Why Support Proposition 8?
Support Proposition 8 so as to prevent this kind of situation:
The San Francisco Chronicle reported that a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. The eighteen first graders, ages 5 and 6, left their studies for the same-sex wedding officiated by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Not only will schoolchildren be taught about same-sex marriage if Proposition 8 fails, it’s already happening.
Gay Marriage Instruction
Opponents of Proposition 8 are spending millions of dollars on television commercials telling voters that gay marriage will not be taught in public schools. Yet a review of public records filed with the First District Court of Appeal in Boston shows these same organizations fought to make it so in Massachusetts. Specifically, they fought to ensure that gay marriage be taught in Massachusetts public schools. Further, their assurance that parents can always “opt-out” of such instruction when it is taught is belied by the fact that in Massachusetts, they argued successfully that Massachusetts’ parental opt-out provision should not be permitted. In Massachusetts second graders were taught in class about gay marriage using the book, “King and King.” This book is about a prince who married another prince, and includes an illustrated scene of the two men kissing.
Parker v. Hurley
In Parker v. Hurley, 474 F. Supp. 2d 261 (D. Mass. 2007), a federal district court in Massachusetts held against parents who objected to a pro-homosexual curriculum. The following are statements filed in amicus curiae briefs in Parker v. Hurley. The statements show how organizations leading the No on 8 campaign are misleading California voters when they say gay marriage will not be taught in California public schools.
From the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) Amicus Curiae Brief:
In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where the right of same-sex couples to marry is protected under the state constitution, it is particularly important to teach children about families with gay parents. [p 5]
From the Human Rights Campaign Amicus Curiae Brief:
There is no constitutional principle grounded in either the First Amendment’s free exercise clause or the right to direct the upbringing of one’s children, which requires defendants to either remove the books now in issue — or to treat them as suspect by imposing an opt-out system. [pp 1-2]
From the ACLU Amicus Curiae Brief:
Specifically, the parents in this case do not have a constitutional right to override the professional pedagogical judgment of the school with respect to the inclusion within the curriculum of the age-appropriate children’s book … King and King. [p 9]
This is the truth about the calculated efforts to deliver gay marriage into California public school classrooms, against the wishes of the people of that state. Voters may differ about how they feel about gay marriage, but there is no disputing that the organizations funding and leading the No on Proposition 8 campaign have already revealed, in their own words, their desire to impose this subject on children in the public schools — “whether you like it or not.”