Friday, August 28, 2009

R-71 Controversy Heightens With Lawsuit

A lawsuit was filed yesterday in King County Superior Court to keep R-71 off the November ballot, regardless of how many signatures are validated by the Secretary's office.

The suit has been assigned to Judge Julie Spector, who is openly homosexual.

The Public Disclosure Commission yesterday rejected our request to seal the names of donors to Protect Marriage Washington. They said they saw no danger in making the names public.

And we are coming down to the last few days in verifying the petition signatures for R-71.

A homosexual rights political advocacy group, Washington Families Standing Together, filed a lawsuit yesterday against Secretary of State Sam Reed.

They are alleging that Reed has accepted thousands of signatures that were not in compliance with the law.

One of their allegations is that Reed has accepted signatures from people who were not registered voters when they signed the petition form.

Essentially, they are accusing many of us of signing the petition then registering to vote after the fact. I know that is not true. Absolutely not true. However, they will find it difficult, even if that were the case, to prove it because the petition signatures are not dated.

They are also alleging that Reed accepted, "thousands of signatures on petitions," that were improperly filled out.

The Seattle Times correctly quoted me this morning saying that this is simply a last ditch effort on their part. It is becoming apparent that if numbers hold, R-71 will qualify for the ballot. More on that in a moment. I have also included a link to a KOMO news article.

A deep concern that we have is that Judge Julie Spector is openly homosexual and activist. She is found on a list of openly homosexual elected officials. In her campaign to be elected to her seat in 2000, she was quoted in the September 13, 2000, edition of the Seattle Weekly, calling herself a "dyke".

It is impossible to believe an openly homosexual activist judge could rule fairly in this case. We are considering our next step.

Apparently, the homosexual activists are convinced that R-71 will make the ballot and the public, given the chance to express themselves, will repeal what the law makers have done to advance the homosexual agenda.

I agree with them. If people properly understand what economic and cultural impact SB 5688 will have over the next several decades, they will reject it with their vote. They will defend marriage.

The key, going forward, is to be able to fight this horrendous battle and educate the public regarding this matter.

The homosexual rights groups have already raised $89,000 to fight us. That amount will grow expedentially. We have, it appears, with God's help and a few dollars, been able to mobilize tens of thousands of people across the state, working with a coalition of faith based organizations, shock both the press and the homosexual rights activists. One reporter actually referred to this as "a miracle" in a conversation with me.

If you believe what we are doing is worthy and you support the defense of marriage, this our time. There will not be a "better" or more "convenient" time in the future as some have suggested. Senators Swecker, Stevens, Holmquist and Representatives Shea, McCune, Klippert and others have affirmed this both to their colleagues in the Legislature and to the public. This is the time.

Your donation today is urgent. I cannot overstate the importance and urgency of your financial support. I know you understand that. Click here to make an online donation.

All donations given to the Faith and Freedom PAC are used for direct expenses in advancing R-71. All income is spent directly on printing, mailing, internet promotion and going forward, media ads and expenses, rather than salaries or consulting fees.

The Faith and Freedom PAC board consists of Gary Randall, Richard Wilson, Sen. Dan Swecker, Rep. Matt Shea, Rep. Jim McCune and Larry Stickney.

We stand at a cultural crossroads. Decisions made today will impact you, your children and grandchildren for decades to come. And it will affect what your children and grandchildren are taught in the public school classroom.

Much hangs in the balance.

As Referendum 71 is, God willing, placed on the ballot, there will be much work to do over the next couple of months. The PAC will be directly advocating the rejection of SB 5688 on the ballot, while the non-profit Faith and Freedom Foundation will be educating the public regarding this issue.

Thank you for standing with us.

Yesterday the Public Disclosure Commission rejected our request to seal the names of donors to Protect Marriage Washington. Although there have been a number of threats made against people active in this campaign, including a published death threat against me and Larry Stickney, they concluded there was no direct threat to the donors.

A Temporary Restraining Order which orders the Secretary of State to not release the names of those who signed the R-71 petition, remains in affect until September 3---next Thursday. At that time the judge will rule on the matter.

Today's report from the Secretary's office on the signature validation progress is showing that nearly 111,000 signatures have been approved. Last night's tally shows the error rate has moved downward from 11.85% on Wednesday to 11.81% on Thursday. The Secretary's office says they expect to complete the process by next Tuesday. We cannot have an error rate greater than 12.4% to make the ballot.

Thank you for standing with us in these historic times.

God bless you.

_____________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom

Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

20 comments:

  1. At issue, Gary, is the back of most of your petitions. It appears they have not been signed. You asked your supporters to make sure they signed the validation, and they didn't. If they didn't follow your orders and the state's requirements, doesn't that invalidate them? You yourself emphasized the importance of doing that. So is it now something that can be conveniently forgotten, even though it's state law?

    ReplyDelete
  2. First and foremost, Judge Julie Specter has to recuse herself from the case as this is a clear "Conflict of Interest" in her ruling in matters of this nature. If she continues to hear this case, she is violating Federal laws and will need to be reported to the American Bar Association for purposely trying to overrule state law.

    Second, this is a last ditch effort by the organizations to overthrow R-71 which, under election laws of Washington state, is a frivilous lawsuit to waste the courts time. Under the Constitution of the United States, we have the same rights to Freedom of Speech as they do. It amazes me how one sided they use these rights, but feel anyone against them doesn't have any rights.

    Third, we are at a crossroads in America to stand up to morality and stand against the enemy who wishes to destroy this country from within and what it stands for. This country was founded on the principles of the Bible which clearly states God's position in reagrds to these matters. As for me an my family, we will stand on the Word of God and fight the evil in this country.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1st you lied again - there is nothing with in the language of the SB5688 that would support your comment about kids being taught in schools about homosexuality. 2nd this is not a defense against marriage it is a Domestic Partnership. PLEASE STOP USING LIES TO GET YOUR MONEY FOR YOUR POCKET. By all means you have the right to fight this. and I support that but not your lies. I am a GOOD CHRISTIAN AND I CAN NO LONGER SUPPORT YOUR ACTIONS. I hope for you that Jesus can truely forgive you. Even though it is greed that moves you. Also, I'm a little nervous about the gay community since they don't have kids to raise they have 4 times as much money to donate than we do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This just isn't right- how can they have any ground to stand on this. It just seems so funny. If we donate money, is there a way that we can remain anonymous?? Just like with non-for-profits you can make an anonymous donation and they cannot give out your information! My family and I will be holding prayers to night for with some of our neighbors. God Bless you all. Lets keep up the good fight. I know God will see us through this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I suppose a Heterosexual judge would be impartial? What's the difference here?

    ReplyDelete
  6. So... if the judge is heterosexual does that make him/her impartial? I see no issue here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If a gay judge is biased toward our position, isn't a straight judge biased toward yours? A good judge -- whether gay or straight -- will rule on the merits of the case. You are simply calling her biased because she's gay.

    Secondly, the SoS has accepted signatures of people who registered to vote AFTER you turned in the petitions on July 25. I think it's pretty clear that those signers were not registered to vote when they signed.

    And finally, you didn't mention that more than 2500 petitions (representing more than 30,000 signatures) were missing the names and signatures of the signature gatherers, which is required by law. By signing, the signature gatherer swears that, to the best of his/her knowledge, the names on the petition are valid and not forged.

    Upon discovering so many petitions without the signature gatherers' signatures on the the Capitol steps, Larry Stickney rubber stamped (!) his signature on most of those petitions, even though he could not vouch for the signatures on the petitions.

    Still, more than 150 petitions were turned in without a signature gatherer's signature at all, and all of those petitions were counted, too.

    R71 should be on the ballot only if you follow the law. If roles were reversed, you'd be doing the same thing WAFST is doing.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, Judge Specter should recuse herself. But, what is even more glaring is that the case should be dismissed. The Government is of the people, by the people... And, in WA this is exemplified in both the referendum and the ballot process. The People will speak and settle this matter. May God, by His Holy Spirit, bring conviction and voice to His people. VOTE and be heard. Speak the Truth in Love, but speak the Truth. Let God be true and every man a liar. Preach the Word...!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am a Christian and, if this makes it to the ballot, will vote NO. It saddens me that folks like yourself tarnish the faith & mission of Christianity by advocating that it is God's will that a minority be discriminated against. You stand to lose nothing if homosexuals are offered the same rights you have. You put an unnecessary stumbling block in the path of those who may embrace Christ. Very sad.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @2:41 it is also exemplified in the democratically elected legislators who passed a law that defined the process by which signatures should be verified. If you failed to follow the law than the 30,000 signatures in question should not be verified. We're talking about the rights of over 5800 families, both gay and straight. All care should be taken to do this right and frankly you failed.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @ ROY - VOTE "YES" TO APPROVE THE LEGISLATION AND PROTECT ALL FAMILIES.

    Voting "no" means you want to veto the legislation and strip couples of their civil rights (banking, hospital, insurance, legal, etc).

    VOTE "YES" MEANS TO PASS THE GOOD LEGISLATION. VOTE "NO" MEANS SIDE WITH THE SO-CALLED CHRISTIAN BIGOTS.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Read Romans.It states that God will turn his back on nations who do NOT follow his basic principles. Authentic marriages is a 'biggy!''lying with a man to man, women to women is an abominaton to God'. I am concern about our nation, along with those who choose to 'compromise' concerning God'a word! Bless those who continues to stand up for God's principle, and who along with many of us, 'take' the rejections coming our way! Eternity is a LONG time, and I feel life here is so short, surely we can stand up for God''s principles completely--until we join Him for eternity!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oh, poor poor pitiful Anti-gay bigots being forced to follow the law when trying to curtail the rights of their fellow citizens, my heart weeps. I wonder if, given the fact that SoS Reed has accepted petitions not filled out and witnessed in accordance with state law, Gary and Larry want to retract their earlier smears of him when things weren't looking to go their way?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Seems to me that trying to [1] remove the civil rights of others and [2] try to hide your name, are the abominations.

    Hopefully this will motivate people to donate to the re-election campaign of Judge Spector.

    ReplyDelete
  15. What makes you think an openly homosexual judge would be any less biased than an openly heterosexual judge?

    ReplyDelete
  16. @5:34 PM We should also go after Red Lobster, Pikes Place Market, QFC, and thousands of other places that sell shellfish. People who eat shellfish are going to hell and we should save their souls by making it illegal. Randall, will you help us with an initiative next year?

    Leviticus 11:9-12 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
    11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

    ReplyDelete
  17. First, if Domestic Partnership rights are apparently such a no-brainer for any thinking, moral individual, why is the homosexual community so afraid of a referendum? You would think that they would trust that their case is self-evident. The extraordinary measures they are employing in blocking a democaratic process reveal their insecurity about the case they can make to the electorate.

    Secondly, there is a clear effort to intimidate donors. I haven't donated yet but this really irritates me and I probably will be MORE likely to donate because of it! Remember Winston Churchill: he refused to be intimidated.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I suppose a Heterosexual judge would be impartial? What's the difference here?

    ROFL

    ReplyDelete
  19. To those who have no moral standard to discern good from evil
    one manner seems just as good as another to them. At such times they see one thing equal to another whether it be good or bad.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 1:35 PM,

    You have described the dishonest campaign run by Gary quite aptly.

    ReplyDelete

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