CA Supreme Court Opinions//

I’ve updated my post on Tuesday’s Supreme Court Prop 8 decision to include a link to the court’s website where you can view the Justices’ opinions.

Original Post can be found {here}

Ira Trombley, Vermont State Assembly Member, sends unprofessional and harassing email to supporters of traditional marriage//

Ira Trombley-- Vermont Representative
Ira Trombley– Vermont State Assembly

On April 7, 2009, the Vermont State Assembly voted to overrule the governor’s veto and successfully neutered marriage in that state, allowing the state to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. Marriage advocates who had organized to fight on behalf of marriage were largely ignored. The governor was ignored. The majority of people in the state were ignored. Yet, the damage was done. The state redefined this fundamental social institution. —Self Evident Truths

One would think that if you write to a representative, and that if you get a response, it would be courteous and professional…right? Well, so not the case with this guy. Check out this response my friend Euripides got from Trombley, to an email he sent about the marriage issue:

You must have a computer virus. Your email, below, is identical to others.
Why would someone in far off, sunny AZ try to influence a domestic issue in tiny VT?
Doesn’t AZ have an economic crisis to solve?

I did not like what AZ did to the housing market, but I did not bombard AZ with thousands of emails.

>>> 03/25/09 7:11 PM >>>
March 25, 2009
The Honorable Ira Trombley
115 State Street
State House
Montpelier, VT 05633-5501

Pretty rude, snippy and unprofessional huh? This is what Vermont tax dollars are paying this guy to do.

Euripides reports over at his blog, “Self Evident Truths,” that,

Other marriage advocates received the same type of email – a form email – from Mr. Trombley.

Yes, the message is the same as others. The thousands upon thousands of individuals all expressed the same concern – that the Vermont Assembly not make the mistake of neutering marriage. Apparently the message was lost on Mr. Trombley.Does Mr. Trombley really not understand how political campaigning and political advocacy works? (I am skeptical.) Does he not understand that each of these generated emails comes from and individual? (Of course he does. Why else would he bother to write me back?)

{Click here to read the entire post}

Did you notice that Trombley calls himself the honorable? Interesting huh? I could be wrong but I thought that only judges got to call themselves that. We don’t even call the President of the United State “the honorable.”

Click {here to see Mr. Trombley’s bio}. In writing, he appears to be a quasi intelligent person and thus capable of considering the will of his constituents when he goes to vote, you know, the job those folks elected him to do, and subsequently pay him for. Yep, that’s right, the citizens  of Vermont are his boss! But he’d rather spend time drafting hideous form emails and mailing them out to all who wrote to him in support of traditional marriage.

Trombley’s Political Courage Test provided by Project Vote Smart, began with this little disclaimer:

Representative Ira Trombley repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff.

Not very cooperative and forthcoming of an elected official who should kindly remember that he works for the people, and should they choose not to re-elect him, that would be called unemployment.

Fox News Prop 8 “Legal Analyst” Bob Massi’s Commentary Way Off the Beam//


Photo: Bob Massi

So if you were watching Fox News on Tuesday, right after they announced the California Supreme Court decision, then you probably saw the insane commentary from legal analyst Bob Massi. Check out this analysis from my brilliant friend beetle blogger, sent in an email after the decision was announced. She’s right on as always.

I think we should all apply for analyst jobs at fox. I don’t have any news experience, but obviously it doesn’t matter, I apparently won’t need facts either…

Fox News Legal Analyst???  What kind of comment is this?  On live news, incorrect propaganda is being spouted:

“this movement, prop 8 was very much funded , millions of dollars, much by the Mormon Church as you know, they spent, they were organized, they went out .. what’s going to happen now? The bottom line is they lost….

There is a lot to be learned by this….  they got out charged, money wise.   They got out organized.  You and I have covered these kind of cases… its all about money.  If you have the amount of money to go out and try to raise the kind of support you want, and to pay the people and the volunteers to get out there, those are the ones that usually win.”

—Bob Massi, Fox News Legal Analyst
Would you like a point by point rebuttal of this awful legal analyzing?  I’m just a regular joe and I know more than your legal analyst does!
The Mormon Church gave no money.  Only in-kind donations amounting to an insignificant fraction of the donations received in the Proposition 8 fight.  As a prop 8 supporter I can tell you that I was not paid, and neither were any of the thousands of volunteers who worked tirelessly for marriage. We worked for Proposition 8 because it was right, not for money.
Proposition 8 supporters were out fund-raised and outspent by far, not the other way around.
Fire the “Legal Analyst”.
Massi goes on to say that gays a “class” of people, now divided…
We really have now… two classes of people within the same class… There is a sense of reverence. They want to be able to introduce their partner as their spouse. They want to say “this is my husband,” “this is my wife,” not “this is my partner.” And as a result, the reverence and the depth of that that you and I take for granted, they want that back. This will back very soon I’m sure in the next four years.
If you want to let Fox know how you feel about Massi’s rah-rah,gay marriage rally, write to Fox News here:

Digg, delicious, facebook, twitter…it’s all there!

Check out Bob’s video:

California Supreme Court upholds Proposition 8//


The voters, and now the California Supreme Court, have spoken.

Marriage = 1 Man + 1 Woman. That’s it!!!!!

Today, the California Supreme Court announced their decision to uphold Proposition 8, and the will of the voters, in a 6 to 1 decision!!! Only 1 dissenting vote. Marriage in California is now legally defined in our Constitution as only between 1 man and 1 woman. I totally agree with my blogger friend Pearl, when she said:

I am immensely relieved that this state’s judiciary was inspired to reaffirm the right of the people of California to amend our own Constitution as we see fit.

Society, families and children will benefit from this  preservation of marriage! As for the 18,000 same-sex couples who got married last year during a small window when it was legal, the court has ruled that they will remain valid. I find it interesting though, that these folks think they are married, in a state where our constitution clearly says their marriages aren’t “valid or recognized.” Married or not, homosexual couples retain the same rights under California’s domestic partnership laws,  so hopefully they will learn to be happy with that. They aren’t being deprived of any civil rights like they try to convince everyone they are. I’m just happy that the court didn’t let them hijack real marriage.

The Supreme Court’s website is most likely overloaded, so I haven’t been able to read the justices’ opinions yet. I’ll post more info later! Prop 8 made history today for a 2nd time. I hope that now all of the other states will follow suit…it seems like a lot of them have been willy-nilly passing pro SSM laws lately, but since we know that the nation watches, and often follows, California, hopefully today’s decision will have a positive influence when it comes to preserving marriage in other states.

{p.s.} Pearl, I stole tags from your post! They was awesome! Thanks!!!!

NEW VIDEO, OBAMA BETRAYS SUPPORTERS// see what happened at the pro-marriage inaugural rally…

The update to the Public Advocate “traditional” marriage rally at Obama’s inauguration is here!!!! Watch the video to see people’s thoughts on marriage. Eugene over at Public Advocate posted a message on our initial rally post (linked above) and gave me the video info! Thanks Eugene!

I love seeing so many different kinds of people in this video all agreeing that marriage should only be between 1 man and 1 woman! They look so happy and  spoke with conviction! They represented the marriage supporters well and made us proud! Thanks to everyone who was there and made our voice heard. Now if only Obama and all of the dissenters would listen…

Follow the link on their site to their youtube video and leave some great marriage comments!!!

Source: Public Advocate

Gays Defend Marriage// … seriously!!!!

This has to be one of my favorite new resources in the defending marriage fight. Let me introduce you to a website/blog with information about marriage, coming from, you’re not going to believe it, inside the gay community! How cool is that? They are defending marriage, or what some like to call “traditional” marriage!!! I love it!!!!! The blogger, by the name of David Benkof, is someone on the other other side who actually “gets it.” He writes on his About Me page:

David Benkof is openly gay/bisexual, but as an Orthodox Jew he is guided by Jewish law in the areas of sexuality and family life. He writes a biweekly column from his particular perspective called “Fabulously Observant” in the Jerusalem Post.

He has written books on both Jewish history and gay history.

Gay history is what I found on his site so far to be quite interesting. (I took to reading all of that and haven’t delved into his post archives much yet, but I plan to). He writes, and cites other professional sources like anthropologists, and sexual and social historians, on the subject of gay history, and the consensus is: (drum roll please) how basically, there weren’t any gays in history.

Yep, you read that right. He goes on the point out, again with sources, that being gay, lesbian, and all of those other things, are simply social constructions that have been conveniently coined in the last 100 years or so. So, for all of you who were wondering. . . nope, there wasn’t a gay minority in ancient Rome. There weren’t any gays at all. Click to read more about gays defending marriage…

Baldwin Brothers Divided By Gay Marriage Issue// stephen is anti-gay marriage

Stephen (left) is Pro Marriage!

Stephen (right) is Pro Marriage!

Much to his older brother’s (Alec) dismay, Stephen Baldwin went public on Howard Stern’s radio show and told the world:

“I don’t believe that gay marriage is in line with God’s word, which is found in the Bible… and the Bible says that gay marriage is not acceptable.”

There’s no way I would ever listen to Howard Stern, talk about liberal, and talk about trash, but I found this story on

Traditional Marriage// the gay/ liberal agenda is trying to eliminate all tradition

I got this comment from my great blogger friend, Euripides, over at the  blog, Self Evident Truths.

Yay for support of marriage. It’s a shame we have to qualify it as “traditional” marriage instead of just marriage. The word marriage should obviously refer to a man and a woman.

When I was responding to comments from that post, I got to thinking about the whole “tradition” thing. I mean, we have only started to use that term recently, when marriage came under attack by the gay rights activists, and all those who mistakenly thought it was a good idea to jump on that bandwagon. So because of all of that ruckus, we now have to use “traditional” marriage, to distinguish between what some refer to as homosexual “marriage,” (I use that term very loosely) and then real marriage, between one man and one woman. So I just decided to look it up, to clarify for myself exactly what we have all been referring to. Not only are we calling it “traditional,” but marriage is a tradition in and of itself. What I found was really interesting.

I came across a paper by Dr. Mark Cooray on Tradition. Here’s what he has to say:

“No more tradition’s chains shall bind us.” This is one of the fundamental ideas of socialist/progressivist thinking. If men and women are freed from tradition, the experiences of history and the family environment, they can be manipulated and used by ideological and religious leaders, eccentrics and maniacs. If tradition declines, ideologues can mould and influence individuals.

That about sums it up right there. That’s what seems to be happening, although I’m taking religious leaders out of that quote. They are trying to remove all tradition, history and the family environment from society, so they can then manipulate us. Kind of explains the gay marriage situation huh? Their agendas definitely fall into the socialist/progressivist way of thinking.

Read more about the tradition of marriage here

Supporters of Marriage Rally At Inauguration// group will hand out buttons in support of traditional marriage

“President Barrack Obama says he supports traditional marriage but is catering to anti-marriage forces by appointing known-gay rights advocate Eric Holder as Attorney General and by announcing his intent to reverse the ban on open homosexuals in the military. To balance his anti-marriage actions, Public Advocate will demonstrate public support for the marriage protection amendment in Congress on his first day — and frequently during his term — as President, ” said Eugene Delgaudio, President of Public Advocate.

Tooday from 10 A.M. to 12 noon, a group of 25 volunteers with US conservative pro-traditional marriage group Public Advocate, will congregate near the corner of Louisiana Avenue, N.E. and D Street, N.E. from to hand out buttons at the Presidential Inauguration! The group has been granted a permit by U.S. Capitol Police to be near Union Station in the designated public demonstration area.

The group will also interview citizens on their support of marriage using small video cameras with special Inaugural day messages to President Obama to support traditional marriage. [This is such a cool idea]

I don’t live anywhere near Washington D.C. and I’m not all that wild about the inauguration tomorrow and the millions of tax payer dollars that have been spent on a party for D.C’s new scandalous elite, but I am happy that some people have planned to attend and rally for traditional marriage. I imagine it will be a complete zoo there tomorrow, and I’m sure there will be rallies for the gay agenda too, and I just don’t think I could stomach listening to those people chant all day. So, I’m grateful for the people who are willing to brave the chaos for this great effort!


Defending Marriage// a memo to president-elect obama

As I was browsing the web tonight, staying abreast of the marriage and family issues that are plaguing our country I came across this great post/memo from The Heritage Foundation.

Written by Thomas M. Messner, and Jennifer A. Marshall of the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, they attempt to set President-elect Obama straight, or rather they call him out, on his support and then retraction of support for marriage as defined only between a man and a woman. They make some great points and cite tons of references. I am always impressed by citations and footnotes!!! Love it!! They know their stuff! Read their entire post here, and then if you feel so inclined, write a little memo of your own to Obama. Remember ladies and gentlemen, he works for us, not the other way around. In fact all government workers work for us, the American public!

We agree with you that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman.

Societies through the ages have considered marriage to be a relationship between a man and a woman that forms the cornerstone of families and the ideal place for having and raising children.[5] Societies have a strong interest in marriage because “procreation [is] fundamental to the very existence and survival of the [human] race.”[6] Societies also have a strong interest in marriage because, as you have suggested, having both a mother and a father is important when it comes to raising children.[7] For these reasons, it is fitting and proper to define marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman and to resist any attempt by courts to remove this issue from democratic deliberation.

In addition, redefining marriage to include homosexual unions poses serious threats to the religious liberties of people who continue to believe, as you do, that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. This understanding of marriage is an important religious belief for many Americans,[8] but the freedom to express this belief will come under growing pressure as courts, public officials, and private institutions come to regard the traditional understanding of marriage as a form of irrational prejudice that should be purged from public life.[9] Defending the legal definition of marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman, in addition to serving the fundamental public interests set forth above, would also check these threats to religious liberty and help to ensure that believers are not forced “to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square.”[10]

I love the points they  make about homosexual unions posing serious threats to our religious liberties, because it’s true. However, gay rights activists try to convince us otherwise. The memo goes on to request that Obama adopt policies which will protect the traditional definition of marriage in this country. We don’t need a president who goes back on his word and blows around in the wind to see which statement will be most popular. We need a man of moral conviction to run this country, hopefully we will get one in 4 years, until then let’s hold him accountable.

Have a great weekend everyone! Thanks for reading!