Letter: Reader favors Propositions 4 and 8
Election time is closing in and many sides and feeling will be shared, pushed and discussed. This is not just good, but real good. It’s part of our civic heritage and we should hope to be more informed through the process.
Mike Martinez asks (in his letter of Oct. 17), “can you imagine being called a ‘deviant?’.” I can. When I was an atheist, God called me a deviant. I had deviated from his acceptable norm. The word means deviating from the accepted norm (Webster’s NCD). I’m sorry if someone has sarcastically slandered you or a friend. Shame on them. But the fact remains — just because 3-6 percent of the population practices a certain, not normal lifestyle, does not make it normal. And society certainly does not have to approve of it and allow it to be codified into our community, state, or country. Our God-given free will allows us all to do anything we want, with anyone who is of like mind and spirit. But God and society certainly don’t have to say it’s good or even okay. And we certainly don’t have to codify it.
Mike goes on to say, “Make no mistake, this is not about your normal or religious beliefs, gentlemen, it is about equality.” How dare you! Your movement disallows our “moral and religious beliefs” because they stand in the way of accomplishing your agenda. And, if your “equality” comes to pass I will go to jail or at least pay a fine for just saying the things herein, let alone putting them in written form. I will be deviant because I am not part of your norm. And as the fullness of your movement evolves, pastors and churches will be asked to perform marriages that their, “moral and religious beliefs” don’t allow. In Massachusetts your movement demands that parents not have the right to opt-out, even in the lowest grades, when the gay marriage is being indoctrinated into the little ones’ brains.
So as you gain equality, we gain inequality, and anyone who would say, “No!” becomes the deviant. That may sound real good to you, but to most of us it sounds real bad.
Your movement hopes to be accepted and more complete through gay marriage. Sorry, its a sham. Pascal, the French mathematician and philosopher said, there is a God-shaped hole in the middle of each of us, that only God can fill. Gay marriage will not fill that hole. God has a plan for each of us, and try as me might to find happiness in other ways, it will not happen.
So, when we are filling out our absentee ballots or in the voting booth on election day, we need to consider whom we will be standing with. Will you stand with God or man? Don’t be fooled! We all have to answer for every action that is not of God. His love is merciful, but also just.
I, my family, and my Christian friends will be voting yes on Proposition 4, yes on Proposition 8, and for the only pro-life candidate for president of the United States of America.
Christians, get on your knees and pray to God that the Christians of this state will turn out in large enough numbers because of Proposition 4 and 8, that California would end up being a red state on election evening.
Jon Barsotti,
Madera
While I respect the enthusiasm with which Jon Barsotti’s letter (Tribune, Oct. 25) supports a yes vote on prop 8, I must reject his arguments on a prima facie level. His endorsement of a yes vote boils down to his religion does not support gay marriage. A noble stance perhaps; but one that has no place in law.
While it’s certainly undeniable that the U.S. has a majority of Christians in its electorate, protections and separations were put in place to insure that everyone has religious freedom no matter what religion one happens to be. The very first amendment to the constitution lays this out, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
While there may be other arguments for or against prop 8, he cites only that it’s against his personal religion. I do not deny that it may be against his, or my, or your religion but I must warn against the precedent trying to be instilled in this vote. That is legislating a preferred religious doctrine into state law for all to follow. Clearly this is unconstitutional … which is why the proposition is to amend the California constitution to a more bigoted form.
He seems to think that if others are granted marriage then his own is somehow lessened. It is a fallacy to believe such assertions. He says when others “gain equality, we gain inequality.” What has been taken away from him? He seems to think that he now has a smaller piece of pie instead of understanding that the entire pie is now bigger.
I’m sure he views his marriage as being a contract between him, his wife and his God. State-recognized marriage is simply that, state-recognized only. It does not lessen the marriage he or anybody else has.
As Americans we must ask ourselves if we stand for individual freedom for all, freedom to have different religions, freedom to do as we choose; or to try to mandate our personal beliefs onto our neighbors. We all have opinions on how others should live, but I for one do not have the audacity to tell you how you should live your own life. I don’t understand why anybody would. It’s easy for Christians to band together on this issue of pushing their own religious morals, but would we not also be up in arms as soon as an opposing religion tries to do the same against us?
I would like to comment on the letter by Jon Barsotti (Oct. 25). He asks, “Will you stand with God or man?”
Don’t be fooled. Yes, election time is closing in and once again the mainstream Christians are showing their narrow minded thinking by voting for the nominee who says he is pro-life. I too am a Christian, and reading the word of God daily is always the highlight of my day. For me to vote for a candidate who throws out he is pro-life, to sway the 65 million-plus Christian vote, is ridiculous.
Jesus said that in the last days, many will be deceived. You think we would have learned that by putting this president in office the last eight years. For you to say once again you will vote for the candidate who carries red and is pro-life is absurd.
This nominee can’t wait to take office and invade North Korea, Pakistan and other countries as well. Whereas this president is responsible for having thousands of young Americans killed. Not to mention the innocent women and children being killed. While lining his pockets and his co-hosts pockets with American money. These men are absolutely war-makers. They do not have the best interests of American people in their mind or heart. You are going to tell me they are pro-life, give me a break. To them that is a cliché to gather votes deceitfully.
In case you haven’t noticed the country is in the worst shape its ever been since its existence. I will say back then the people who founded this country had a true belief in God and laid down a Godly foundation. To say that these men who carry the color red and say they are pro-life are true believers is deception, we have the blind leading the blind. We are already falling into the ditch, let’s not go any deeper. In these uncertain times, we need to elect those who have the needs and concerns of the people at heart. To keep us from falling deeper into a ditch. These are the same kind of people Jesus came to seek and save, those who have become lost.
I ask you, will you stand with God or man? Don’t be fooled again.
As a Christian I, too, will get on my knees and pray for you, your family, your friends, and Katherine Atilano (Oct. 27), that many eyes will be open to see and many ears will be open to hear the voices crying in the wilderness once again.
Steve Sanchez,
Madera
In response to Mr. Bonander’s recent letter to the Tribune regarding Proposition 8, I present the following as food for thought. But first let me state (borrowing Mr. Bonander’s words), I support his enthusiasm but with all due respect, I reject his argument.
Let’s rewind the clock back to the year 2000 when California voters passed Proposition 22 (by 61 percent); (in Madera County alone 80 percent of voters said yes to its passing [source: savecalifornia.com]) saying that a marriage in California is between a man and a woman. Marriage defined in the Family Code reads … “marriage means a civil contract between an unmarried man and unmarried woman, who are of legal age, not first cousins or closer in consanguinity, who are capable of consenting to and physically consummating marriage, and who are not currently registered in a domestic partnership or civil union.”
Then earlier this year, four activist judges based in San Francisco overturned the people’s vote, legalizing same-sex marriage. The court’s decision overturned the will of California voters. Article 3, Section 3 of the California Constitution upholds the separation of powers principle by expressly prohibiting the judicial, executive and legislative branches of California from exercising the powers of each other; Article 4, Section 1 expressly states that only the Legislature and the people using the initiative process possess legislative powers to change the law or make new law; Article 18 clearly states that only the people, not the courts, can amend the constitution.
To say I was upset by the action of the Court is putting it mildly — whether it’s this issue or any other, the Court’s responsibility is to uphold the laws of the land, not to change or create them. I cherish the American democratic process described by Abraham Lincoln as “government of the people by the people, for the people” — a process that was undermined by these four judges.
Do my religious beliefs come into play? You bet they do. Marriage is one of the seven sacraments of the Church. Jesus instituted Christian marriage when the Pharisees asked him a question about divorce. Jesus’ response as recorded in Mark 10:6-9 was, “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife. And they twain shall be one flesh so then they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Do I feel that by granting marriage to others outside of God’s definition lessens its sanctity? Absolutely! Oops and here I go “pushing” my Christian morals which are unlike today’s dominate cultural morals that are made clear by the attitude and behavior evidence such as the rapid growth of the pornography industry, income tax cheating, computer hacking, adultery, etc.
In closing, a yes vote on Proposition 8 would mean to overturn the outrageous Supreme Court decision and restore the definition of marriage that was approved by over 61 percent of voters. Proposition 8 is not an attack on gay couples and does not take away what The Domestic Partnership Act of 2003 affords same-sex couples (and to certain opposite-sex couples in which at least one or both of the parties are over the age of 62), the same rights and responsibilities as marriage. Gays have a right to their private lives, but not to change the definition of marriage for everyone else. Passing Proposition 8 places into the Constitution the simple definition that a marriage is between a man and a woman.
Pam Pistoresi,
Madera
I say this about Prop 8 – Keep YOUR religion out of OUR marriages.
I am teaching my daughter to grow up as an individual who loves her world and fights to keep what she cares about safe and thriving. To love whoever she pleases, be it man or woman, and to treat that person with honest emotion. It is none of anyones business to decide what makes a marriage a marriage. A union between a human and a monkey might be alarming, but another living, breathing, happy, loving, brilliant human being – perfectly suited for the other – that should never be stopped.
If you, reading this, feel that man and woman are the only fit in a marriage, then teach your children that. It’s part of your religion? Let others marry who they please, just like you have, and allow them to teach their children what they believe.
Yes on 8 is simply put – discrimination.
Look at the signage on this website:
(URL LINK REMOVED)
The sign that reads, “Prop 8 Undecided? PRAY about it, its THAT important,” makes me want to throw up.
I know people that are gay that voted yes on Proposition 8. Now, what does that tell all you people who dislike Proposition 8? Kinda makes your arguments seem less important doesn’t it?
I have a hard time thinking that someone who is gay voted yes on 8. Even so, my arguments, and the argument of so so many are definitely not less important.
It’s interesting how people who claim that groups of people — the Mormon Church and people that voted Yes on 8– are bigots and Prop. 8 itself is bigotry, yet they turn around and do the same thing to these groups of people –mainly the Mormons– when they protest its passage.
For those of you using religion to back your arguments-
Do people who are not of your religion get married?
Do agnostics?
Do atheists?
Do Satanists?
Most homosexuals (and an increasing number of people in general) don’t care if their marriage is sanctified or recognized by any church or religious group. What they want is equal footing, the same rights and the same words everyone else gets.
By passing proposition 8, the people of California have thrown away the idea of our Republic-a system of government that protects the minority from the tyranny of the majority-and said that it’s perfectly fine for a simple majority to -take away- the rights of a minority. I don’t know about you, but that’s not a precedent I’m comfortable with. You know, first they come for the gays, but I’m not gay, so I say nothing…
If you don’t like gay marriage-don’t have one. It’s pretty simple. Gay marriage was legal here for several months. If I remember right 13,000 couples married here. Did the state spin into a moral crisis? Are your children suddenly gay? Is the quality of your marriage somehow diminished?
There is, simply put, no sound, logical, secular argument against gay marriage and in time, this nation will realize that. We will see equal rights for homosexuals and those who opposed them will look as backward as those who still think black people should drink from the ‘coloreds only’ fountain.
Proposition 8 was/is to restore the traditional definition of marriage, which has existed in this country since its creation. It is only an added fact that religious groups support it too because of their own beliefs.
Also, according to all of the oppositions’ arguments , I should also be able to marry a horse, cow or any other animal. Going by what has been said, they have rights too and who is to define what love is? Basically, your arguments and statements have many bad holes in them that allow unthinkable things to happen also.
Marriage is between a man and a woman, regardless of your religous beliefs or lack of them. Stop saying it is only based on religion because it is not.