Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Domestic Partners Seek To Hide Their Names From The Public

Bills have been introduced in both the State House and Senate that if passed, will create a confidentiality program under which domestic partners will be able to hide their names and address from public disclosure.

What am I missing here? Am I mis-reading these bills?

And some of the sponsors are those, who along with Sec. Reed and Attorney General McKenna, fought to disclose the names and addresses of all those who signed Referendum 71 petitions---and prevailed. And now all the names have been published on several websites.

Disclosure?

Hypocrisy.

Check out SB 6213 and HB 2385. Notice the sponsors.

The argument? "This is different." Full disclosure is actually, "selective disclosure."

Where is the high browed disgust from Sec.--"The people need to know, I represent the people," Reed? And will A/G McKenna and his people look into this violation of disclosure if the bills should pass?

Why should the names and addresses of domestic partnerships be exempt from public access? Marriage licenses are not.

Special rights.

In the world of so-called "sexual orientation" and "equality," things are most often not as they seem.

While we are trying to defend marriage, yet another little secret is being advanced.

While the priority is on the defense of marriage, please take an extra moment and call your Representative and Senator and tell them you oppose these 2 bills.

It causes one to wonder what else is happening in the shadows of " disclosure" and "equality"?

Also. Today is March For Life Day at the Capitol in Olympia. For more than 30 years pro-life citizens have gathered publicly on behalf of the sanctity of life. Thousands will attend today's event. They will gather on the Capitol steps from noon to 1:30, then attend prayer vigils and call on law makers on behalf of life. We encourage all who can do so to attend.

Note from March for Life: 1/16/2012 UPDATE -- The March for Life is ON for January 17, at the Capitol! We know the weather may present some challenges, but it will not keep us away. We'll gather again, as we have for the past 33 years. Bundle up and drive safely. We can't wait to see you there!

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Active. Be Prayerful. Be Blessed.

5 comments:

  1. Gary is either misreading or misrepresenting these two bills, given his history on this issue, my money's on the latter.

    What Gary presents here a bill making ALL the names of ALL people in domestic partnerships secret, is actually a bill to offer the same protections to victims of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking by a law enforcement officer. These are the same protections that are given to individuals in a marriage in the same conditions.

    While Gary dishonestly tries to present this as a stark contrast to his failed litigation, it is not. Had Gary chosen to pursue the type of individual protections for individuals with specific needs for anonymity, who had signed, R-71 he may well have been successful. He did not do that, instead he chose to dishonestly present professional anti-gay activists and legislators as victims of imaginary threats. He chose to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars of state funds defending against this dishonest smear campaign parading as a legal action.

    How sad that, rather than discuss issues openly and honestly, Gary chooses to misrepresent and spread disinformation.

    If one is either Vigilant or Discerning, one will see through the lies being spread here in a heartbeat!

    ReplyDelete
  2. These bills would simply protect the personal information of people who have been a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, and/or stalking. Not people who are afraid this might happen, but people to whom it has already happened.

    Wow, you are callous.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm afraid he's right, Gary. This just expands the address confidentiality to domestic partners. Of course, since we know homosexuals are our moral superiors and would never engage in anything so tacky as domestic abuse, the protection will never have to be invoked anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Joel,

    I'm glad you have no opposition to these bills.

    Thank you for your support.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "And some of the sponsors are those, who along with Sec. Reed and Attorney General McKenna, fought to disclose the names and addresses of all those who signed Referendum 71 petitions---and prevailed. And now all the names have been published on several websites."

    Gee, Pastor Randall, all those awful violent homosexual activists out there having access to the R71 petitions for all these months. And the total number of incidents of harassment or violence stands at zero. Even after you put out a call here for information on any incidents, the total remains stuck at zero. Does that mean that you misled the court and your membership about the threat of violence?

    ReplyDelete

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