Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsSaturday, July 25, 2009
Homo R-71: Who Signed?
Posted by Dan Savage on Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 6:11 PM
The Seattle Times story about the organizers of R-71 turning in their petitions today ("Will Foes Hold Up Gay Benefits?") ends on an ominous note: the peace of mind of thousands of residents of Washington state is under threat. Oh, not the peace of mind of gay and lesbian residents of Washington state, the people whose civil rights are under assault—please—but the peace of mind of the assholes who signed the petitions to strip their fellow citizens of their civil rights.
A political group called WhoSigned.Org has already said it will publish online the names of people who signed petitions for the referendum. It is patterned after campaigns in other states where gay-rights ballot measures have been proposed.Domestic-partnership opponents could have their names and other information published by the Web site only after R-71 petitions are verified by the secretary of state's office. At that point, the signed petitions are public records.
Plans to make the information on these public records available to the public have been described as an effort to intimidate people into thinking twice about signing R-71. But it seems to me that there's a perfectly legitimate reason—even goo-goo—for publicize the names of folks who signed R-71: as Dom and others have documented, R-71 signature gatherers have been actively misleading people, a.k.a. as "lying" or "bearing false witness." Signature gatherers have gone so far as to tell people that R-71 was a pro-gay initiative and that by signing they were actually showing their support for gay rights.
Of course it's perfectly legal for R-71 signature gatherers to lie and mislead voters and bear false witness—just like it's perfectly legal for WhoSigned.Org to post the names of those who signed to a website.
How many registered voters were duped into signing R-71 by lying signature gatherers? How many were fooled by R-71's misleading ballot title? How many were swayed by false claims that the domestic partnership law required the state to teach gay sex to school children? There's only one way to find out: contact the folks who signed R-71 and ask them. I, for one, am curious to know roughly how many signatures were obtained fraudulently. It's too big a job for any one reporter, though, or even one news operation. So put the names out there and let the mob sourcing begin.
2
The sign in the linked post discusses teaching school children that gay sex and the gay lifestyle is normal.
Does Slog oppose that?
Does Slog oppose that?
6
So some nosy faggot is going to call and the person will admit; "yeah, I was an idiot, I didn't know what the hell I was signing..."
7
The "gay lifestyle" should be taught the exact same way the "straight lifestyle" is taught: the existence of gay people should be acknowledged just as the existence of straight people is acknowledged. If you regard "acknowledging the existence of" to be "teaching" then, yes, you could say that the "gay lifestyle" should be "taught."
As for gay sex, it should also be "taught"—at an age-appropriate time and in age-appropriate setting. Gay kids endure plenty of the "teaching straight sex to school children," for crying out loud. Some kids are gay and they need information about sex too, and they need to know how to protect themselves too.
To paraphrase Dick Cheney: comprehensive sex ed means comprehensive sex ed for everybody.
As for gay sex, it should also be "taught"—at an age-appropriate time and in age-appropriate setting. Gay kids endure plenty of the "teaching straight sex to school children," for crying out loud. Some kids are gay and they need information about sex too, and they need to know how to protect themselves too.
To paraphrase Dick Cheney: comprehensive sex ed means comprehensive sex ed for everybody.
8
7
So even though it is not part of the domestic partnership law you think the state should be required to teach gay sex to school children?
So even though it is not part of the domestic partnership law you think the state should be required to teach gay sex to school children?
9
"How many were swayed by false claims that the domestic partnership law required the state to teach gay sex to school children?"
Maybe it was an honest mistake.
It is so hard not to get the various aspects of the Homosexual Agenda confused sometimes...
Maybe it was an honest mistake.
It is so hard not to get the various aspects of the Homosexual Agenda confused sometimes...
10
I believe in comprehensive sex ed—age-appropriate comprehensive sex ed.
And, like I already said, comprehensive sex ed means comprehensive sex ed for everybody.
And, like I already said, comprehensive sex ed means comprehensive sex ed for everybody.
12
This may be a good way to "ominously threaten the peace of mind of thousands of residents of Washington state who signed the R71 petition" but it probably won't help defeat the measure at the ballot and may end up being an expensive self-indulgence.
13
Why is the thread off topic, and about comprehensive sex education. Does the state of Washington not already have complete comprehensive sex education for everybody? I'm finding it hard to believe that Washington has less comprehensive sex education than Oregon. Here we see the curriculum in advance, and also have the option to remove our children if we choose. Is Washington that different?
14
Without wading into the whole gay rights thing (which is a very valid thing, make no mistake) I would like to harken back to the early years of the initiative process: No, I wasn't there, but yes, I do know something about it.
Originally, before the Christian Industrial Complex and Corporate Shills figured out how to work it, the initiative process was all about open government and democracy - something that had been sidetracked in the regular legislative process by horrible pseudo-people like the Southern Pacific Railroad (which is long dead and buried)
So, in the original spirit of this now corrupt and stupid initiative process, why not reveal who the signers were, regardless of the cause?
Conservatives love to blather on about "personal responsibility". What could be more personally responsible than owning up to your opinion on an initiative?
Originally, before the Christian Industrial Complex and Corporate Shills figured out how to work it, the initiative process was all about open government and democracy - something that had been sidetracked in the regular legislative process by horrible pseudo-people like the Southern Pacific Railroad (which is long dead and buried)
So, in the original spirit of this now corrupt and stupid initiative process, why not reveal who the signers were, regardless of the cause?
Conservatives love to blather on about "personal responsibility". What could be more personally responsible than owning up to your opinion on an initiative?
15
13
Perhaps.
But in Oregon do they teach:
"mutual masturbation, oral sex, anal sex, outercourse, sex toys your partner can insert into you, sex toys you can insert your partner into, erotic role-play that doesn't culminate in vaginal intercourse, GAY SEX— lots of "foolproof" ways for teenagers to be sexual, to be fully intimate, without risking an unplanned pregnancy."?
Do they teach that: "It's possible for a teenager to have fulfilling and low-risk sex, and the intimacy and closeness and connection that comes along with it, without risking the "24-hour job and... huge responsibility" that having a baby entails."
Well.
Do they?
Perhaps.
But in Oregon do they teach:
"mutual masturbation, oral sex, anal sex, outercourse, sex toys your partner can insert into you, sex toys you can insert your partner into, erotic role-play that doesn't culminate in vaginal intercourse, GAY SEX— lots of "foolproof" ways for teenagers to be sexual, to be fully intimate, without risking an unplanned pregnancy."?
Do they teach that: "It's possible for a teenager to have fulfilling and low-risk sex, and the intimacy and closeness and connection that comes along with it, without risking the "24-hour job and... huge responsibility" that having a baby entails."
Well.
Do they?
16
Also in Oregon do they teach children how to have "oral sex, anal sex, GAY SEX-" without giving each other AIDS?
Because the 2% of America that is homosexual men seem not to know how and account for 53% of new AIDS cases.
Because the 2% of America that is homosexual men seem not to know how and account for 53% of new AIDS cases.
17
15
If there are lots of "foolproof" ways for people to be sexual, to be fully intimate, without risking an unplanned pregnancy why are there 800,000 abortions in America each year?
Are there 1,600,000 careless stupid superfools out there?
If there are lots of "foolproof" ways for people to be sexual, to be fully intimate, without risking an unplanned pregnancy why are there 800,000 abortions in America each year?
Are there 1,600,000 careless stupid superfools out there?
18
Dan brings up an excellent point - publicizing the names will allow those who signed due to misinformation about the true nature of R-17 to have a chance to refute their signing - and no doubt there will be some publicity around those who feel they were duped. Also, it will be a good chance to have the public help vet the validity of the signatures.
The whole "should they be made public" argument is a red herring. The petitions are a matter of public record - end of story.
The whole "should they be made public" argument is a red herring. The petitions are a matter of public record - end of story.
19
15:
Yes, it starts at 8th grade. Sex is divided into catagories: penetrative (oral, anal, and vaginal), masturbatory, birth control, disease prevention, emotional impact of puberty, abstinence, etc. I've only seen the 8th grade curriculum, because my child was in 8th grade (all of the above was covered, in an age appropriate manner). LIke I said, we see the curriculum before hand, so we can be prepared to talk with our children. We can remove our children if we so wish.
Can we stop hijacking the thread now.
Yes, it starts at 8th grade. Sex is divided into catagories: penetrative (oral, anal, and vaginal), masturbatory, birth control, disease prevention, emotional impact of puberty, abstinence, etc. I've only seen the 8th grade curriculum, because my child was in 8th grade (all of the above was covered, in an age appropriate manner). LIke I said, we see the curriculum before hand, so we can be prepared to talk with our children. We can remove our children if we so wish.
Can we stop hijacking the thread now.
20
18
By all means let's publicize supporters of gay marriage and domestic partnership who signed by mistake as the ignorant fools they are.
By all means let's publicize supporters of gay marriage and domestic partnership who signed by mistake as the ignorant fools they are.
22
The signatures will only be made public if R71 makes it onto the ballot. Is WhoSigned.Org already conceding defeat?
23
"Plans to make the information on these public records available to the public has (sic) been described as an effort to intimidate people into thinking twice about signing R-71."
By whom?
By whom?
24
18
"Also, it will be a good chance to have the public help vet the validity of the signatures."
not really.
the petition will already be certified before the names are released.
"Also, it will be a good chance to have the public help vet the validity of the signatures."
not really.
the petition will already be certified before the names are released.
25
What's going on here is an old standard tactic of the right-wing when it comes to topics where the answers appropriate for a egalitarian, pluralistic society are more complicated than can be comprehended by the common 100 IQ. Asking should gay sex be taught to schoolchildren? is inherently an oversimplification, since the term gay sex implies explicitness inappropriate to an academic environment, let alone one that includes minors. Discussion of gay sex has its place in many academic topics, health and human sexuality being only two of them. Gay sex will, for example, be part of history covering the expansion of civil rights, though in such a context the sex would be less explicit than it would in, say, listing sexual activities and the respective risks for communicating certain diseases.
This device of oversimplification can be applied to many controversies of this form. When abortion access obstructionists ask Should mothers be allowed to murder their babies? The question inherently implies healthy mothers and babies already out of the womb even though the circumstances to which the questioner is actually referring are generally otherwise, i.e. fetal and involving anomalies incompatible with life.
Should we teach the proper use of firearms to schoolchildren implies field training with targets, and actual handling experience, though usually it involves instructions of what to do when an unsecured firearm is discovered (i.e. don't touch it; get an adult).
Taken to the extreme Should we teach violence to our children implies that we're teaching them to hit each other, or that violence is acceptable. In reality, we teach about violence on a regular basis, say, when we discuss the American Revolution, the World Wars, or about three quarters of the history of western civilization. Interestingly, many primary schools nowadays frequently omit the detail that wars involve people killing other people, in gory ways and large numbers.
Judith Levine, notes in her book Harmful to Minors the difference between innocence and ignorance. Both, in reference to a child refer to their unlearned state, but in the latter case, the information in question is something we want them to know. In the former, it's something we don't want them to know. The fact of the matter is, as many fairy tales and nursery rhymes imply, the world is a dangerous place, and children should be educated to this truth, if we want them to survive.
More...
This device of oversimplification can be applied to many controversies of this form. When abortion access obstructionists ask Should mothers be allowed to murder their babies? The question inherently implies healthy mothers and babies already out of the womb even though the circumstances to which the questioner is actually referring are generally otherwise, i.e. fetal and involving anomalies incompatible with life.
Should we teach the proper use of firearms to schoolchildren implies field training with targets, and actual handling experience, though usually it involves instructions of what to do when an unsecured firearm is discovered (i.e. don't touch it; get an adult).
Taken to the extreme Should we teach violence to our children implies that we're teaching them to hit each other, or that violence is acceptable. In reality, we teach about violence on a regular basis, say, when we discuss the American Revolution, the World Wars, or about three quarters of the history of western civilization. Interestingly, many primary schools nowadays frequently omit the detail that wars involve people killing other people, in gory ways and large numbers.
Judith Levine, notes in her book Harmful to Minors the difference between innocence and ignorance. Both, in reference to a child refer to their unlearned state, but in the latter case, the information in question is something we want them to know. In the former, it's something we don't want them to know. The fact of the matter is, as many fairy tales and nursery rhymes imply, the world is a dangerous place, and children should be educated to this truth, if we want them to survive.
26
It's getting pretty gross to be a straight guy walking around Seattle...every time it seems like some gay guy walks up behind me so that my hand hits his crotch.
Can you say "YUK"! Why is it that gays have such a different standard of perversion than others? Why aren't he police arresting all these gay perverts at sports games and other public places. Why can't gays behave?!?!
Can you say "YUK"! Why is it that gays have such a different standard of perversion than others? Why aren't he police arresting all these gay perverts at sports games and other public places. Why can't gays behave?!?!
28
17
There are about 7,000,000 "careless stupid superfools" in California.
26
Maybe teh gayz down here in Hillcrest have much better manners than those in Seattle, but that never seems to happen to me- even at the gym.
There are about 7,000,000 "careless stupid superfools" in California.
26
Maybe teh gayz down here in Hillcrest have much better manners than those in Seattle, but that never seems to happen to me- even at the gym.
29
I hope someone corresponds signatures on this list to business owners in the state, so I know who not to patronize.
30
I sign a lot of petitions, maybe a third of the ones I'm asked to sign (and I'm asked to sign a LOT of petitions.) I've never been embarrassed about my signature on a petition, I sign petitions because I favor the law. (Or I think the person is a legitimate candidate who should have a chance to run. I'll sign candidate petitions without favoring the candidate.)
So, unless people have been tricked into signing, or unless there's a threat of violence against people who sign (both of which ought to be illegal if they aren't) I can't see how it should be a big deal to publish the names.
So, unless people have been tricked into signing, or unless there's a threat of violence against people who sign (both of which ought to be illegal if they aren't) I can't see how it should be a big deal to publish the names.
31
29
Interesting point.
And it can cut both ways.
If our society divides itself into two economic blocs, based on attitudes toward homosexuality, it will be a terrible step backwards.
If homosexuals boycott every business that's attitude toward homosexuality doesn't please them how long before the other side responds in kind?
And when businesses, especially small ones that employ most people in this country, learn that having even one gay employee is going to cost them two-thirds of their customers in small town America how will that affect their hiring practices?
How will that affect the decision of high school kids to identify as gay?
Identifying donors to pro Prop8, harassing them, getting them fired and boycotting their businesses was recognized by most Californians as unfair and contributed to the surprise victory of Prop8.
Dan hopes to bring the same failed tactic to the struggle over R71.
Economic War to the Death seems a poor tactic for the side that makes up 2% of the population...
Interesting point.
And it can cut both ways.
If our society divides itself into two economic blocs, based on attitudes toward homosexuality, it will be a terrible step backwards.
If homosexuals boycott every business that's attitude toward homosexuality doesn't please them how long before the other side responds in kind?
And when businesses, especially small ones that employ most people in this country, learn that having even one gay employee is going to cost them two-thirds of their customers in small town America how will that affect their hiring practices?
How will that affect the decision of high school kids to identify as gay?
Identifying donors to pro Prop8, harassing them, getting them fired and boycotting their businesses was recognized by most Californians as unfair and contributed to the surprise victory of Prop8.
Dan hopes to bring the same failed tactic to the struggle over R71.
Economic War to the Death seems a poor tactic for the side that makes up 2% of the population...
32
Dan, calling those who disagree with you 'assholes' is not very mature or civil.
It could start costing you those coveted gigs on CNN as America's Gay Spokesmodel...
It could start costing you those coveted gigs on CNN as America's Gay Spokesmodel...
33
#32 - Dan's response might not be mature, but it is entirely valid. If he's prepared to go on national television and call people who actively work to deny their fellow citizens rights 'assholes' than he can be my gay spokesman.
Those of you trying to trivialize the argument back to being about 'teaching kids about gay sex' are assholes. You don't want to have your vote tracked back to you, because you're embarrassed about your bigotry, yet you'll go out of your way to reconfigure an argument about legal protection to a sex act.
I vote that we deny marriage rights to straight people that have ever had a finger in their butt, or swallowed cum, or had sex outdoors. All those things make people feel 'icky' and should never be taught to 'the children'.
I'm forming a new organization - 'American's for missionary in the dark'.
Those of you trying to trivialize the argument back to being about 'teaching kids about gay sex' are assholes. You don't want to have your vote tracked back to you, because you're embarrassed about your bigotry, yet you'll go out of your way to reconfigure an argument about legal protection to a sex act.
I vote that we deny marriage rights to straight people that have ever had a finger in their butt, or swallowed cum, or had sex outdoors. All those things make people feel 'icky' and should never be taught to 'the children'.
I'm forming a new organization - 'American's for missionary in the dark'.
34
Gays don't do anything in bed that plenty of, even most straight people do, so I'm guessing the real point of this movement is to deny that gay people are allowed to exist?
38
So, which side of this argument is the troll that keeps posting, on? The side of equality? The side against equality? Or the opposite of whichever side Dan is on?
39
WhoSigned.org committed to making whatever the Secretary of State's office makes public record for Referendum 71 accessible to the public online.
Our understanding had been that petitions became public record when they were verified, but in discussions with the Elections Division staff we learned that petitions become public record when they are submitted. Now that the Referendum 71 petitioners have submitted the signatures to the Secretary of State's office they are part of the public record whether they have enough valid signatures or not.
The only circumstance where we wouldn't be making the gathered signatures accessible was if the Referendum 71 petition hadn't become part of the public record.
In a recent report card Washington State got an "F" for it's ballot initiative integrity from the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center - largely around failures to register and regulate Paid Signature gatherers. http://www.ballot.org/pages/initiative_r…
Our understanding had been that petitions became public record when they were verified, but in discussions with the Elections Division staff we learned that petitions become public record when they are submitted. Now that the Referendum 71 petitioners have submitted the signatures to the Secretary of State's office they are part of the public record whether they have enough valid signatures or not.
The only circumstance where we wouldn't be making the gathered signatures accessible was if the Referendum 71 petition hadn't become part of the public record.
In a recent report card Washington State got an "F" for it's ballot initiative integrity from the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center - largely around failures to register and regulate Paid Signature gatherers. http://www.ballot.org/pages/initiative_r…
40
Oh gross, Dan. You wrote "...actively misleading people, a.k.a. as "lying"..."
"Also known as as"?
You're going to burn in grammar hell.
"Also known as as"?
You're going to burn in grammar hell.
42
Let me see ... LYING, CHEATING, and STEALING - are you sure these people are Christians, cause that doesn't sound like any of the teachings of Christ that I know ...
43
If homosexuals boycott every business that's attitude toward homosexuality doesn't please them how long before the other side responds in kind?
Well the "other side" has boycotted corporations like Disney in the past but those actions just don't really hold up anymore like they sort of did over a decade ago. By “boycotting” it is simply publishing the publically available name of a business owner that provided financial support or a signature that helped get an anti-gay initiative or referendum on the ballot. Many gays and lesbians will probably choose not to patronize that business like in the case of the El Coyote Restaurant in California where the part owner said the Mormon Church made her donate $100 towards Prop 8 which she defended and refused to recant.
Lies are not being spread. The owners did that they did and they are typically not refuting that. And, in turn, Individuals are choosing not to patronize a business when the owner uses the excuse “my church made me do it” in order to help get discriminatory laws enacted. I will not be forced to visit a business with an anti-gay owner since their actions are really about hate and treating me like I am subhuman.
44
This is so strange. Anyway, very informative post. Good job. Best regards from teaching sex education.
45
kc curay Considering of the first two essays I read on sexualhealthcare.net one was an anti-abortion sermon (saying abortion is wrong in all cases, yet not providing alternative solutions to the problems abortion solves) and the other gave inaccurate data regarding the withdrawal method of contraception, it's hard not to question the true intent of the site.
It should be interesting to see if my comments there awaiting moderation are censored since they're rather critical of the aforementioned entries.
It should be interesting to see if my comments there awaiting moderation are censored since they're rather critical of the aforementioned entries.
46
Apparently, my comments regarding the anti-abortion bit did not pass moderation. It must have been all my profanity and aggressive slander.
47
I agree with anonymous troll.
Specifics about public-school educational curricula clearly has something to do R-71, and we need this initiative to stop the government takeover of healthcare to kill grandmas and force kindergartners to have gay sex and make Christians go into labor camps and 9/11 and Obama's secret Muslim plot and prove that we love marriage and babies and Jesus and the Bible.
Specifics about public-school educational curricula clearly has something to do R-71, and we need this initiative to stop the government takeover of healthcare to kill grandmas and force kindergartners to have gay sex and make Christians go into labor camps and 9/11 and Obama's secret Muslim plot and prove that we love marriage and babies and Jesus and the Bible.
48
I hope someone corresponds signatures on this list to business owners in the state, so I know who not to patronize.
Sildenafil Citrate
Sildenafil Citrate
49
Domestic Partnership Organizations call for boycott of Mormon-owned
companies because of LDS Church opposition to same-sex marriage referendum
in Washington State
AgriNorthwest to be targeted first
Seattle, Washington - Several domestic partnership and gay rights
organizations are kicking off a boycott campaign of major Mormon/LDS owned
companies in Washington State as a result of behind-the-scenes opposition
of
Referendum 71 by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS).
The organizations include the GLBT Coalition for Same Sex Marriages, Gay
Equality Action Alliance, Domestic Partnership Education Council, Gay
Marriage Freedom Federation, Coalition for Fair Domestic Partnership Laws,
Washington Citizens Against Civil Union Discrimination, Marriage Equality
Washington, and the Alliance for Gay Wedding Fairness.
In particular, the domestic partnership advocacy groups are upset about a
Mormon backed television advertisement that has been airing in Washington
State opposing Ref. 71 (http://protectmarriagewa.com/index.php/v…).
Referendum 71 is a ballot referendum that asks Washington State voters to
re-confirm the expansion of domestic partnership rights and obligations in
Washington's domestic partnership legislation (SB 5688), which was signed
by
Governor Christine Gregoire on May 18, 2009.
In the above referenced TV advertisement opposing Ref. 71, the
introductory picture of Adam and Eve is a painting by Lowell Bruce
Bennett, and is the intellectual property of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints. The second painting in the video, the Sermon on the
Mount, was painted by Carl Heinrich Bloch, which the LDS Church frequently
uses in their publications. Because the LDS/Mormon Church is vociferous
about
protecting its intellectual property, the photos in the advertisement have
been used by permission of the LDS Church.
As a result of LDS Church opposition to Ref. 71, the above mentioned
domestic partnership rights organizations announced that AgriNorthwest, a
large LDS owned farming and food production company headquartered in
Kennewick, Washington, is the first target on their boycott list.
"We decided to target 10 large LDS/Mormon church owned companies in
Washington State. As AgriNorthwest was the first one on our alphabetical
list, we are targeting them first. More importantly, AgriNorthwest sells
its potatoes, corn, apples and other crops to large restaurant and retail
chains, so we feel we can get a lot of widespread support for the
boycott," stated Mike Davis of the GLBT Coalition for Same Sex Marriages.
"Because companies such as McDonalds, Burger King, Wal-Mart, Safeway,
Kroger, Wendy's, Arby's, ConAgra Foods, Sysco, etc. buy products from
AgriNorthwest, we will demand that these companies quit doing business
with
AgriNorthwest." explained David Wilson of the Gay Equality Action
Alliance.
AgriNorthwest has had some past problems with workplace discrimination
issues. For example, in "Nielson v. AgriNorthwest", the company would not
allow a male employee who was dating a non-Mormon to attend the company
picnic because the employee and his girlfriend were not married.
AgriNorthwest reprimanded the employee for unacceptable performance and
then demoted the employee shortly thereafter after he became engaged to
the girlfriend. AgriNorthwest also gave the employee another written
warning for poor performance shortly after marrying his girlfriend.
Because of the ongoing retaliation and discrimination by AgriNorthwest,
the employee quit. The Court of Appeals rules ruled in "Nielson v.
AgriNorthwest", that AgriNorthwest's motive for taking action against
the employee was
discriminatory.
For more information about the boycott against LDS owned companies such as
AgriNorthwest, please call 1-888-843-4564.
################
Please do not reply to this email. Mail sent to this address cannot be
answered.
This report is published by Domestic Partnership News Network, San
Francisco, CA 94101
Copyright 2009 Domestic Partnership News. All Rights Reserved. Domestic
Partnership News and all other marks contained herein are trademarks of
Domestic Partnership News Intellectual Property and/or Domestic
Partnership News affiliated companies.
More...
companies because of LDS Church opposition to same-sex marriage referendum
in Washington State
AgriNorthwest to be targeted first
Seattle, Washington - Several domestic partnership and gay rights
organizations are kicking off a boycott campaign of major Mormon/LDS owned
companies in Washington State as a result of behind-the-scenes opposition
of
Referendum 71 by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS).
The organizations include the GLBT Coalition for Same Sex Marriages, Gay
Equality Action Alliance, Domestic Partnership Education Council, Gay
Marriage Freedom Federation, Coalition for Fair Domestic Partnership Laws,
Washington Citizens Against Civil Union Discrimination, Marriage Equality
Washington, and the Alliance for Gay Wedding Fairness.
In particular, the domestic partnership advocacy groups are upset about a
Mormon backed television advertisement that has been airing in Washington
State opposing Ref. 71 (http://protectmarriagewa.com/index.php/v…).
Referendum 71 is a ballot referendum that asks Washington State voters to
re-confirm the expansion of domestic partnership rights and obligations in
Washington's domestic partnership legislation (SB 5688), which was signed
by
Governor Christine Gregoire on May 18, 2009.
In the above referenced TV advertisement opposing Ref. 71, the
introductory picture of Adam and Eve is a painting by Lowell Bruce
Bennett, and is the intellectual property of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints. The second painting in the video, the Sermon on the
Mount, was painted by Carl Heinrich Bloch, which the LDS Church frequently
uses in their publications. Because the LDS/Mormon Church is vociferous
about
protecting its intellectual property, the photos in the advertisement have
been used by permission of the LDS Church.
As a result of LDS Church opposition to Ref. 71, the above mentioned
domestic partnership rights organizations announced that AgriNorthwest, a
large LDS owned farming and food production company headquartered in
Kennewick, Washington, is the first target on their boycott list.
"We decided to target 10 large LDS/Mormon church owned companies in
Washington State. As AgriNorthwest was the first one on our alphabetical
list, we are targeting them first. More importantly, AgriNorthwest sells
its potatoes, corn, apples and other crops to large restaurant and retail
chains, so we feel we can get a lot of widespread support for the
boycott," stated Mike Davis of the GLBT Coalition for Same Sex Marriages.
"Because companies such as McDonalds, Burger King, Wal-Mart, Safeway,
Kroger, Wendy's, Arby's, ConAgra Foods, Sysco, etc. buy products from
AgriNorthwest, we will demand that these companies quit doing business
with
AgriNorthwest." explained David Wilson of the Gay Equality Action
Alliance.
AgriNorthwest has had some past problems with workplace discrimination
issues. For example, in "Nielson v. AgriNorthwest", the company would not
allow a male employee who was dating a non-Mormon to attend the company
picnic because the employee and his girlfriend were not married.
AgriNorthwest reprimanded the employee for unacceptable performance and
then demoted the employee shortly thereafter after he became engaged to
the girlfriend. AgriNorthwest also gave the employee another written
warning for poor performance shortly after marrying his girlfriend.
Because of the ongoing retaliation and discrimination by AgriNorthwest,
the employee quit. The Court of Appeals rules ruled in "Nielson v.
AgriNorthwest", that AgriNorthwest's motive for taking action against
the employee was
discriminatory.
For more information about the boycott against LDS owned companies such as
AgriNorthwest, please call 1-888-843-4564.
################
Please do not reply to this email. Mail sent to this address cannot be
answered.
This report is published by Domestic Partnership News Network, San
Francisco, CA 94101
Copyright 2009 Domestic Partnership News. All Rights Reserved. Domestic
Partnership News and all other marks contained herein are trademarks of
Domestic Partnership News Intellectual Property and/or Domestic
Partnership News affiliated companies.
50
Does anyone remember when Congress wanted to publish the names of NAACP members because they were suspected of collaborating with communists? Or when Southern whites wanted to publish the names of black voters? Or when black panthers stood outside voting presincts with guns and clubs?
Yes, you have a right to publish them. But that doesn't make it right.
Yes, you have a right to publish them. But that doesn't make it right.
51
Marriage is still marriage no matter how far you stick your head in the ground.
Telling the truth in love, one man one woman for life; true, authentic, honest, real.
Truth doesn't change by rewritting our laws or lieing to ourselves. Love you.
Sincerely, Just one man.
Telling the truth in love, one man one woman for life; true, authentic, honest, real.
Truth doesn't change by rewritting our laws or lieing to ourselves. Love you.
Sincerely, Just one man.
53
Well, I've found quite interesting statistics that made me think that same-sex legalization is now just a matter of time. Here's the list of civil unions (or domestic partnerships) and same sex marriage around the world...
Same-sex marriage:
Belgium
Canada
Netherlands
Norway
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
United States (CT, IA, ME*, MA, NH*, VT)
Recognized, but not performed:
Aruba (Dutch only)
Israel
Netherlands Antilles (Dutch only)
United States (DC, NY)
Civil unions and registered partnerships:
Andorra
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greenland
Hungary
Iceland
Luxembourg
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Slovenia
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Wallis and Futuna
Performed in some regions:
Argentina (C, RC, RN, VCP)
Australia (ACT, TAS, VIC)
Mexico (COA, DF)
United States (CA, CO, DC, HI, NJ, NV*, OR, WA, WI)
Venezuela (ME)
Recognized, but not performed
Isle of Man (UK only)
Unregistered co-habitation:
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Brazil
Colombia
Croatia
Israel
Portugal
In some regions:
United States (MD)
Illegal:
Iran
Iraq
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Jordan
Kuwait
Afghanistan
Pakistan
Same-sex marriage:
Belgium
Canada
Netherlands
Norway
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
United States (CT, IA, ME*, MA, NH*, VT)
Recognized, but not performed:
Aruba (Dutch only)
Israel
Netherlands Antilles (Dutch only)
United States (DC, NY)
Civil unions and registered partnerships:
Andorra
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greenland
Hungary
Iceland
Luxembourg
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Slovenia
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Wallis and Futuna
Performed in some regions:
Argentina (C, RC, RN, VCP)
Australia (ACT, TAS, VIC)
Mexico (COA, DF)
United States (CA, CO, DC, HI, NJ, NV*, OR, WA, WI)
Venezuela (ME)
Recognized, but not performed
Isle of Man (UK only)
Unregistered co-habitation:
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Brazil
Colombia
Croatia
Israel
Portugal
In some regions:
United States (MD)
Illegal:
Iran
Iraq
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Jordan
Kuwait
Afghanistan
Pakistan
55
so 54 you wont get any, no need to shout it. I agree perverts should not have the right to move into nice neighborhoods and stare at kids from afar but is this not about the lgbt community? what do perverts have to do with anything. Just because a person is from that community or even supports them does not mean the are perverts just for being gay. Like you 54 you are a hetero I am assuming you are a pervert no doubt (i mean you just yelled it out) so just because you are a pervert you are gay now??? hmmm you need to check your facts.
PRIDE 2010!! woohoo lets bring about change like all of the past minority groups have, let us make our history heard and taught ignorant, self hating, moronic humans must be educated that homosexuality is not some new trend it exist before their Jesus Christ and will exist after the human race is gone due to the stupidity of hateful heterosexuals.
PRIDE 2010!! woohoo lets bring about change like all of the past minority groups have, let us make our history heard and taught ignorant, self hating, moronic humans must be educated that homosexuality is not some new trend it exist before their Jesus Christ and will exist after the human race is gone due to the stupidity of hateful heterosexuals.
56
The R-71 petition records released 11-17-11 are being posted online at
http://www.scribd.com/HaxoAnglemark
http://www.scribd.com/HaxoAnglemark
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
State Legislator Testifies That His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Came to Him from a Commercial for Jack in the Box by Christopher Frizzelle
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
"I don't know if I want to be here [if gay marriage passes]," by Republican State Senator Jay Rodne of North Bend by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (56) RSS