Wednesday, February 01, 2012

Seattle Times: Forget The Voters

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Today the Washington State Senate is scheduled to vote on SB 6239, a bill that if passed, will redefine marriage and legalize so-called homosexual "marriage" in the state, forever changing the culture of the state and rewriting much of the public education sex-ed curriculum.

Senator Ed Murray and other activist legislators have been incrementally working toward this day for more than 15 years. Each session they have passed bills that expanded homosexual rights, all under the guise of fairness and compassion. In more recent years they have adopted the "civil rights" theme for their incremental progress, claiming their sexual behavior merited and was equal to the deserved civil rights movement of equality for African Americans.

Claiming that ethnicity is equivalent to their sexual behavior.

Sen. Murray says he now has the 25 votes necessary to pass the bill in the Senate. The margin is greater in the House.

Gov. Gregoire came out recently saying she was breaking with the beliefs of her church and her upbringing, but was going to both sponsor the bill and support redefining marriage anyway. "But," she said, her decision was not without personal moral conflict. And that she preferred that this issue be referred to the people for a vote.

Sen. Haugen, the 25th vote, recently joined the parade, also admitting personal moral conflict over the issue and wishing out loud it could be referred to the people for a vote. Senators Hill, Shin and others have also wished it could be referred to the people.

This past Monday, the Seattle Times told its readers to forget the voters saying, "The rights of minorities should not be subject to the whims of majorities."

The whims?

The sanctity of marriage as between a man and a woman has been honored and promoted by every successful civilization and affirmed by every major religion in the history of the human race. And every major religion condemns homosexual behavior as deviant and unacceptable.

Those who support marriage and oppose redefining it stand on solid ground and on the side of history and wisdom.

It is hardly a "whim."

Those seeking to redefine a proven human institution, elevating and celebrating behavior condemned throughout human experience, may better define "whim".

If Murray is right and his bill passes today, what if an amendment to refer the bill to the people is offered--- what will they do? Are they truthful about wishing it could go to a vote of the people? Or have they been merely creating a little political cover for themselves?

By the time this day has passed, we will likely know if the Senate is willing to stand against history and morality by redefining our oldest human institution.

And we will know if they really would prefer to refer it to the people.

If the Legislature is afraid to refer this issue to the people, those of us who are standing for marriage will run a referendum. And we all know what that will involve. But we will do it anyway, because the people have a right to speak on this issue?

May God help, guide and provide for us in the days ahead.

Be Prayerful.


  1. As Gary and his friends have assured us repeatedly, this WILL go to a vote of the people, regardless of whether the legislature refers it or not. Given that, isn't a move by the legislature to refer this bill to the people really just a gift that will save Gary's friends at NOM and their secret out of state donors a couple hundred grand in paid signature gatherers?

    Also, if referring bills about marriage to the people is such a necessity, why didn't Gary and his ilk demand that the state's DOMA be put to a popular vote? Why are they seeking a legislative repeal of marriage equality in NH, rather than putting it to a vote of the people?

    Seems your side ONLY favors a vote of people, when you are unable to get your way in the legislature! Situational ethics much? I note that not even Gary can manage a "Be discerning" after this load of pablum.

  2. Homosexuality is not a right, it's a rare, intensely codependent sexual addiction that is the sine qua non of personal and national failure -- especially if it's legislatively spun into a special right. All homosexuals I've known have personality disorders. They alienate themselves from Christianity by their acts, inclining them to anarchism/communism and resultant opposition to our God-given unalienable rights.

    We have fallen to this point mainly due to cowardly pastors and priests who, over the years, gave up moral courage for thirty pieces of 501(c)(3) silver. These sorry cowards have no pastoral authority and must be rebuked and rehabilitated, or fired and replaced, if we are to turn from our wicked ways. These sacred topics are certainly not debatable.

    Gary, thanks for your fine work in this arena.

    1. Well said. These homos shouldn't be rewarded. Just the opposite, they shouldn't get free medical care or food stamps anymore.

    2. Thank you Ernest for your summary. You are correct in what you say. I have occasionally put my two cents in because of my personal experience and back ground and stated it well enough that Gary posted it the next day.

      I'm most frustrated by the homosexual community insisting that there love is based on mutual respect, mutual love, mutual exclusivity when anyone who has been around the community knows very well these are all lies.

      There is a very distinct difference in knowing one couple ( I could use my cousin and her butch as an example of a stable long term relationship) and knowing the community as a whole. I want to be clear that my cousin's relationship appears to have the characteristics I mentioned but they have divorced themselves from the family in such a way as to be mysterious so none of us really knows how they work out their relationship. It could be an 'open' relationship for all I know.

      The perversion is definitely a demon and those who have been released have warned me repeatedly that it is a 'jump, sticky' demon. I agree with the picture this brings up. I have no idea if that is accurate theology. I do know that much of the reasoning used to support their cause is very enticing. It clearly falls apart the minute you look from the helicopter view. My word, men are doing WHAT together and women are doing WHAT!!!

      It is common sense that something was damaged in a child's heart to turn to this perversion and the ministry that I'm reporting from in San Fransisco personally has found abuse in 100% of them.

  3. Thanks Gary for once again pointing out the extremism of the Seattle Times and their dishonesty. Good point. We are on the side of wisdom and morality. They are not. This is a day that may be long remembered as the moral tipping point of our state.

  4. 11:30 You are aware that Gary and Larry Stickney did not have paid signature gathers. They used volunteers. I was one of them. Also I think you know this is not NH, it is WA.

    1. I have heard from several sources that they DID bring in paid gatherers at the end. Also NOM has already pledged the money for paid gatherers this round.

      This may not be NH, but the fact remains when the legislature was denying marriage equality with DOMA the anti-gays didn't demand a public vote, and where they can win legislatively like NH they don't demand a public vote. Clearly they only consider a public vote to a necessary right when they can't get their way through the legislature.

      Note: this is the second time I've posted this response, if Gary or FFN claims the did not use any paid gatherers why not post my statement and respond? rather than attempt to silence the issue, as if you had something to hide?

    2. That is the mystery - there were paid signature gathers who came from as far away as California to do it yet no one reported paying them.

  5. The Times is absolutely right. Judicial fiat, legislative vote, referendum, whichever will suit the purpose. Democracy is fine as long as the gay people always win.

  6. The Times is absolutely right. Judicial fiat, legislative vote, referendum, whichever will suit the purpose. Democracy is fine as long as the gay people always win.

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. And Gods judgement on a wicked nation whose turned their backs on Him continues.

  9. I am so pleased to be the first commenter on this blog to gloat over the 28-21 vote in the Senate tonight! As great as it is that the cause of equality has advanced, and as wonderful as it is that some Washingtonians may soon be able to get married, all of that pales in comparison to the pleasure I get knowing the grief that this will cause you. If you feel absolutely horrible about this, then you will have but a taste of the misery that you inflict on gay people on a daily basis. So please know that whatever you are feeling is well deserved.

    Now I know there is the referendum to come. And no one knows how that will turn out. But tonight, you have lost and lost big. You might ask yourselves why your victories are growing less frequent, your margins of victory slimmer, and the money and effort required to procure any victories greater. Perhaps it is because people know hate when they see it and can't be fooled just because you insist that you act in love.

  10. People do indeed know hate when they see it. And unfortunately, when it's aimed at Jesus freaks, they'll also vote for it.

  11. Congratulations to the people of Washington. It's a great victory for a great state!

  12. anom 830

    I must say if this wasa political issue I would have little concern for your comments, since idealogical beliefs often only see the hate from the other side of the political side. Really hope your life gets better , and the love of friends and life find you able to see the world and people in a more forgiving and able manner.

    People are usually about the same I have found , almost like we share a common denominator in how we were formed and designed . But a world view that places an emphasis on the importance of a children and mom and dad, or a world view that sees this specfic issue as a civil rights issue I would suggest to you both have positive virtues aligned with them. People have so much potential to promote kindness when you give them a little respect and love . If you need people to agree with your morality or support for same sex marriage , your life will be quite limited . You don't want that , and you don't want to hang on to your hate for those who do disagree , that way the ones who really are bigoted keep on winning even when your side wins .

  13. The gay marriage issue is a non issue issue.

    The issue issues is fair wages for work .

    So that people can support their families.

    Health care so that family members can take advantage of medical advancements and don't die.

    Housing so that families can live out of the elements.

    These are issue issues.

    Gay marriage is GOD's issue not ours.


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