 8

If you haven't noticed I use this blog for photos and updates as to what our family has been doing I don't use it as a soap box of ranting, but today I feel differently. Lately our family (okay Colby, Wendy and Karley) have been going house to house getting people aware of a proposition (prop 8) that will be on the ballet in California this November. I believe that 6 other states have similar propositions on their ballets as well. I can say in over a hundred people I have talked to very few/ almost none knew about prop 8 at all. I can only wonder how on earth we are going to get it passed if no one knows that the proposition is on the ballet in the first place. You might be asking yourself why would it matter if prop 8 doesn't pass. Since same-sex marriage in California is already legal and the state doesn't seem to be falling down around us. It doesn't affect me right? WRONG!!! Let me tell you why I feel so strongly for prop 8 that I am willing to go knock on people doors to make them aware of it. Trust me when I say that at it was not easy the first few times I talked to people. I wanted to find excuses to get out of going. I tried to tell myself that I had donated my money to protectmarriage.com and that should be good enough. Then I found out that protectmarriage.com predicted that the the funds for prop 8 would be only be about half of what those against prop 8 would donate. Those against have big corperations such as Target, Mc Donald, movie stars and the California Teachers Union on their side. Those for prop 8 mainly have religious organizations. Protectmarriage knows that we will not win by plubicity alone. We don't have enough funds to out pulbicize the opposition. So I came to the conclusion that I needed to give more then just my money I needed to give my time and myself to help prop 8 pass. Reasons why I am for prop 8: 1) Prop 8 does not take away any right for same-sex couples that they didn't already have except the right to call their union a marriage. It doesn't change their benefits or next of ken etc. Infact same-sex marriage takes away the rights of heterosexual couples. In California the terms bride and Groom are no longer politially correct. I couple was denied a marriage certificate because they used the words bride and groom on the application instead of party A and Party B. When they refused to use A and B they were denied the certificate. The case is in court now. It seems that my right to be called a bride and my husband my groom is being taken away. Here is an article from a paper about the case. At a rally for prop 8 I also talked with the lawyer defending the couple in this case. Gender-neutral license violates rights, claims Roseville couple By Nathan Donato-Weinstein The Press-Tribune CourtesyRachel and Gideon Codding in their engagement photo.Gideon and Rachel Codding say they weren't looking to start a big political row when they made a snap decision at the county clerk's office: writing in "bride" and "groom" on the state's new gender-neutral marriage certificate. Party A and Party B – the new terms printed on the form after the California Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage earlier this year – just weren't quite the same, they felt, as the "bride" and "groom" that previously identified newlyweds. "I want to be called a groom and my wife wants to be called a bride," said Gideon, 29. Now, the Roseville couple's decision has become a flashpoint in the debate over same-sex marriage after the state rejected the certificate because it had been altered. On conservative blogs and Web forums, the couple's experience is serving as a rallying cry for those who feel the ruling and subsequent changes to marriage certificates amounts to a watering down of the institution of marriage. And a conservative legal group is using it to generate support for Proposition 8, the November ballot initiative that would amend the state's constitution to bar same-sex marriage. "This is a major slap in the face for traditional marriage," Brad Dacus, president of the Sacramento-based Pacific Justice Institute, said in a news release. The incident arose after Gideon printed the word "Groom" above the form's section for Party A's personal information. Above Party B's section, he wrote "Bride." Two weeks after the couple's wedding ceremony on Aug. 16, a letter from the Placer County Clerk's Office informed them the state's Office of Vital Records rejected the form because the handwritten words were considered alterations. The letter said they would have to fill out a new form to be legally recognized – something the couple has so far declined to do. "This was a state decision," said Placer County Clerk Jim McCauley. "We tried to send it through the way they had it. There's various laws on the books that say if you alter a document, it makes it invalid." State officials say they were not aware of a previous rejection because of marriage applicants writing in "bride" and "groom." Janet Huston, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Public Health, said the rule against altering documents in the state's Health and Safety Code predates the state high court's decision. "The law requires the forms not be altered," she said. "It doesn't matter whether it's bride or groom or blue and purple." The Coddings, though, say signing their names under the traditional terms is about more than just labels. "We were just really happy that we were able to get married and bless our families, but bride and groom was taken away from us and bride and groom is associated with being married," Gideon said. "It's part of the traditions we've inherited from generations past and we don't need to just hand those over without saying, 'Where are my rights?'" The conservative Pacific Justice Institute pounced on the issue to promote Proposition 8, saying in a news release heterosexual couples "will be forced to wed out of state if they wish to be officially identified as bride and groom or husband and wife" if the measure doesn't pass. But backers of same-sex marriage say the Supreme Court's ruling on May 15 was about expanding marriage rights to include everyone, not about taking them away from others. "Having more people have their committed relationships given dignity and respect really strengthens the institution of marriage, and really strengthens families," said Dale Kelly Bankhead, the statewide campaign manager for No on 8. "Nobody's marriage is diminished; to the contrary, marriage is strengthened." Rocklin resident Robin Richie, who married her partner Dru in June, agreed. "I don't think not having 'bride' or 'groom' on a marriage license is going to invalidate who you are sexually," she said, adding what verbiage is printed on a form "is seriously not what being married is all about. "Legal recognition for us, at least on a state level, validates the relationship as far as we are making a lifelong commitment together, that we are more than simply two roommates," she added. For their part, the Coddings, who met at Roseville's Abundant Life Fellowship, where Rachel's father is the senior pastor, say they wouldn't be against simply offering different forms for different unions. "I'm not calling out anyone or any one group," Gideon said. "However it gets resolved the end result is I want to be called groom and my wife called a bride and that's it." Until then, the couple is sitting tight, even though their decision means difficulties sharing health insurance and other benefits that come with marriage. "I understand what it takes to fix it, but we're not willing to do that," Gideon said. 2) Without prop 8 public school children in grades as early as kindergarten will be taught about homosexual relationships. In Massachuset a kindergartener was read a story called The Prince and the Prince about a gay prince who was looking for someone to marry. When the girl came home and told her parents about the story the parents were outgraged and went to the school board and finally to the courts. The ruling in the courts was that marriages of samesex couples was recognized by the state therefore when you enroll your child in a public school in the state you forgo your right to keep you child out of discussions and lessons about homosexual relations. How can my right to decide what and how my child learns about moral issues be taken away from me yet in Mass. it already has. Many say that if this happens here they would just take their children out of public schools and home school them. Think about this. Only a few months ago did the California's supreme court overruled the lower courts decision that mothers' who did not have a teaching credential were unqualified to teach there own children. The lawyer on behalf of the homeschoolers was the same laywer definding the Gideon's in the case above. Just taking them out of school is not going to keep them for learning about homosexual relations from all those children who are being taught about them at an age were they are to young to fully understand and are very impressionable. 3) Reguardless of there religious believes all clergymen would be required to marry same-sex couples in their religious buildings. My brother and sister-n-law told me that their bishop mentioned that there would no longer be weddings or receptions in all our California Church buildings if prop 8 doesn't pass. How is it that we will no longer be allowed to choose what we believe and how we practice that belief. Why does religion have to be taken our of my children's weddings and receptions. How can these rights be taken away from us and yet some are trying. I could go on all day about the other things that groups with or without prop 8 help are going to or already have proposed. Things like a day during the month of May when school children learn about Harvey Milk a California man who was killed in the 1970's becasue of his believes of free lovin. About how a Catholic adoption agency in Mass. was closed down when they refused to allow a gay couple to adapt a baby. How the same lawyer in the cases already mentioned know that charges will be brought against several preachers in different churches because there influence on their congragations should be considered a hate crime and not a right of free speech. My challenge now to you is to start talking. Talk to your neighbors friends and family. Let them know what is going on in the world around them. For all those who live outside California this challenge applies to you to. You don't know if your friends and neighbors have friends and family in one of the states that are involved with this issue. The more that we are talking and getting people aware the better chance that we will overcome the challenge that we face.