Proposition 8

By Jonathan Whitcomb

 

1) Voting “YES” restores “marriage” to its original meaning. (This is in keeping with
the desires of the 61% who voted for Proposition 22 in 2000.) Without the passage
of Proposition 8, there will no longer be a word for the husband-wife relationship.

2) Marriage between a man and a woman has been the foundation of almost all human
societies for thousands of years. It is the primary source of human life throughout
the world. In some societies, out-of-wedlock births and divorces are common, but
previous generations, when families were more stable, have given us our lives. Each
of us is alive because of previous generations of husbands and wives who gave their
time and energy to provide for the children who would become our ancestors and
our grandparents and parents. Every person on the earth has many ancestors who
were devoted husbands and wives. Doesn't the special relationship that is most
responsible for all human life deserve a name? Oh, yes! That name is “marriage.”

3) A man and a woman, in countless cases, have a unique opportunity to contribute to
the genetic makeup of their children. A wife and husband, in many families, can give
equally of their own biological inheritance to a child. Two men cannot do this; two
women cannot do this: never. It has nothing to do with discrimination; it is natural.

4) Our children deserve the best. Countless children are raised in challenging situations.
Many of these boys and girls hope for a better future. They hope for a family without
divorce, a family with a husband and wife who can stay married. But in May, 2008,
by a 4-to-3 vote, the California Supreme Court overturned Proposition 22 and took
away from all Californians the only word we had for the husband-wife relationship.
Proposition 8 (on the November ballot) will give us back the original meaning and
give us an opportunity to support the dreams of countless children. How? By giving
us the option to support and strengthen traditional family units, we can make sweet
dreams a reality for at least some children who otherwise would be distracted from
hoping for a relationship in which each marriage partner might contribute equally to
the biological inheritance of their children: the next generation. Proposition 8 helps
encourage children to hope for the most rewarding family life: traditional marriage.

5) Each child is precious. What about boys and girls who will be born ten years from
now? Some of them (even if only a small percentage) may, for whatever reasons,
develop feelings of same-sex-attraction. Whether a young person labels himself or
herself “gay,” “lesbian,” or “homosexual,” doesn't that person, in the year 2018,
deserve the same rights as those young persons living now? Without the passage
of Proposition 8, however, future counselors will be denied the opportunity to give
counseling in keeping with the desires of some of those young persons. Counselors
will no longer be able to keep their licenses and counsel persons in how to change
their feelings of same-sex-attraction. Proposition 8 keeps all options open: YES!

6) Courts in California are clogged with criminal and civil cases, many of them serious.
Do we need a whole new category of court cases? If Proposition 8 fails, court rulings
will cause many additional cases, trivial cases that have been recognized as unjust in
the past (unconstitutional) because of the separation of church and state. A YES vote
will avoid that costly new kind of court case. Never before have we needed to sue a
minister because of preaching from the Bible over the pulpit. There is no need. Keep
government (paid by our taxes) from spying on church meetings. Vote “YES” on 8.

7) The four California Supreme Court justices who overturned Proposition 22 (and who
thereby eliminated the only word we have had for the husband-wife relationship) had
no long-standing human tradition for their decision; they acted from the example of
Canada. What’s the significance? Canadian government officials have already gone
into at least one church to “retrain” those of that faith. With the budget of the state of
California in critical condition, do we need to follow that example? Do we need to
pay government officials to teach state doctrine in churches? We would be better off
retraining those four judges; the next best thing is to vote “yes” on Proposition 8.

8) The 4-3 decision of the court, earlier in 2008, paved the way for countless churches
to close their doors to all public marriage ceremonies (“gay” or “straight”). Should
Proposition 8 fail to pass, no couple (traditional or otherwise) will be able to have
their ceremony in a church that firmly upholds traditional values. Why? Those
church officials will not allow any ceremonies rather than allow “gay” ceremonies.

Dennis Prager has said, “Nothing imaginable -- leftward or rightward -- would constitute as radical a change in the way society is structured as this redefining of marriage for the first time in history: Not another Prohibition, not government taking over all health care, not changing all public education to private schools, not America leaving the United Nations, not rescinding the income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax. Nothing.

“Unless California voters amend the California Constitution or Congress amends the U.S. Constitution, four justices of the California Supreme Court will have changed American society more than any four individuals since Washington, Jefferson, Adams and Madison.”

Arrogance seems to have been part of the reason for that 4-3 decision: Four members of that court, regardless of motivations, have allowed their own arrogance to get in the way of common sense. Those who label themselves “gay” have had rights and privileges of married couples; they’ve had those rights for years. Nobody, however, has any true right to take away from all of us the only word that we have had for the husband-wife relationship.