Straw poll on gay marriage
- Thread starter Trooper_IHB
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
mediaboyz_IHB
New member
I have a real problem with this ===> First Graders Taken To San Francisco City Hall For Gay Wedding
October 11, 2008
Contact: Chip White/Sonja Eddings Brown, 916-215-4392
SAN FRANCISCO, October 11 ? In the same week that the No on 8 campaign launched an ad that labeled as ?lies? claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away from their studies for the same-sex wedding. According to the Yes on 8 campaign, the public school field trip demonstrates that the California Supreme Court's decision to legalize same-sex marriage has real consequences.
"Taking children out of school for a same-sex wedding is not customary education. This is promoting same-sex marriage and indoctrinating young kids," said Yes on 8?ProtectMarriage.com Campaign Co-Manager Frank Schubert. "I doubt the school has ever taken kids on a field trip to a traditional wedding," Schubert said.
When asked by the Yes on 8 campaign, The San Francisco Chronicle reporter said she did not know if the school had ever sponsored a field trip for students to a traditional wedding. Telling the Chronicle that the field trip was "a teachable moment," the school's principal believes it is perfectly appropriate for first graders to attend a same-sex wedding. Officials in other school districts disagree.
"Prop. 8 protects our children from being taught in public schools that 'same-sex marriage' is the same as traditional marriage," said Santa Ana Unified School District board member Rosemarie "Rosie" Avila. "We should not accept a court decision that results in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn't be forced on us against our will," Avila added.
The lesbian teacher's wedding was officiated by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Newsom is featured in a Yes on 8 television ad, released last week, in which he arrogantly declares of same-sex marriage: "The door's wide open now. It's gonna happen, whether you like it or not."
The Yes on 8 campaign's ads explain that if the voters do not overturn the California Supreme Court's same-sex marriage ruling, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage. ?It's totally unreasonable that a first grade field trip would be to a same-sex wedding," said Chip White, Press Secretary for Yes on 8. "This is overt indoctrination of children who are too young to understand it.? The field trip underscores the Yes on 8 campaign?s message that unless Prop. 8 passes, children will be taught about same-sex marriage in public schools. ?Not only can it happen, it has already happened,? White said.
###
Media contacts:
Northern & Central California (Sacramento Press Office): Chip White, 916-215-4392
Los Angeles & Southern California: Sonja Eddings Brown, 818-993-4508
http://tinyurl.com/49ec7n
October 11, 2008
Contact: Chip White/Sonja Eddings Brown, 916-215-4392
SAN FRANCISCO, October 11 ? In the same week that the No on 8 campaign launched an ad that labeled as ?lies? claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away from their studies for the same-sex wedding. According to the Yes on 8 campaign, the public school field trip demonstrates that the California Supreme Court's decision to legalize same-sex marriage has real consequences.
"Taking children out of school for a same-sex wedding is not customary education. This is promoting same-sex marriage and indoctrinating young kids," said Yes on 8?ProtectMarriage.com Campaign Co-Manager Frank Schubert. "I doubt the school has ever taken kids on a field trip to a traditional wedding," Schubert said.
When asked by the Yes on 8 campaign, The San Francisco Chronicle reporter said she did not know if the school had ever sponsored a field trip for students to a traditional wedding. Telling the Chronicle that the field trip was "a teachable moment," the school's principal believes it is perfectly appropriate for first graders to attend a same-sex wedding. Officials in other school districts disagree.
"Prop. 8 protects our children from being taught in public schools that 'same-sex marriage' is the same as traditional marriage," said Santa Ana Unified School District board member Rosemarie "Rosie" Avila. "We should not accept a court decision that results in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn't be forced on us against our will," Avila added.
The lesbian teacher's wedding was officiated by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Newsom is featured in a Yes on 8 television ad, released last week, in which he arrogantly declares of same-sex marriage: "The door's wide open now. It's gonna happen, whether you like it or not."
The Yes on 8 campaign's ads explain that if the voters do not overturn the California Supreme Court's same-sex marriage ruling, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage. ?It's totally unreasonable that a first grade field trip would be to a same-sex wedding," said Chip White, Press Secretary for Yes on 8. "This is overt indoctrination of children who are too young to understand it.? The field trip underscores the Yes on 8 campaign?s message that unless Prop. 8 passes, children will be taught about same-sex marriage in public schools. ?Not only can it happen, it has already happened,? White said.
###
Media contacts:
Northern & Central California (Sacramento Press Office): Chip White, 916-215-4392
Los Angeles & Southern California: Sonja Eddings Brown, 818-993-4508
http://tinyurl.com/49ec7n
[quote author="mediaboyz" date=1223981095]I have a real problem with this ===> First Graders Taken To San Francisco City Hall For Gay Wedding</blockquote>
It was their teacher! Jesus. They probably didn't care who she was getting married to, just it was their teacher. I'm sure they were very excited to be there. It's some of the bigoted and narrow-minded parents (and others) that have a problem with this, not the little kids, I'm sure. The only problem I have with this is that it appears to have been done during school hours, which wouldn't be appropriate for any kind of wedding, gay or straight.
And Chip White's comment about "indoctrination" is pure bullshit.
It was their teacher! Jesus. They probably didn't care who she was getting married to, just it was their teacher. I'm sure they were very excited to be there. It's some of the bigoted and narrow-minded parents (and others) that have a problem with this, not the little kids, I'm sure. The only problem I have with this is that it appears to have been done during school hours, which wouldn't be appropriate for any kind of wedding, gay or straight.
And Chip White's comment about "indoctrination" is pure bullshit.
no_vaseline_IHB
New member
If the teacher was straight, I'd have a problem with somebody loading a class full of first graders and hauling them off to her wedding if it fell on a school day. It has nothing to do with thier sexual perference. Class time is class time. Play time is play time. You want your class to go attend your wedding? Do it on Saturday.
This is what is wrong with charter schools. No oversight. And people wonder why I oppose vouchers.
This is what is wrong with charter schools. No oversight. And people wonder why I oppose vouchers.
EvaLSeraphim_IHB
New member
[quote author="mediaboyz" date=1223981095]I have a real problem with this ===> First Graders Taken To San Francisco City Hall For Gay Wedding
October 11, 2008
Contact: Chip White/Sonja Eddings Brown, 916-215-4392
SAN FRANCISCO, October 11 ? In the same week that the No on 8 campaign launched an ad that labeled as ?lies? claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away from their studies for the same-sex wedding. According to the Yes on 8 campaign, the public school field trip demonstrates that the California Supreme Court's decision to legalize same-sex marriage has real consequences.
"Taking children out of school for a same-sex wedding is not customary education. This is promoting same-sex marriage and indoctrinating young kids," said Yes on 8?ProtectMarriage.com Campaign Co-Manager Frank Schubert. "I doubt the school has ever taken kids on a field trip to a traditional wedding," Schubert said.
When asked by the Yes on 8 campaign, The San Francisco Chronicle reporter said she did not know if the school had ever sponsored a field trip for students to a traditional wedding. Telling the Chronicle that the field trip was "a teachable moment," the school's principal believes it is perfectly appropriate for first graders to attend a same-sex wedding. Officials in other school districts disagree.
"Prop. 8 protects our children from being taught in public schools that 'same-sex marriage' is the same as traditional marriage," said Santa Ana Unified School District board member Rosemarie "Rosie" Avila. "We should not accept a court decision that results in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn't be forced on us against our will," Avila added.
The lesbian teacher's wedding was officiated by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Newsom is featured in a Yes on 8 television ad, released last week, in which he arrogantly declares of same-sex marriage: "The door's wide open now. It's gonna happen, whether you like it or not."
The Yes on 8 campaign's ads explain that if the voters do not overturn the California Supreme Court's same-sex marriage ruling, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage. ?It's totally unreasonable that a first grade field trip would be to a same-sex wedding," said Chip White, Press Secretary for Yes on 8. "This is overt indoctrination of children who are too young to understand it.? The field trip underscores the Yes on 8 campaign?s message that unless Prop. 8 passes, children will be taught about same-sex marriage in public schools. ?Not only can it happen, it has already happened,? White said.
###
Media contacts:
Northern & Central California (Sacramento Press Office): Chip White, 916-215-4392
Los Angeles & Southern California: Sonja Eddings Brown, 818-993-4508
http://tinyurl.com/49ec7n</blockquote>
<em>Love</em> how you choose to offer the Yes on 8 press release rather than the news article itself.
As for Rosie Avila, I would be interested to know if she ever took <a href="http://www.mattababy.org/~belmonte/Home/Politics/Oath/oath.txt">California's loyalty oath</a> to serve on the SAUSD Board. To say out loud that a California Supreme Court decision should not be accepted could land her in a pot of hot water.
<strong>Later edit:</strong>
Why, lo and behold, Mrs. Avila <em>did</em> have to take <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_20">the loyalty oath as an SAUSD board member.</a>
<blockquote>CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 20 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS
SEC. 3. Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
subscribe the [oath of allegiance].</blockquote>
October 11, 2008
Contact: Chip White/Sonja Eddings Brown, 916-215-4392
SAN FRANCISCO, October 11 ? In the same week that the No on 8 campaign launched an ad that labeled as ?lies? claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away from their studies for the same-sex wedding. According to the Yes on 8 campaign, the public school field trip demonstrates that the California Supreme Court's decision to legalize same-sex marriage has real consequences.
"Taking children out of school for a same-sex wedding is not customary education. This is promoting same-sex marriage and indoctrinating young kids," said Yes on 8?ProtectMarriage.com Campaign Co-Manager Frank Schubert. "I doubt the school has ever taken kids on a field trip to a traditional wedding," Schubert said.
When asked by the Yes on 8 campaign, The San Francisco Chronicle reporter said she did not know if the school had ever sponsored a field trip for students to a traditional wedding. Telling the Chronicle that the field trip was "a teachable moment," the school's principal believes it is perfectly appropriate for first graders to attend a same-sex wedding. Officials in other school districts disagree.
"Prop. 8 protects our children from being taught in public schools that 'same-sex marriage' is the same as traditional marriage," said Santa Ana Unified School District board member Rosemarie "Rosie" Avila. "We should not accept a court decision that results in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn't be forced on us against our will," Avila added.
The lesbian teacher's wedding was officiated by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Newsom is featured in a Yes on 8 television ad, released last week, in which he arrogantly declares of same-sex marriage: "The door's wide open now. It's gonna happen, whether you like it or not."
The Yes on 8 campaign's ads explain that if the voters do not overturn the California Supreme Court's same-sex marriage ruling, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage. ?It's totally unreasonable that a first grade field trip would be to a same-sex wedding," said Chip White, Press Secretary for Yes on 8. "This is overt indoctrination of children who are too young to understand it.? The field trip underscores the Yes on 8 campaign?s message that unless Prop. 8 passes, children will be taught about same-sex marriage in public schools. ?Not only can it happen, it has already happened,? White said.
###
Media contacts:
Northern & Central California (Sacramento Press Office): Chip White, 916-215-4392
Los Angeles & Southern California: Sonja Eddings Brown, 818-993-4508
http://tinyurl.com/49ec7n</blockquote>
<em>Love</em> how you choose to offer the Yes on 8 press release rather than the news article itself.
As for Rosie Avila, I would be interested to know if she ever took <a href="http://www.mattababy.org/~belmonte/Home/Politics/Oath/oath.txt">California's loyalty oath</a> to serve on the SAUSD Board. To say out loud that a California Supreme Court decision should not be accepted could land her in a pot of hot water.
<strong>Later edit:</strong>
Why, lo and behold, Mrs. Avila <em>did</em> have to take <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_20">the loyalty oath as an SAUSD board member.</a>
<blockquote>CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 20 MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS
SEC. 3. Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
subscribe the [oath of allegiance].</blockquote>
SoCal78_IHB
New member
Whether Rosie Avila is abiding by her oath or not is pretty irrelevant. Just as Father Geoffrey Farrow broke his oath in the article a couple posts back, it would seem as though Avila also feels this is an issue worth putting her job on the line for. It is hypocritical to think one is commendable and the other is not. Both are being true to themselves regardless of ramifications.
EvaLSeraphim_IHB
New member
[quote author="SoCal78" date=1223985648]Whether Rosie Avila is abiding by her oath or not is pretty irrelevant. Just as Father Geoffrey Farrow broke his oath in the article a couple posts back, it would seem as though Avila also feels this is an issue worth putting her job on the line for. It is hypocritical to think one is commendable and the other is not. Both are being true to themselves regardless of ramifications.</blockquote>
I might agree with you except for a couple of things:
1. The State (via the CSU system) <em>is</em> enforcing the loyalty oath, at least in the pre-oath stage (i.e., if you want to change the language, we won't employ you). This has happened at both Fullerton and Hayward in the last couple of years. I believe things were resolved one way or another.
2. I don't think Mrs. Avila believes she is putting her position on the line (at least not right now). My guess is that she is using her position to lend "gravitas" to her POV. In fact, I suspect if you asked her, she would have no idea that she is jeopardizing her position. That said, based on what I know of her, if she thought her position was in danger because she spoke out, I think she might enjoy being a martyr to the culture wars. Then again, maybe I'm just a cynic.
3. It would be one thing for Mrs. Avila to be a proponent of Yes on 8 - that's fair game and working within the system - but it's a completely different ball of wax to suggest that a California Supreme Court decision should not be accepted. If you don't understand the difference, let me know and I'll try to find the time to explain it.
Nos. 2 and 3 are why the (former?) Father's position and Mrs. Avila's are different.
I might agree with you except for a couple of things:
1. The State (via the CSU system) <em>is</em> enforcing the loyalty oath, at least in the pre-oath stage (i.e., if you want to change the language, we won't employ you). This has happened at both Fullerton and Hayward in the last couple of years. I believe things were resolved one way or another.
2. I don't think Mrs. Avila believes she is putting her position on the line (at least not right now). My guess is that she is using her position to lend "gravitas" to her POV. In fact, I suspect if you asked her, she would have no idea that she is jeopardizing her position. That said, based on what I know of her, if she thought her position was in danger because she spoke out, I think she might enjoy being a martyr to the culture wars. Then again, maybe I'm just a cynic.
3. It would be one thing for Mrs. Avila to be a proponent of Yes on 8 - that's fair game and working within the system - but it's a completely different ball of wax to suggest that a California Supreme Court decision should not be accepted. If you don't understand the difference, let me know and I'll try to find the time to explain it.
Nos. 2 and 3 are why the (former?) Father's position and Mrs. Avila's are different.
EvaLSeraphim_IHB
New member
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1223982194]If the teacher was straight, I'd have a problem with somebody loading a class full of first graders and hauling them off to her wedding if it fell on a school day. It has nothing to do with thier sexual perference. Class time is class time. Play time is play time. You want your class to go attend your wedding? Do it on Saturday.
This is what is wrong with charter schools. No oversight. And people wonder why I oppose vouchers.</blockquote>
No_Vas, I agree that attending any wedding on school time is probably not a good use of one's "educational" time. That said, the article notes:
<blockquote>As is the case with all field trips, parents had to give their permission and could choose to opt out of the trip. Two families did. Those children spent the duration of the 90-minute field trip back at school with another first-grade class, the interim director said.</blockquote>
So, for those parents who thought it was a bad use of their kid's time, the kids did not attend.
Weird, I didn't see that portion of the article mentioned in the press release. I wonder why that was?
This is what is wrong with charter schools. No oversight. And people wonder why I oppose vouchers.</blockquote>
No_Vas, I agree that attending any wedding on school time is probably not a good use of one's "educational" time. That said, the article notes:
<blockquote>As is the case with all field trips, parents had to give their permission and could choose to opt out of the trip. Two families did. Those children spent the duration of the 90-minute field trip back at school with another first-grade class, the interim director said.</blockquote>
So, for those parents who thought it was a bad use of their kid's time, the kids did not attend.
Weird, I didn't see that portion of the article mentioned in the press release. I wonder why that was?
no_vaseline_IHB
New member
That would never have happened in a non charter public school. That's my point. Private schools have even more levity on what they teach and how.
Do you send your children to school to learn (aka be instructed)? Or to attend weddings?
BTW:
The Priest at Fresno State does not work at the University. The St. Paul Newman center is on Barstow across from the stadium, and is part of the Diocese of Fresno.
<a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm">http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm</a>
<a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/pastor.htm">Father Geoff's bio is still up - for the moment.</a>
Do you send your children to school to learn (aka be instructed)? Or to attend weddings?
BTW:
The Priest at Fresno State does not work at the University. The St. Paul Newman center is on Barstow across from the stadium, and is part of the Diocese of Fresno.
<a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm">http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm</a>
<a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/pastor.htm">Father Geoff's bio is still up - for the moment.</a>
SoCal78_IHB
New member
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1223988216]
BTW:
The Priest at Fresno State does not work at the University. <a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm">http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm</a>
<a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/pastor.htm">Father Geoff's bio is still up - for the moment.</a></blockquote>
(I was referring to his "oath" to the church, not the university... not sure if this is a reply to my comment but wanted to clarify just in case.) Carry on.
BTW:
The Priest at Fresno State does not work at the University. <a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm">http://www.csufnewman.com/campus_min.htm</a>
<a href="http://www.csufnewman.com/pastor.htm">Father Geoff's bio is still up - for the moment.</a></blockquote>
(I was referring to his "oath" to the church, not the university... not sure if this is a reply to my comment but wanted to clarify just in case.) Carry on.
irvine_native_IHB
New member
There were people holding up yes on 8 signs with their toddlers on the corner of Culver and Alton this morning. Forcing your kids to breathe in exhaust fumes all morning so they could be a prop for the parents bigoted beliefs makes me sad.
Trooper_IHB
New member
ok, I just worked 24 hours and need to get some sleep. I will respond to this tomorrow.
One thought to keep in mind: How many of those kids have gay parents ? How wonderful for them to see how "normal" they are finally.
I'm sure parent's had to sign off on the trip.
One thought to keep in mind: How many of those kids have gay parents ? How wonderful for them to see how "normal" they are finally.
I'm sure parent's had to sign off on the trip.
Trooper_IHB
New member
Been busy and just getting a chance to respond.
Seems stng (BIG THANKS!) found the link to the entire story. The teacher didn't even know they were going to be there, she was surprised....and what a wonderful surprise. The article also mentioned that <strong>one of the student's two Mom's</strong> would be getting married in 2 weeks. Like I said, it was wonderful for that child's version of "normal" played out in the beautiful thing that is marriage. And true, this could only happen in a Charter School....but what the teacher said, about a "teachable moment", is correct. This event is historical, and 50 years from now....when all this gay separatism crap is long gone....they'll be able to tell their grandchildren, "I was there."
Indoctrinating children....puh-lease.... this is all about teaching tolerance for your fellow human being. Last time I checked, that was a good thing. I'm surprised you didn't say anything about "one of those gays" teaching kids ! I mean geez....she MUST be indoctrinating them daily ! /snark
<strong>FYI, There is an estimated 52,000 children being raised in gay households in the State of California.
</strong>
And not sure if anyone else caught the press release yet, but the California Teacher's Association <a href="http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid63808.asp">JUST DONATED ONE MILLION DOLLARS</a>
To the No on 8 campaign. Yes, that is on top of their 250K donation from a month ago.
So, if teachers donate $1,250,000 to keep gay marriage legal, what do you think about that ? Don't you think that they are uniquely qualified to gauge "what's best for the children" ? I mean, if you don't like it, there's always private religious schools for your kids to attend.....but geez, they're expensive ! However, in those schools, you can keep your narrow world view chugging right along through your kids....no problemo !
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate.
Seems stng (BIG THANKS!) found the link to the entire story. The teacher didn't even know they were going to be there, she was surprised....and what a wonderful surprise. The article also mentioned that <strong>one of the student's two Mom's</strong> would be getting married in 2 weeks. Like I said, it was wonderful for that child's version of "normal" played out in the beautiful thing that is marriage. And true, this could only happen in a Charter School....but what the teacher said, about a "teachable moment", is correct. This event is historical, and 50 years from now....when all this gay separatism crap is long gone....they'll be able to tell their grandchildren, "I was there."
Indoctrinating children....puh-lease.... this is all about teaching tolerance for your fellow human being. Last time I checked, that was a good thing. I'm surprised you didn't say anything about "one of those gays" teaching kids ! I mean geez....she MUST be indoctrinating them daily ! /snark
<strong>FYI, There is an estimated 52,000 children being raised in gay households in the State of California.
</strong>
And not sure if anyone else caught the press release yet, but the California Teacher's Association <a href="http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid63808.asp">JUST DONATED ONE MILLION DOLLARS</a>
To the No on 8 campaign. Yes, that is on top of their 250K donation from a month ago.
So, if teachers donate $1,250,000 to keep gay marriage legal, what do you think about that ? Don't you think that they are uniquely qualified to gauge "what's best for the children" ? I mean, if you don't like it, there's always private religious schools for your kids to attend.....but geez, they're expensive ! However, in those schools, you can keep your narrow world view chugging right along through your kids....no problemo !
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate.
graphrix_IHB
New member
Hey Troop,
I wanted to let you know, that I had to take a detour through Old Town Orange the other night because of traffic. Guess what I noticed? Yup, more NO on 8 signs than yes signs. In a way I am surprised, because it is still OC, and there are a lot of older conservative residents there. It was kinda funny to see the yes sign and the NO sign on homes next to each other. Too bad the yes neighbor is the one who must feel uncomfortable.
I will be voting early this week, and voting no. Cayci also has her ballot, and judging from her posts, I think we have a good idea in which way she will be voting.
I also wanted to let you know, that my mom, a life long republican, will be voting NO as well. I also had a recent discussion with her about the election, and you could see the hurt and disappointment on her face when she told me some of her friends were still on the yes side. She understands that we will be looking back on this in history and seeing how ignorant we were for even having to vote on this.
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate!
I wanted to let you know, that I had to take a detour through Old Town Orange the other night because of traffic. Guess what I noticed? Yup, more NO on 8 signs than yes signs. In a way I am surprised, because it is still OC, and there are a lot of older conservative residents there. It was kinda funny to see the yes sign and the NO sign on homes next to each other. Too bad the yes neighbor is the one who must feel uncomfortable.
I will be voting early this week, and voting no. Cayci also has her ballot, and judging from her posts, I think we have a good idea in which way she will be voting.
I also wanted to let you know, that my mom, a life long republican, will be voting NO as well. I also had a recent discussion with her about the election, and you could see the hurt and disappointment on her face when she told me some of her friends were still on the yes side. She understands that we will be looking back on this in history and seeing how ignorant we were for even having to vote on this.
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate!
tmare_IHB
New member
There are a few Yes on 8 signs in our north Santa Ana neighborhoods, but the overwhelming majority of the 8 signs are NO signs. My mother-in-law intended to vote yes on 8 even though she attends a church that regularly does wedding ceremonies for it's many gay members. Her argument was that she didn't see why anyone really "needs" to get married in the first place. It was a strange argument but thankfully, she is now voting NO. I think peer pressure and the "cool" factor are now on the side of gay marriage but I still think that there are a lot of people who will stand in the secret voting booth and vote YES. Some people still feel superior when they can exercise power over others. I think it's going to be very close.
SoCal78_IHB
New member
[quote author="graphrix" date=1224342034]Hey Troop,
I wanted to let you know, that I had to take a detour through Old Town Orange the other night because of traffic. Guess what I noticed? Yup, more NO on 8 signs than yes signs. In a way I am surprised, because it is still OC, and there are a lot of older conservative residents there. It was kinda funny to see the yes sign and the NO sign on homes next to each other. Too bad the yes neighbor is the one who must feel uncomfortable.
I will be voting early this week, and voting no. Cayci also has her ballot, and judging from her posts, I think we have a good idea in which way she will be voting.
I also wanted to let you know, that my mom, a life long republican, will be voting NO as well. I also had a recent discussion with her about the election, and you could see the hurt and disappointment on her face when she told me some of her friends were still on the yes side. She understands that we will be looking back on this in history and seeing how ignorant we were for even having to vote on this.
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate!</blockquote>
Seeing as how there has been a lot of vandalism and theft of the Prop 8 signs, I wouldn't go by those. This article mentions Orange as being one of the cities with vandalism.
<a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people">http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people</a>
There is also a poll to the lower right of the article and its results are pretty much neck-and-neck.
I wanted to let you know, that I had to take a detour through Old Town Orange the other night because of traffic. Guess what I noticed? Yup, more NO on 8 signs than yes signs. In a way I am surprised, because it is still OC, and there are a lot of older conservative residents there. It was kinda funny to see the yes sign and the NO sign on homes next to each other. Too bad the yes neighbor is the one who must feel uncomfortable.
I will be voting early this week, and voting no. Cayci also has her ballot, and judging from her posts, I think we have a good idea in which way she will be voting.
I also wanted to let you know, that my mom, a life long republican, will be voting NO as well. I also had a recent discussion with her about the election, and you could see the hurt and disappointment on her face when she told me some of her friends were still on the yes side. She understands that we will be looking back on this in history and seeing how ignorant we were for even having to vote on this.
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate!</blockquote>
Seeing as how there has been a lot of vandalism and theft of the Prop 8 signs, I wouldn't go by those. This article mentions Orange as being one of the cities with vandalism.
<a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people">http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people</a>
There is also a poll to the lower right of the article and its results are pretty much neck-and-neck.
freedomCM_IHB
New member
I'm guessing that if the signs are on public property, like medians, then they are fair game.
I wonder why people who put them there don't get littering tickets?
I wonder why people who put them there don't get littering tickets?
graphrix_IHB
New member
[quote author="SoCal78" date=1224375144][quote author="graphrix" date=1224342034]Hey Troop,
I wanted to let you know, that I had to take a detour through Old Town Orange the other night because of traffic. Guess what I noticed? Yup, more NO on 8 signs than yes signs. In a way I am surprised, because it is still OC, and there are a lot of older conservative residents there. It was kinda funny to see the yes sign and the NO sign on homes next to each other. Too bad the yes neighbor is the one who must feel uncomfortable.
I will be voting early this week, and voting no. Cayci also has her ballot, and judging from her posts, I think we have a good idea in which way she will be voting.
I also wanted to let you know, that my mom, a life long republican, will be voting NO as well. I also had a recent discussion with her about the election, and you could see the hurt and disappointment on her face when she told me some of her friends were still on the yes side. She understands that we will be looking back on this in history and seeing how ignorant we were for even having to vote on this.
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate!</blockquote>
Seeing as how there has been a lot of vandalism and theft of the Prop 8 signs, I wouldn't go by those. This article mentions Orange as being one of the cities with vandalism.
<a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people">http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people</a>
There is also a poll to the lower right of the article and its results are pretty much neck-and-neck.</blockquote>
Wow... that article was certainly biased towards the yes campaign. Of course they could only find cases of the "victims" of vandalism from the yes side. Somehow they couldn't take the time or find more than one person from the NO side who had their signs stolen. Maybe because the NO campaign doesn't track them, they figured they should be lazy and not find any sources to quote. Two sources for the NO side and more than double for the yes side is not a balanced article. I'm not saying that it isn't happening, but come on, their fact checking was on par with wretched Gretchen over at the NY Times. It was more like a puff piece for the yes side to make them out to be "victims" and to show how "evil" those NO supporters are. The real "victims" are the ones who should have the same rights as everyone else.
<a href="http://epaper.ocregister.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=OCW&BaseHref=OCWOrangeCityNews/2008/10/16&EntityId=Ar00905&ViewMode=HTML">I don't know if the link will work</a>, but here is an op/ed piece by an Orange resident who was vandalized because she is an Obama supporter.
<em>
Vandals target Obama supporter
My husband?s car has been vandalized twice in the past month. First, the bumper was ?keyed? all around his bumper sticker supporting Obama. A couple of weeks later, the back passenger window and the back window were shot out by a pellet gun at close range. This action caused $900 worth of damage to our car. Our neighbors had both of their cars windows smashed in. They have Obama stickers too. Do we live in a high crime area like Watts? No, we?re in Orange ? nestled between Villa Park and Anaheim Hills in a wonderful neighborhood. Can we understand this violence? No, we can?t.
I have to stop and wonder ? what makes it right to vandalize someone?s personal property when you don?t approve of their choice of candidate? What makes it right to vandalize someone?s personal property for any reason? We live in a country that treasures and honors free speech. This means we listen to each other and appreciate each other?s opinions ? even if those don?t mirror our own.
People have wondered if we?ll put another Obama bumper sticker on our car. We believe in our nation?s ability to have a variety of opinions. You betcha?, we?re putting another sticker on.
Karla Kjellin-Elder of Orange</em>
I have a feeling there is a lot more vandalizing happening like this and for the NO supporters than is being reported. Because this should have been news, not an op/ed piece that someone had to submit to the OCR to get published.
I wanted to let you know, that I had to take a detour through Old Town Orange the other night because of traffic. Guess what I noticed? Yup, more NO on 8 signs than yes signs. In a way I am surprised, because it is still OC, and there are a lot of older conservative residents there. It was kinda funny to see the yes sign and the NO sign on homes next to each other. Too bad the yes neighbor is the one who must feel uncomfortable.
I will be voting early this week, and voting no. Cayci also has her ballot, and judging from her posts, I think we have a good idea in which way she will be voting.
I also wanted to let you know, that my mom, a life long republican, will be voting NO as well. I also had a recent discussion with her about the election, and you could see the hurt and disappointment on her face when she told me some of her friends were still on the yes side. She understands that we will be looking back on this in history and seeing how ignorant we were for even having to vote on this.
Vote NO on 8, don't discriminate!</blockquote>
Seeing as how there has been a lot of vandalism and theft of the Prop 8 signs, I wouldn't go by those. This article mentions Orange as being one of the cities with vandalism.
<a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people">http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people</a>
There is also a poll to the lower right of the article and its results are pretty much neck-and-neck.</blockquote>
Wow... that article was certainly biased towards the yes campaign. Of course they could only find cases of the "victims" of vandalism from the yes side. Somehow they couldn't take the time or find more than one person from the NO side who had their signs stolen. Maybe because the NO campaign doesn't track them, they figured they should be lazy and not find any sources to quote. Two sources for the NO side and more than double for the yes side is not a balanced article. I'm not saying that it isn't happening, but come on, their fact checking was on par with wretched Gretchen over at the NY Times. It was more like a puff piece for the yes side to make them out to be "victims" and to show how "evil" those NO supporters are. The real "victims" are the ones who should have the same rights as everyone else.
<a href="http://epaper.ocregister.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=OCW&BaseHref=OCWOrangeCityNews/2008/10/16&EntityId=Ar00905&ViewMode=HTML">I don't know if the link will work</a>, but here is an op/ed piece by an Orange resident who was vandalized because she is an Obama supporter.
<em>
Vandals target Obama supporter
My husband?s car has been vandalized twice in the past month. First, the bumper was ?keyed? all around his bumper sticker supporting Obama. A couple of weeks later, the back passenger window and the back window were shot out by a pellet gun at close range. This action caused $900 worth of damage to our car. Our neighbors had both of their cars windows smashed in. They have Obama stickers too. Do we live in a high crime area like Watts? No, we?re in Orange ? nestled between Villa Park and Anaheim Hills in a wonderful neighborhood. Can we understand this violence? No, we can?t.
I have to stop and wonder ? what makes it right to vandalize someone?s personal property when you don?t approve of their choice of candidate? What makes it right to vandalize someone?s personal property for any reason? We live in a country that treasures and honors free speech. This means we listen to each other and appreciate each other?s opinions ? even if those don?t mirror our own.
People have wondered if we?ll put another Obama bumper sticker on our car. We believe in our nation?s ability to have a variety of opinions. You betcha?, we?re putting another sticker on.
Karla Kjellin-Elder of Orange</em>
I have a feeling there is a lot more vandalizing happening like this and for the NO supporters than is being reported. Because this should have been news, not an op/ed piece that someone had to submit to the OCR to get published.
NewToOC_IHB
New member
This OC Register article has an interactive poll on how people will vote on Prop 8 and its 49% vs 48% Yes to No's right now.
<a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people">Prop 8 sign vandalism article with poll</a>
<a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/signs-sign-ban-2197356-vandalism-people">Prop 8 sign vandalism article with poll</a>