Flip-flopper governor signs 'Harvey Milk' bill

Can you believe this?

Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 10/13/2009 6:20:00 AM

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed a law designating May 22 as "Harvey Milk Day" for public school students.

Harvey Milk, the first openly homosexual member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, was murdered in 1978 while in office. Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com tells OneNewsNow that in light of the governor's signature on SB 572, schools in The Golden State are now a source for homosexual indoctrination.

"Now children are going to be taught to admire the homosexual activist, his entire homosexual/bisexual agenda -- even a cross-dressing agenda," he asserts.

Previously, Schwarzenegger previously had vetoed a bill authorizing Harvey Milk Day bill. But Thomasson says the governor's record helps explain why he signed it this time.

"He signed a bill recognizing out-of-state homosexual 'marriages' -- a clear violation of Proposition 8," says the family advocate, referring to the voter-approved constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage. "[So] it's no surprise [that] if he flip-flops on marriage, that he flip-flops on saying one year the Harvey Milk Gay Day should be vetoed and the next year signing it into law."

According to Thomasson, calls to the governor were 4-to-1 against signing the bill -- and he now encourages people to call again and voice their disapproval. He also strongly suggests it is time for parents to make other educational arrangements for their children, noting that RescueYourChild.org explains how to do that.

Separation Between Church and State? - Proposition 8

I was listening to the radio yesterday and the host was talking about the separation between church and state in the context of Proposition 8 that passed not too long ago in CA. Separation between church and state has to exist and does indeed exist. However, what does separation between church and state mean?

I believe that in order to answer my previous question, there is a need to state that God is sovereign over all. Also, I want to point out that Romans 13:1 says:

Everyone must submit to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

Another point that needs to be pointed out is that whether we are Christians or non-Christians, atheists or believers, we are all subject to God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So, whether or we follows Christ or not, we will be judged when Christ returns. In the different ways, the government and individual people are both subject to God. As the parable of the talent shows us, each individual or group is given a different amount (thing) to be responsible for. So, the government's "talent" is to govern, while the people have different responsibilities; one being to follow the laws of the land.

However, even though I think that there needs to be a separation between church and state, that separation is so that the government does not govern the church, and so that the church does not govern the government. However, as a Christian, I feel that my responsibility toward government is that laws continue to be Christ-centered. I feel that it's the same as being in community. My friend Tristan and I sharpen each other and call each other out when things are not Christ-centered. In the same way, I feel that the lay-Christian must do the same with government. In order to help governement fulfill its duties towards God. Since, as quoted before, there is no authority except that which God has established.

So when voting (if I indeed was able to vote since I am not a citizen yet) on prop 8, I would have voted yes because I need to recognize that I am supposed to keep the law of the land continuously reflecting the face of God.

I guess that someone can then say that God does not want disunity and sees everyone as equal. I also think that someone can also say that God looks out for the poor and the minority. Especially when it comes to people's rights. But I would ask this: What is more important, to look at this from the people's perspective, or to look at this issue as to which response would give God more glory. I feel that God also wants unity among His people.. IE, those that have accepted Him as LORD. When Jesus prayed about unity in John 17, He spoke of unity between Him and the Father, His disciples, and all of those that would be in Him through the message of salvation that the disciples proclaimed.

One of my friends also pointed out that now most homosexuals are upset with the Church since basically all of the Church, or a large percentage, voted Yes on prop 8. Well, not to be too blunt here, but so what? Even if I voted no on prop 8, I would still be totally against the homosexual lifestyle. Hence, homosexuals might not like the Church now, because I'm holding up another one of God's ideals.

I think that no matter how anyone looks at it, there needs to be a recognition that both church and state have different functions and that these functions are both subject to God. All will be judged... even those people goverment... And all will be judged as to how they lived or did not live a Christ-like lifestyle.

Another possible argument is this: what is more important, minority rights or keeping a Christ-like lifestyle in our society as a whole or individually? Furthermore, who is to say which one of those two is above the other?

That's a harder one. But, I believe that even though one could be more important than the other, or even though they might both hold the same weight, if one of the two allows for evil(sin) to occur, then the one that allows that sin to occur automatically becomes second in order of importance.

I need to work this out in writing:

Consequences of YES on 8:

1. Society not as depraved
2. Sexuality not lawfully okay
3. minority rights not given to homosexuals

Consequences of NO on 8:

1. Society becomes more depraved.
2. Sexuality now lawfully okay
3. minority rights not given to Christians as a population

I think this last #3, again going back to the government being under God whether they like it or not, shows that the LORD always favors His people, since His people are supposed to be following His law. Supposed to be... But anyways, this last point sounds a little confusing to me and it's late, so I'm not going to rephrase it. If you have questions about this or want to talk about this then ask and I'll take the time to answer.

I'm basically saying that the rights of God's people according to God's laws will always be higher in hierarchy than people that are not of God.

That last point was a bit abrasive.

Prop 8

Man this makes my heart hurt. People are in pain and are therefore expressing it in anger. Here is an email that I received from www.protectmarriage.com...

It has been a week and a half since Proposition 8 passed and we won a resounding victory for marriage. Since then, the voters, volunteers and donors in support of Prop 8 have come under an unprecedented, vicious and outrageous assault.

The voters, who have twice passed propositions in favor of the definition of traditional marriage, have had their will disrespected by unruly protests and a series of lawsuits designed to overturn their vote.

But as bad as this has been, the most outrageous attacks have come against volunteers and donors who worked so hard to help us pass Proposition 8. Because we are required by law to report our donors’ names, occupations and employers with the Secretary of State, the opponents of marriage have been threatening boycotts and blacklisting of our donors. As noted below, some of our supporters have been forced to resign.

They have also defaced churches and in at least one case, attacked a woman who counter-protested a No on 8 rally.

We teach our children that getting involved in the political process, as a voter, volunteer, or donor, is a good thing. Civic involvement and participation in democracy is at the core of our nation’s most cherished freedoms. The unruly mob that has emerged out of the failed No on 8 campaign is attacking all of these freedoms and values.

The election for Proposition 8 was hard fought, but in the end, as before, traditional marriage won. That is our process in a democracy. As noted in the Sacramento Bee editorial below, (and remember the Bee was a strong No on 8 supporter) the other side has crossed the line of appropriate political discourse.

Tomorrow, we will begin to show just how outrageous the No on 8 street mob has become. In the meantime, we appreciate how hard you all worked to help us succeed, and the quiet dignity in which you have celebrated our victory. We assure you that we will vigorously defend our victory in the courts of law and the courts of common decency and respect for democracy.

In the meantime, here are some articles we thought you would like to read.

Sincerely,

Jeff Flint
Campaign Manager
Yes on Proposition 8

Elton John: Heterosexual Couples Have Marriage, Same-Sex Couples Have Civil Partnerships

USA Today published an article yesterday in which Sir Elton John spoke about his position on Proposition 8. John clarified his position on Prop 8 while attending the annual benefit for the Elton John AIDS Foundation. He was accompanied by his longtime partner David Furnish, whom he joined in a civil union in 2005. John was quoted as saying, "We're not married. Let's get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage."

John went on to emphasize that civil unions grant same-sex couples the same rights afforded to married heterosexual couples. He stated, "I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership…the word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."

Sacramento Bee Editorial: No on 8 Supporters Cross the Line that Separates Civil Protest from Harassment

An editorial in the Sacramento Bee today takes a close look at the outrageous actions undertaken by many No on 8 supporters following the passage of Prop 8.

The editorial summarizes the opposition’s actions, citing that, “Angry opponents of Proposition 8 are targeting businesses and individuals who contributed money to the “yes” campaign. Vandals have hit churches that supported the initiative. Sparked by the speed and reach of the Internet, supporters of gay and lesbian rights are organizing protests from California to Salt Lake City, the home of the Mormon Church.”

And while the editorial takes a sympathetic approach to the opposition’s protests, saying their “charged reaction is understandable,” it does not justify that by “venting their anger and in exercising their right to challenge Proposition 8, some opponents risk crossing the line that separates civil protest from harassment. And by crossing that line, they undermine the message that some gay and lesbian leaders are trying to impart: that everyone's rights should be respected.”

The editorial went on to acknowledge that the No on 8 campaign has not adequately addressed the acts of violence and harassment undertaken by their supporters, saying that “a lone statement” on their Web site asking supporters to not isolate those who oppose their views is simply not enough.

Sacramento Musical Theatre Director Resigns Due to Harassment by No on 8 Supporters

Today the Sacramento Bee announced that Scott Eckern, artistic director for the California Musical Theatre, resigned under pressure Wednesday as a growing number of artists threatened to boycott the organization because of his $1,000 donation to the Yes on 8 campaign. This kind of blacklisting shows that the No on 8 campaign, which claimed to be all about tolerance, is in fact a cauldron of intolerance and bigotry.

No on 8 Campaign in Turmoil During Last Weeks

Over the last week, details have emerged revealing that the No on 8 campaign was unorganized and for the most part, in a state of complete disarray. Key campaign staff, including the campaign manager, were replaced in the final weeks as it became apparent in polls that the Yes on 8 campaign was quickly gaining ground.

Their replacements sought to shift voter support for Prop 8 by pouring millions of dollars into television and radio buys aimed at convincing California voters that support for traditional marriage was the equivalent of Japanese internment camps. They went so far as to compare Yes on 8 voters to bigots.

They were ultimately stunned that California voters saw past their deceptive ads and voted to once again uphold the definition of marriage to be between a man and a woman. Ethnic communities, those who have truly been affected by civil rights issues, turned out to vote Yes – African Americans alone supported the measure by more than 2 to 1.

It is true that the Yes on 8 campaign ran a better campaign. We raised important issues, our messages appealed to voters and we had a volunteer army that was unprecedented in California history. But just as the best farmer cannot raise crops in the barren desert, our campaign, no matter how well run, could not have succeeded if there were not still a deep well of respect for the sacred institution of marriage. And for that, the voters in their wisdom deserve the credit.

Homosexuality and Happiness

I have been in a wonderful discussion with a lot of my Westmont Christian friends over Facebook on proposition 8. I will post everything from that when it's done because it's just AWESOME! A lot of people have some great insight! I also received a private message from someone and I do want to post that because I think it shows an overarching misconception about the difference between happiness versus joy in life as well as some clear verses about the homosexual lifestyle as well as true love. In red is what this person said and in bold black below it was my response.

Pablo, I wanted to give you my thoughts on your thoughts about sin, pain, etc in response to this note. You are obviously right that God doesn't make sinners, however, sexual orientation is not a sin... sexual activity is a sin. All babies are equally sexual, if you rub them while changing their diapers sometimes the friction causes a response. I think you would agree there's no sin in that. When sexual orientation becomes sexual practice, that's when the sin and pain comes in. Now I got married young as a virgin which was not a sin, but I had pain in excess and I was not at peace. Now, I'm a divorced single mom "living in sin" with my baby's father, however, I'm at peace with God and society is accepting of my situation so I feel no pain over my "sin." I know you're familiar with pain regarding sexual adventures (and you know that pain is not limited to homosexuality). Being in theatre, I know a great number of gay and lesbian people. I believe some are made in society and some are born that way. I believe that sexual orientation is part of a person's soul and not their biology and therefore as a person's personality or humanity cannot be proven genetically neither can sexual orientation. The gay and lesbian people I know fluctuate in happiness and pain as everyone does. Those I know who feel the most pain are those who are not commited and searching. I know some commited gay couples who live in supportive theatre environments and they live lives of very little pain.

I understand your concerns from the perspective of a future parent, and as a new parent I've become politically interested for the first time in my life. If you cultivate a healthy relationship with your children they will listen to you... and as they grow they will either decide to continue agreeing with you or go another direction. As a new mommy, I want my daughter to be raised in a world that is tolerant of all forms of diversity so that she'll feel accepted no matter what and make up her own mind based on love and acceptance. Many people live in pain based on feeling like a misfit. Some for orientation or racial reasons, and others because they simply don't fit in. My brother is straight and white and has lived through tremendous pain based on his personality. If those people could find acceptance and have their own peace with God, they'll find happiness.

I did a lot of souls searching, praying, and exploring with God when I was unhappily married. The bible clearly states that divorce is a sin... however, in 1 Cor there are exceptions. Many people in the church condemn divorce as passionately as homosexuality or murder... I felt horrible while I was making that decision. I feel that the words in the bible have passed through the hands of many humans to get to us and that God's true words are that of purity, love, and commitment. If a homosexual couple is married, loving, faithful, and at peace with God, I don't see the sin in that. God gave us free will and his word as guidelines for happiness, it's in the combination of those two that we can asses our humanity and our relationships with him and each other.

AND HERE IS MY RESPONSE....

Hi [friend],
Good to hear from you :) Thanks for your response. I agree with you that a homosexual orientation can be either nature or nurture. one thing to point out is that there is nothing that is a hard biological and genetic fact that shows that homosexual orientation is indeed genetic. However, it is 100% proven that homosexual orientation can be because of how a person is raised and because of their societal influences. I am completely willing to say, however, that there is a chance that homosexuality can be a genetic trait. Because of that, I, like you, focus on what the Bible says in that the behavior is a sin: lust, adultery, fornication... which applies to a male-male or female-female relationship.

I disagree about pain though. At least in some part. If there is sin, there is pain. There is no place where sin can dwell in that there is no negative repercussion. Therefore, a gay couple that is obviously in sin has to be in pain, whether or not they recognize it. And if it's not immediate superficial and easily recognizable pain, it's an inherent and deep-rooted need for Christ in their spirituality that is not met.

About your brother, I'm so sorry to hear that he's lived what seems to be consistent pain due to his personality. I like [your brother] :) Always did.

I feel that God is love. It says so in the Bible at least, so I believe it :) We as humans, however, are not called to happiness, but to joy. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that we are to seek happiness, but it's plastered from beginning to end that joy in Christ is what we are called to pursue. So, to me, the fact that two people are "happy" but they both live in a sinful lifestyle does not warrant my acceptance of their acts being okay. It's the exact opposite. Seriously though, it's so black and white to me when in Leviticus 18:22 is says - "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." And when Leviticus 20:13 says - "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." Of course we're not going to kill someone, but these are God's laws to humanity. And we have to be culturally relevant as far as putting someone to death, but when the Old and New testament say that homosexuals who practice homosexuality will not inherit the Kingdom of God, I do see the sin in that.

Also, about love, the Bible says that God is love and that if a person does not know God they don't know true love, then it's pretty evident to me that two people that are not Christians do know really know love, but something other than true love. The verse is in John 4:7-19. Verse 7-8 say - "Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." If we take and inverse the last part of verse 7, we can say that if someone does not know God, then they do not know love.

When you say "God gave us free will and his Word for happiness" I think that happiness needs to be replaced with joy. If we, as inherently sinful human beings seek happiness, then we will seek a selfish happiness that benefits us. However, if we seek joy from Jesus Christ, then we can live in unhappy times that occur constantly in our lives, but we live in the joy of Jesus who saved us. Then can we really love, then can we really be at peace with God. No on can be at peace with God when they are in sin.