Friday, March 20, 2009

Two Thousand Four Hundred "Stand Up For Marriage"--- in the Rain

Mid-week, in the rain, according to the Washington State Patrol, there were at least 2400 on the steps of the Capitol yesterday---standing up for marriage.

Thank you.

It was great to meet so many of you I have not met before.

We have put a few pictures from the event on the website today. Our video crew is getting their A and B rolls together and we will be putting up video as soon as it is available. Click here to view photos.

If you took some pictures and would like to share them, please email them to us at info@faithandfreedom.us and we will include them on the website.

I left the rally with some very strong impressions and a good sense of direction.

In the speech I gave, my commitment to move forward with a referendum or whatever action is appropriate depending on what exactly the Legislators do with the "every thing but marriage" legislation they have introduced, was met with thunderous applause and cheers.

That is encouraging.

Faith and Freedom and Washington Values has committed ourselves to move forward on behalf of defending marriage. It is vitally important that we build and expand the grassroots network. If you signed up at the rally, your name will be added to the list and you will begin receiving regular communication. If you know those who should join us, please encourage them to subscribe to our daily blog and commentary. This is how we will continue to communicate as we move forward.

A good number of Senators and Representatives do support marriage. Many of them were present yesterday and several of them spoke. Senators Swecker, Stevens, Roach and others participated. We are grateful for their service and stand on these important issues.

Representatives Matt Shea and Shelly Short, who were elected to office in this past election with your help, spoke strongly in support of marriage. They are both talented people of character.

There are more such people around the State of Washington who could also be elected.

Not only must we address the marriage issue, and be abundantly assured we will, but we must also take a longer view and work to change the character of the Legislature. You have already begun that process with these and other high quality people as examples of what can happen when people of like mind do something together.

This rally was further evidence of that, with a number of organizations coming together.

We will keep you informed as we move forward.

Thank you for your support.

_______________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom

Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

18 comments:

  1. 2400 is nothing. You need 120,000 to achieve you goal to legislate hate. Good luck wit that! Most Christians don't even agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Anonymous: I hope one day you will understand this is not an issue of hate - just sin - we all sin! 'Most Christian' just don't want to see it legislated! I am nobody, just a christian standing for what she believes

    ReplyDelete
  3. 'MOst Christians don't agree with you?' Excuse me!? That is your opinion, but in my life, we are united to keep God's principles known, and are prayerfully moving forward to fullfill God's leading, and loving those who just don't understand us! God made everyone, and has commissioned us to love everyone. And we do! While our main concern is for our nation losing sight of God's principles as our forefathers has set up for us to do, and for those who have lost their way from these basic principles. This may sound sharp, but the truth is in Rom. it tells us that if a nation turns their back on God's principles, God will turn his back on the nation. I know this concept seems foreign to many, even Christians who have lost site of these warnings that God gave to us! If only eveyone can see the big picture of what can happen in our great country. Actually, in my humble opinion, it already has started, and its frightening! Thus there are no apologies from us who choose to stand up to be counted, and more importantly, pray consistently for those who don't understand or choose not to understand. Hate? absolutely not. The opposite. It's out of Love for our Lord, and yes, out of love for those who need the Lord. and be renewed to His leading! In the process of keeping our authentic marraiges intact, as one man and one woman, we sincerely care and love those who just 'don't understand' but we pray that they will someday! WE DO CARE--WE LOVE ALL THOSE WHO LABEL US AS HATING, WHICH IS THE OPPOSITE, WE STRIVE TO SHOW LOVE WHILE WE DO GOD'S LEADING!
    As websters says, one man and one woman is a marraige! period!
    I am SO sorry for those who 'are in love' and cannot accept God's concept,even those who are Christians, and again, we don't hate, but SINCERELY care. But at the same time, we are concern for our future as a nation, how our children will be taught in schools, how our churches are being affected, etc etc. PLEASE know we love you 'IN the LORD', as we agree we disagree, and with God's leading, we can come to understand one another--in LOVE!
    The 700 club on tv showed two men speaking to univeristies and colleges. One represented God's principles, the other for the gay community. They travel together. They have become great friends. It's an example as to how we can be. It was great watching them teasing each other in love. Surely if these men can do this, so can we, disagree in love and respect!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Rebeccah,

    So it's a sin according to your religion. Maybe you can explain why everyone should have to live according to your religion.

    Since you can't show any impact at all on your life from Tim & Ted getting married, then it just comes down to you wanting to force your religion on everyone else.

    That's really self centered.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To anonymous at 10:15:

    You are free to live by your chosen religious beliefs, and allowing same-sex couples to marry or form domestic partnerships will not change that one bit.

    The question is: Why do you insist upon legislating that all of us live by your beliefs? Why do your beliefs trump mine? Or the beliefs of the many other Christians who disagree with you? Why shouldn't the government treat us all equally, and give us the freedom to make our own choices? Why must we all make YOUR choices?

    You talk about loving all of us, but your insistence that we follow your religious value system through the force of laws is, frankly, not something you'd be willing to do if the tables were reversed.

    That is hypocrisy, which makes your arguments seem insincere and, yes, hateful. That might sound sharp, but it's the truth.

    Tony in Seattle

    ReplyDelete
  6. anom 1015

    You are right on this issue you are thrown into the PC world of hate monger if you publically speak against gay marriage . Much of it has to do also with the political machine of the left that the gay movement latched on with . Gay politically support bortion rights public education via the NEA, etc .

    If your for abortion rights you are pro choice , if you for killing yourself you are compassionate , for a poor person getting to choose where they go to school you are against public education and if you want every child to have a higer chance of being raised by their own Mom and Dad you are a hate monger .

    40 percent of out of wedlock births , and people still thinking the statistics don't mean disaster !

    Interesting gay marriage still has the numbers to loose in public elections .

    What I think what is hurtful is the way gays are cartooned in this debate .
    They see it more because they are the minority, the minority always notice it more , its the nature of it .

    ReplyDelete
  7. just sin - we all sin! 'Most Christian' just don't want to see it legislated!
    But that is the point - only people who share your religion can 'sin' a totally religious concept. I can't sin - not even part of my religious paradigm. I can behave illegally, I can behave unethically, but I can't sin.

    You have no right to condemn other citizens by your purely religious judgements. You have a right to your religion, I have a right to NOT share your religion and still have equal treatment under the law.

    (oh Dan Savage has pictures of the gathering at the steps - I think it is greater than the 400 reported by OPB but quite a bit less than the 2400 Gary is reporting - from doing an area count on an enlarged picture I would think 6-700 is the more likely figure on the steps at the moment of those pictures.)

    ReplyDelete
  8. no-ne no-ne Tony, you are mistaken!
    The force of changing laws is from YOU, not us! It's so sad. Being older, I remember having gay friends in BIBLE SCHOOL--it was 'not known' if they were or not, but, the point is that it was NOT an 'issue'! I know you don't hear us, but, with our nation being founded on God, we would like to keep His guidance intact, as was set up via our forefathers. All these years we have lived in harmony together, is what I remember. You always had 'your freedom' as single people, because that is what you are! I lived as a single person, and was ok with that! I did not feel married couples had 'more rights' than I did. We do NOT want our children/grandchildren being taught that they maybe 'gay' and it's ok! It's the opposite of what they are taught at home, in the majority of cases! With teens especially, it's not good to have them get this message, during this impressional age! I agree with you that we can both live a quiet, respectful life in freedom, but, when it comes to authentic marriages, that HAS to keep intact. There would be too many problems developed to have this change, with the laws, schools, jobs, etc! Changing society is a dangerous thing to attempt, and yes, against God's principles! Prayerfully someday you can 'comprehend' what we are attempting to relate to everyone!

    ReplyDelete
  9. oshtur. Yeah, the homosexuals had many more than OPB their closest ally reported and Gary had way less than the WSP said. Are you aware that the troopers are assigned to all these events. They are experts on these kinds of things. The papers reported that your group had 250-300. You really do believe that truth begins with what you decide it should be.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "no-ne no-ne Tony, you are mistaken!
    The force of changing laws is from YOU, not us"

    Well yes which is fact , which seldom gets away from the propaganda used by the left . Especially Tony , use to engage him till he started with the typical secular religious attacks on scriptures and how they are mis interpeted . You see it has nothing to do with religion , but the next day it can be about religion , its just your religion is wrong .

    Anyway its good to see people willing to still stand up for their beliefs in a peacefull method . Regardless which side of the issue your on , sorry Tony you may not understand that . Not all religions agree with you and not all gays or secularists do either . It makes their opinions different , which can be a good thing without hate , try another blog to spread yours why don't ya ? If you can't respect the people your speaking with , their religion or non religion , why obsess and make yourself appear intolerant ?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "But that is the point - only people who share your religion can 'sin' a totally religious concept. I can't sin - not even part of my religious paradigm. I can behave illegally, I can behave unethically, but I can't sin. "


    Duh ? Jeffry Damher did not doing anything sin because he was a socio path . Even Dexter ? I see the point somewhat but you make the point of the religious person also , how can he support legislation that promotes sin ?
    Marraige rights use tax payer dollars to support the institution in tax breaks and other supports .
    You would not expect a religious person to vote for promotion of porn pr prositution would ya? You using one way logic Vishtur . Your usually sharper .

    Just as you see no reason to not support it . Your both right from your own politically point of view . The liberal secularist or the religious person.

    But this is my take

    Religious people allowed divorce laws to become easier , no contest etc . And they particpate in divorce on an even scale as their secular counterparts. To me that would be a better debating point , why religious folks fell assleep while divocre laws were getting easier " God Hates divorce, he does not hate gays or Christians"

    But that is something for sincere Christians to discuss, unfortunately I know of no forums that you can do that without the smart alecks ruining honest dialogue . But divorce hurts families , and our culture has see divorce become common place . Gays being allowed to marry is seen as lessening that standard of committed marriage , I do see that somewhat . I think divorce has done that more though .
    The bottom line is the kids in my opinion , I have one more to get out of my house , and then its me me me with me any mine . But actually I notice when you are helping people its more rewarding . Jesus had that right even though its a religious thing also .

    Mick

    ReplyDelete
  12. Duh ? Jeffry Damher did not doing anything sin because he was a sociopath . Even Dexter? I see the point somewhat but you make the point of the religious person also, how can he support legislation that promotes sin?
    But it doesn't - I can't sin and no one who does sin isn't or is because of a secular law - its a religious concept and its containment is a religious affair.

    Marriage rights use tax payer dollars to support the institution in tax breaks and other supports.
    Actually no - society as a whole saves money due to civilly contracting marriages. You are only seeing the 'breaks' and ignoring the savings - single people are more expensive to the government and society than married ones - every single citizen you remove from the state's responsibility is money saved, for every married citizen there is money saved, and more money earned and more factors.

    And regardless, allowing and additional 2% of the population to license the contract would be provided for when necessary by that 2% of the population's taxes.
    You would not expect a religious person to vote for promotion of porn or prositution would ya?
    Not talking about promotion, we are talking about opportunity of legal activities. And since you have voted in the people that allow porn, and have removed the criminal penalties for sex outside of marriage, then you allowed others the opportunity for both - again, allowing others the choice to do or not do things that aren't illegal but you might not do yourself is just being a good American.

    You using one way logic Vishtur . Your usually sharper.
    No just good American logic - we are founded on the right of each individual to do as they choose to the greatest extent possible - that is the founding principle of our government, that it serves the individual, the individual does not serve it.

    But actually I notice when you are helping people its more rewarding . Jesus had that right even though its a religious thing also.
    Altruism is not religious, in fact the urge to be altruistic is biological. You should get a copy of 'The Jefferson Bible'. Thomas Jefferson made two such bibles - one was just an abridged copy he had given to the native americans, but the last was a life's work where he took the Bible Gospels, removed what he considered the superstition, and put it in a single chronological order. He thought Jesus was a great teacher and his outlook a wonderful viewpoint, not a pusher of pedantic rules but a world view where everyone tried to see the needs of others even before their own. You don't have to be religious to like Jesus and his teachings.

    But then if people read and acted as the Jesus of the Jefferson Bible this whole discussion wouldn't even be taking place. People would be thankful that more wanted to marry and encourage them to do so. They would enter ernest discussions about how to encourage and strengthen all families, even the ones that are not typical. Quakers are the most 'Jesus-like' people I know and that's how they would act.

    Oh in another discussion I had an epiphany about why our out of wedlock birth rate is up - because the state does save money dealing with civilly married people as their spouses become the first line of financial responsibility before that state gets involved. And almost all of the monetary 'benefits' of being civilly married are absent in the poor - no retirement, no taxes breaks, and by licensing the contract they can actually lose their state health care by making too much as a couple.

    Many of those out-of-wedlock births are to parents who are living together but not married - why? Two single parents even with a child actually can get more from the state than they can if they are civilly married so they don't.

    You can see the evidence of this in that PDF I linked in the previous blog note that shows that out-of-wedlock births are very skewed to the poor demographics. Need to figure out a way that civil marriage is not economically damaging to the poor if you want to reverse this trend without leaving those that are truly single without support.

    ReplyDelete
  13. What is OPB, WSP? and where is Dan Savage site, with the rally pictures?

    ReplyDelete
  14. OPB is the Oregon Public Broadcast news, the only news article I can find that covers the rally. (Google News is pretty good about finding news sources for virtually anything - pulls up the posts on the local tv and newspapers sources, etc)

    WSP is Washington State Patrol - can't find any official statement of group size.

    And I was mistaken the actual Stranger BLOG (SLOG) entry was by Dominic Holden.

    ReplyDelete
  15. IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU OR ME, THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE FAMILY!

    Whether you believe in God or a follower of Darwinian Theology: Male and Female are physically and anatomically designed to reproduce mankind. Even without a Doctors intervention. Male and a Female, a Man and a Woman are the only beings that can come together and create a new living human being and propagate the Earth. Marriage is a time-honored institution between One Man and One Women for the continuation of mankind.

    What are homosexuals and lesbians’ looking for? Validation of their life style?
    At what cost? Marriage? Homosexuals and lesbians’ want Society to Validate a life style that will degrade and destroy the “Marriage Covenant.” A “Marriage Covenant” that is designed to birth the next generation of mankind. A “Marriage Covenant” that is designed to love, cares for, protect, raise, and instill knowledge and wisdom in a new born child. I know homosexuals and lesbians’ can raise children; however, they will never have the ability to instill the relationship of a family with a loving Man and Women that demonstrate the foundation of a balanced family.

    At what cost? The Family? Homosexuals and lesbians’ want Society to Validate a life style that will tear apart the “Family” that is the backbone of our society and a life style that cannot birth new generations that ensure the continuation of the “Family.”

    AT what cost? The continuation of mankind on the earth? Homosexuals and lesbians’ can not reproduce. The can only recruit.

    The destructive effects of redefine the institution of marriage may not be immediately apparent, but the cumulative damage is inescapable. The eminent Harvard sociologist, Pitirim Sorokin, analyzed cultures spanning several thousand years on several continents, and found that virtually no society has ceased to regulate sexuality within marriage as traditionally defined, and survived.

    Once “Marriage” is no longer confined to a Man and a Woman and the sole criterion becomes the presence of "Love" and "Mutual Commitment," it is impossible to exclude virtually any "Relationship" between two or more partners of either sex. To those who scoff at concerns that homosexuals and lesbians’ marriage could lead to the acceptance of other harmful and widely-rejected sexual behaviors, it should be pointed out that until very recent times the very suggestion that two women or two men could "marry" was totally unacceptable.

    As Gary Chapman reminds us in his book: ‘The Family You’ve Always Wanted:’ “What remains true in all societies is that parents have the primary responsibility for teaching and training their own children. In spite of the fact that in Western contemporary culture the school has become a major player; in my opinion, parents must not abdicate this responsibility. Who will interpret the messages the child hears at school, on TV, online, at church, and in the neighborhood? I believe that is the parent’s responsibility.”

    THE FATHER’S ROLE: A FATHER LOVES HIS CHILDREN UNCONDITIONALLY; PROVIDE FOR AND PROTECT HIS FAMILY; LIVES OUT FAMILY VALUES BY HIS EXAMPLE; PLAY WITH HIS CHILDREN:

    THE MOTHER’S ROLE: A MOTHER PRACITES CREATIVE COMFORTING; TEACHING; CORRECTION; AND ALWAYS AFFIRMATION:

    Fathers and Mothers must be successful, and have a satisfying relationship with each other and their children. Being a parent is not for wimps, and requires great stamina, patience, wisdom, discernment, and fortitude. Raising children never has been and never will be easy; but it is getting harder in these days. Raising children is a FAMILY matter. Children do not become productive citizens without the attributes of a Father and a Mother (Male and Female) they will be robbed of the role model, the protection, and companionship of their Father and the affection, comforting, nurturing, and correction of their Mother.

    Please believe me when I say: It is truly Not about You or Me: This is and always be about the Family!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Whether you believe in God or a follower of Darwinian Theology: Male and Female are physically and anatomically designed to reproduce mankind.

    Which has nothing to do with the civil contract of marriage! 50% of children are not raised by their two genetic contributors. There is no breeding requirement or presumption associated with the civil contract of marriage. 16% of those who currently license the civil contract of marriage produce NO children with their genes.

    What are homosexuals and lesbians’ looking for? Validation of their life style?

    No they looking to license the totally secular civil contract of marriage with their spouse, same as other married couples. So they can build a better, stronger marriage, for the betterment of themselves, their families and society at large, the exact same reasons as 'straights' do.

    Society to Validate a life style that will tear apart the “Family” that is the backbone of our society

    Pure paranoia that is based on nothing but baseless fear. Marriage rates are UP in countries and places that support marriage equality, they are DOWN in countries and places that don't. Having a universal standard of 'the best way to be is married regardless of the gender of your spouse' obviously supports marriage and family.

    Homosexuals and lesbians’ can not reproduce. The can only recruit.

    Again, common sense - if that were true then permissive societies would have greater % of gay people then wouldn't they? I mean since its all 'recruiting'. But wait a second, they don't - the relative % of people stays the same whether no matter how permissive or restrictive you are. Doesn't that speak to the rationale mind that it is just a normal variant, like left-handedness?

    Pitirim Sorokin, analyzed cultures spanning several thousand years on several continents, and found that virtually no society has ceased to regulate sexuality within marriage as traditionally defined, and survived.

    Actually Pitirim said that sexuality should be contained within marriage which having marriage equality would do! Pitirim died long before modern research that shows what's called 'homosexuality' is just the same 'attracted to men, attracted to women' biological mechanism as opposite gender couples have AND it it is no more perverse or changeable than heterosexuality, just a normal variant. With this knowledge, if his thesis about the containment of sexuality within marriage is true, then once again marriage equality regardless of the gender of the spouse is the BEST solution for society.

    Once “Marriage” is no longer confined to a Man and a Woman and the sole criterion becomes the presence of "Love" and "Mutual Commitment," it is impossible to exclude virtually any "Relationship" between two or more partners of either sex.

    Claptrap - letting all citizens have a spouse of a particular gender doesn't open any doors, it just means that all citizens have the same option that currently only one half the citizens do. it does not to any rationale mind open up any doors to allowing spouses that NO ONE is allowed to have.

    Children do not become productive citizens without the attributes of a Father and a Mother (Male and Female) they will be robbed of the role model, the protection, and companionship of their Father and the affection, comforting, nurturing, and correction of their Mother.<

    Stereotypical Fantasy, there are men that are comforting, teaching ,correcting and affirming, there are women who are loving, protecting, educating and playful. The idea that one gender has one set of qualities and the other another flies in the face of simple observation - its just not true. All good parents have all of these characteristics in varying degrees, and one thing we do know is that children raised in a loving, stable home have the best chance of a good life regardless of the gender combination of those parents.

    Want to send a message that marriage is unimportant - tell citizens that their their commitment to their spouses doesn't matter, that their families don't matter, that the children they are raising don't deserve the same nurturing by society because in the end they don't matter.

    Again, if marriage is the best way for sexuality to be expressed, marriage equality is the answer. If wanting the very best families and children we could possible have, marriage equality is the answer. If you want to re connect sexuality with family and love and commitment, marriage equality is the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Woo!! Oshtur Vishanti; What part of “It not about You or Me; It’s about the Family” did you not understand?

    I am very sorry and apologize for your anger! All I want to do is clear the air about the Holy Grail you are seeking and are so upset about.

    Truly! When you calmly examine what Marriage has always been:
    Marriage is All About “The Family.”

    It is true that as a Christian I do not approve your lifestyle.

    However, as a Christian, I will not Judge you for your lifestyle.

    It is not all about sex. “Marriage” is about uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and woman for life. Marriage is a contract both civil and religious, by which the parties engage to live together in mutual affection and fidelity till death shall separate them. Marriage is about raising children. Marriage was instituted by God Himself.

    I am sorry you did not have a happy and fulfilling childhood. I did, and I pray to God you find peace and happiness. Be calm and seek Him Who Love you.

    I pray:
    May the LORD bless you and keep you;
    May the LORD make His face shine upon you and be gracious to you;
    May the LORD turn His face toward you and give you peace. (Numbers 6: 24-26)

    ReplyDelete
  18. What part of “It not about You or Me; It’s about the Family” did you not understand?

    Ha my question - I agree its all about family, I just know there are more of them then you think.

    I am very sorry and apologize for your anger!

    Considering there isn't a single angry word in my entire response I suggest you look up the psychological concept of 'projection'.

    It is not all about sex. “Marriage” is about uniting a man and woman for life;

    I agree other than it can be about two adults of any gender combination, and you are the one that brought up a guy that talked about sexuality - I only mentioned it because you did.

    Marriage is a contract both civil and religious, by which the parties engage to live together in mutual affection and fidelity till death shall separate them.

    It can be both civil and religious, but it can be just either or neither too. Remember until the Catholic church tried to take over all marriages in the 14th century most of the population just 'married' - some times with a party, some times just by saying 'I marry you' 3 times to each other. Religion and a civil contract are totally unnecessary aspects of marriage in its truest form.

    Beyond that I agree that true marriage is about what you mentioned and obviously two people of any gender combination can be in it.

    Marriage is about raising children.

    Again, an argument FOR marriage equality since so many married couples do, regardless of their gender combination.

    I am sorry you did not have a happy and fulfilling childhood.

    Ah passive aggressive - if there were a more certain sign of innate evil I don't know what it would be. You of course know nothing of my childhood just as I know nothing of yours. But if snide remarks and ignoring the needs of all families, even the ones not just like yours, is how you make yourself feel better about yourself, take what small pleasure you can from such cold comforts.

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.