Opposing All But One Man/One Woman Marriage



Redefining Marriage?

For several thousand years, throughout the Earth, marriage has defined a special relationship between one man and one woman. This month, February 2012, Washington State's House, Senate and Governor enacted legislation to redefine marriage as a special relationship between two people regardless of their gender. These lawmakers took this step, legalizing “same-sex marriage”, without any apparent compulsion to verify whether this action was in line with the views of the majority of their constituents. Although the state office-holders who supported this legislation may attempt to position their stance on this as "acting for the greater good" - i.e. They know what's best for us even if we don't know that ourselves – In fact, it's just one of the most recent examples of a tyrannical ruling class imposing it's will on the masses.

Having Your Say

Thankfully, there is an Initiative and Referendum Amendment in the Washington State Constitution. As it applies to this “same-sex marriage” legislation, that means there is an automatic stay on enacting the legislation, to allow time for a related petition process, potentially leading to a referendum being placed on a statewide ballot, to provide for registered voters having their say on the matter. Although proponents of this legislation are likely to present this as standing up for the rights of the “LGBT community” versus the antiquated attitudes of the “Religious Right”, this matter goes well beyond those boundaries. I believe all who are determined to see the United States continue as a “government of the people, by the people, for the people”, should support the referendum to reject this legislation.

Standing Up For Liberty

Yes, I’m saying that it’s not just people of faith, who hold the Biblical view of marriage, who should support the referendum to reject this legislation. I believe it should also be supported by those who are ambivalent regarding the definition of marriage and even those who are in favor of “same-sex marriage.” To illustrate my belief, I ask you to simply consider the following question:

When the tyrannical ruling class comes after one group today

and you don't stand up against them,

who will stand up against them tomorrow,

when they come after your group?

Standing Up For Your Faith

Of course, the passion that the vast majority of Americans of faith have for this surpasses their fervor for liberty, due to their beliefs regarding marriage. The following statement that was included in a recent message from my Pastor, Daniel Gettemy, of Calvary Chapel Vancouver, provides an excellent summary of my related beliefs:

“… the first institution that God created, defined, and established for mankind was Marriage. Marriage was established by God for the development, well-being, and advancement of healthy (spiritually, emotionally, and physically) human relationships. These relationships – particularly when united in fellowship with God – would then be the foundational building blocks for future generations (children/family) and the backbone of local communities and culture. God was quite intentional and specific when He created that first marriage as being between one man (Adam) and one woman (Eve). Because God is both gracious and wise, then we know He wasn’t experimenting with marriage in the beginning – He was defining it!”

My hope, in offering this statement, is to facilitate broader understanding, if not agreement.

What To Expect In Taking Your Stand

A classic approach that you should expect from proponents of the “same-sex marriage” legislation was demonstrated in a message I got from a friend of my youth, who said,

“Gay marriage cannot hurt anyone represented by your Representatives. Gay marriage WILL HELP many who are ALSO represented by your Representatives.”

The above statement from my Pastor should make it clear how I see redefining marriage as being harmful. Furthermore, I don’t see who it helps. In 2009, without redefining marriage, legislation was enacted in Washington State to extend the rights and responsibilities of domestic partners to include the same rights and responsibilities as those extended to married couples. So, when a “same-sex marriage” proponent asks, “When one person in a domestic partnership is ill, shouldn’t they have the same rights as a married person to be visited by their domestic partner?”, understand that they already have that right. These arguments are empty.

And if you don’t agree with the message of the proponents of the “same-sex marriage” legislation, rather than attacking our message, you can expect them to attack the messenger – i.e. me and you. However, this isn’t about any of the personal accusations they will make. It is only about whether the unilateral redefinition of marriage by the tyrannical ruling class should stand.

Additionally, expect that taking your stand will require you to do so for the long-haul. My Wife and I chose to move from California, to make Washington State our home, nearly seven years ago. In 2000, as Registered Voters in California, we supported Proposition 22, an Initiative legally defining marriage as a relationship only between opposite sex couples. It passed easily. However, here we are nearly 12 years later and nothing along those lines has been implemented, as a result of the unendingly insistent actions of the minority represented by the “LGBT community”.

Taking An Appropriate Stance

First, I want to address what not to do. When considering this, the examples I immediately think of are a couple of local “conservative” bloggers known as The Pissants. Like their namesakes, these are beings that thrive in filth and darkness. Like the proponents of the “same-sex marriage” legislation, their primary tactic is to attack the messenger rather than the message. Innuendo and outright lies are their stock-in-trade. And their response to any disagreement is to engage in lengthy tit-for-tat arguments (until, of course, they believe they’ve had the last word), laced with more personal attacks and no constructive dialog.

What I recommend doing is pretty much the opposite of what I described immediately above. Personal attacks are counterproductive. They just harden the position of the opposition and overhearing it is a turnoff to any undecided person who might, otherwise, listen. Just thoughtfully state your views to anyone truly willing to listen. It’s a waste of time to get into lengthy debate with those who want to use the opportunity to personally attack you or to end up believing they had the last word.

An Admonition In Standing Up For Your Faith

Coincidentally, this year’s National Prayer Breakfast took place in Washington D.C. at the same time as Washington State’s legalization of “same-sex marriage” was proceeding. The Keynote Speaker for this event was Eric Metaxas, the author of the current best-selling books BONHOEFFER and AMAZING GRACE, the story of William Wilberforce. I listened to his entire speech and as I did, I was pleased in knowing that President Obama was sitting on the dais and hearing Metaxas’ message. In fact, during his speech, Metaxas gave the President a copy of BONHOEFFER and he committed to reading it. My prayer is that he will do so and that it will work to change his heart. However, in the later part of his presentation, Metaxas delivered a Spiritual message that was aimed right at folks like me and it convicted me deeply. It was an admonition that certainly fits in this discussion for my fellow-Christians and I want to share it with you. I do recommend listening to Metaxas’ entire presentation but I’ve paraphrased his admonition, as follows:

Essentially, Metaxas pointed out that, unlike most around him, Bonhoeffer was able to see the greatest evil of the 20th Century, Nazi Germany’s attempt to exterminate the Jews from Europe. Likewise, he noted that Wilberforce was able to see the wrong of the British slave trade when nearly all of his contemporaries believed it was OK. The answer that Metaxas provides for the question, “How could these men see the truth when others couldn’t?” is: “Because, through His Holy Spirit, Jesus opened their eyes.” With that, Metaxas went on to point out that today, when we find ourselves able to see things like the Biblical view of sexuality or that the unborn are persons, we need to remember that we are commanded by God to love those who do not yet see these things and that without God we would find ourselves on the other side of these issues.

So, beyond my earlier recommendation to “Just thoughtfully state your views to anyone truly willing to listen”, for my fellow-Christians I would add, do so in love and to know that you’re doing so by praying for those who come against you.

Taking Your First Step

In order for a referendum on this matter to be on the statewide ballot this coming November, there must first be a successful petition effort. Petitions are likely to become available in the first week of March. To stay tuned into this, I recommend the Preserve Marriage Washington Website. And, I encourage you to get involved in this effort as soon and as enthusiastically as you can.

Taking A Step Beyond

Supporting the referendum to reject the legislation legalizing “same-sex marriage” in Washington State is Step #1. Step #2 is eliminating the tyrannical ruling class who passed this legislation. So, check the voting record for the State Legislators who have been elected to represent your Legislative District. If they supported this legislation, find out when they’re up for reelection and then find an opponent to vote for whom you believe you can trust to verify whether their actions are in line with the views of the majority of their constituents.

CRC Light Rail Crossing Project: Rickshaws Make Better Sense

Saturday, June 4, 2011, was sunny, with temps in the upper 80s in Vancouver, WA … our first 80 degree day since October 6, 2010. In spite of that, a dedicated group of community-minded Vancouver citizens willingly sacrificed four to five hours of that precious time to attend Bridging The Gaps, an opportunity to be enlightened and to be heard on the topic of the proposed CRC Light Rail Crossing Project … the biggest public works undertaking in the history of the community.

Sadly, Vancouver’s Mayor, Tim Leavitt and the majority of elected officials invited to attend Bridging The Gaps, didn’t join their constituents at this meeting. In Mayor Leavitt’s case, I knew that he had posted an update on Facebook about the day’s great weather and stating that he would be “cruising around town, enjoying our beautiful open spaces and trails.” My initial thought on this was, “How sad, when a group of folks Leavitt is sworn to represent are willing to sacrifice a big chunk of their first summer-like day for the sake of the community, their Mayor is unwilling to do likewise.” I was very disappointed to see Mayor Leavitt use this “Sunny Day Excuse” as his latest rationale for not hearing and responding to the will of the people. Going into Saturday’s event, I continued to wonder about this ongoing attitude on Leavitt’s part and frankly, I was baffled by it. Coming out of this meeting, however, I thought I was finally beginning to understand. Based on the information presented at Bridging The Gaps, I don’t think it was the sunlight that led Mayor Leavitt and other elected officials to remain outside. The expert presentations at Bridging The Gaps were very revealing. This included a number of stunning questions related to the accountability of the CRC Light Rail Crossing Project. I believe it was this revealing light of truth that frightened the delinquent elected officials away from Saturday’s meeting.

Before going on, I want to encourage you to view the recorded presentations from Bridging The Gaps at http://couv.com/. According to COUV.COM, these will be available late Monday, June 6th. Please check them out and come to your own conclusions. Although I don’t intend to provide a “blow by blow” report on Bridging The Gaps, I do want to draw your attention to some of the presentation points that hit home the hardest with me.

For me, the most revealing presentation was made by Tiffany Couch, Founder of Acuity Group, a forensic accounting firm. Ms. Couch was hired by local businessman David Madore, the host and sponsor of Bridging The Gaps, to help him try to make sense of a blizzard of documents he received from the CRC Light Rail Crossing Project, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Based on the review of these documents and details of related meetings with CRC officials, it appears that there has been little oversight of this project and that many basic accountability practices have not been followed.

CRC is unable to produce several essential accounting reports. Here are their replies regarding the reports requested:

Total CRC Funding, By Source – NO REPLY.

Total CRC Expenditures – PARTIAL REPLY.

Project Deliverables – “DOES NOT EXIST”.

Financial Statements – “DOES NOT EXIST”.

Benchmark Costs of Newly Built Overpasses – NO REPLY.

Master Vendor List – NO REPLY.

Audit Reports – “NO AUDITS PERFORMED”.

- WSDOT’s report of expenditures for CRC:

Total $108 Million.

$15 Million not coded to a vendor name.

$38 Million not coded with a specific purpose (e.g. rent expense, engineering expense, etc.)

$77 Million has gone to a single vendor - David Evans and Associates.

If you’re astonished by this, I’m with you. Thankfully, we’re not alone. One of the few elected officials in attendance was State Representative Ed Orcutt (WA-18). His response to this presentation was that he will be calling the State Auditor on this and possibly, the State Attorney General.

When you check out the Bridging The Gaps videos at http://couv.com/, you’ll find more revealing information from:

- John Charles, President and CEO of Cascade Policy Institute – On the CRC, as a Light Rail Project, not a Bridge Project.

- Joe Cortright, President and Principal Economist of Impresa – On the $10 Billion price tag for this project plus its inaccurate forecasting and other financial risks.

- Paul Guppy, Vice President for Research of Washington Policy Center – On how this project serves the interests of the government agencies involved but not the interests of citizen mobility.

Furthermore, when you check out the Bridging The Gaps videos at http://couv.com/, you’ll discover that proposals for a 3rd and a 4th bridge were presented. These bridges could be included in an alternative plan that’s vastly superior to the proposed CRC Light Rail Crossing Project. And, this stands as proof-positive that the folks behind Bridging The Gaps aren’t anti-bridge. They are just opposed to the proposed CRC Light Rail Crossing Project.

Although I’ve lamented the lack of attendance of elected officials at this event, I do want to acknowledge and express my appreciation for those who did attend. As mentioned above, State Representative Ed Orcutt (WA-18) was present. He is encouraging a county-wide vote on the proposed CRC Light Rail Crossing Project. Beyond his comment in response to Tiffany Couch’s presentation, the concerns he expressed about the CRC included:

- Having just two bridges makes no sense.

- The tolling plan for the proposed project is disproportionate for Washington residents.

- Light Rail just takes up space.

The following two photos are a great illustration of this last comment by Orcutt:



The first photo depicts I-84 during the morning commute. You’ll note the area to the right of the road that is taken up by The MAX, Portland’s Light Rail. That area was originally set aside for freeway lane expansion. Now, there is nowhere left to expand the freeway and you’ll note that there isn’t a MAX train anywhere in sight.



The second photo shows where I-84 feeds into I-205, during the afternoon commute. If you look at the feeder roads, you’ll note that traffic is backed up beyond sight. And, you’ll note the area in the middle of I-205 that is taken up by The MAX. Here too, this is space that was originally allocated for freeway lane expansion. Now, here too, there is nowhere left to expand the freeway and, again, there isn’t a MAX train anywhere in sight.

In addition to Ed Orcutt, State Representative Paul Harris (WA-17) and Tom Mielke, Chairman, Board of Clark County (WA) Commissioners, were in attendance. Thankfully, the citizens of our community have been able to rely on these public servants to join us in speaking out with their concerns on the proposed CRC Light Rail Crossing Project.

In closing, I want to get behind two admonitions given at Bridging The Gaps:

One admonition came from David Madore, the event’s host and sponsor. He said, on this topic, it is time (for you) to move from Spectator to Participant. And he said, if you don’t, this (tyrannical boondoggle) will become a reality. I believe he is dead right.

The other admonition came from George Golden, who gave the Benediction at the outset of Bridging The Gaps. He said, accomplishing good things requires honesty and courage. Especially considering the information presented by Tiffany Couch, I don’t believe we can rely on those supporting the proposed CRC Light Rail Crossing Project for honesty. And while we may sometimes be baffled by their seemingly bold actions, those actions can’t be called courageous. When looking for honesty and courage, we won’t find it if we don’t see it when we look in the mirror. Find yours and bring it to the next meeting. See ya there!


Comments

I suspect that a portion of


Submitted by Rab L Rouser (not verified) on Mon, 2011-06-06 15:42.

+1

+-I suspect that a portion of the unaccounted for money has found it's way into the pockets of the City Council and especially Mayor (No Tolls) Leavitt.



He sure changed his tune in a hurry after weaseling his way into the Mayors office.