California Proposition 22
|
Page 4 of 4
|
Ballot Arguments
Limit on Marriages. Initiative Statute.
(March 7, 2000 California Primary Election Ballot)
|
PDF
Version
Email
This
|
|
|
|
Limit on Marriages. Initiative Statute.
| |
Argument Against Proposition 22
|
|
The California Interfaith Alliance
The League of Women Voters of California
The California Teachers Association
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Senator Barbara Boxer
Congressman Tom Campbell
Vice President Al Gore
Senator Bill Bradley
The California Republican League
And thousands of husbands, wives, mothers and fathers from
across California oppose Proposition 22.
THE PURPOSE OF PROPOSITION 22 IS NOT TO BAN
MARRIAGE FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES IN CALIFORNIA. IT
IS ALREADY BANNED.
You don't need to support marriage for gay and lesbian
couples to oppose Proposition 22, the "Knight Initiative". You
just have to believe in a few basic values—keeping government
out of our personal lives, respecting each other's privacy, and
not singling out one group for discrimination or for special
rights.
VOTING NO ON 22 WILL NOT LEGALIZE SAME-SEX
MARRIAGE, NO MATTER WHAT THE SUPPORTERS OF
PROPOSITION 22 SAY.
The real purpose is to use Proposition 22 as a tool in court to
deny basic civil rights to lesbians and gays and their families.
Proposition 22 will be used, as similar laws have been in other
states, to deny the right of partners to visit their sick or injured
companion in hospitals, to deny the right to inheritance, and
even to deny the right of a remaining companion to live in their
home.
PROPOSITION 22 WILL RESULT IN UNNECESSARY
GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE.
Whether we think homosexuality is right or wrong, we
should stay out of other people's private lives and let people
make their own decisions about moral values and
commitments. Californians treasure our right to be left alone |
and to lead our lives the way we wish. Adding more laws about
private behavior and personal relationships isn't a solution to
anything.
PROPOSITION 22 DIVIDES US. Californians have seen too
many efforts in recent years to pick on specific groups of people
and single them out for discrimination. Supporters of
Proposition 22 are spending millions of dollars to convince you
that basic rights should be denied to a group of Californians.
They want us to believe that attacking same-gender couples
will solve problems instead of causing them. But we've seen
what spreading fear and hatred has already done. According to
the Attorney General, more than 2,000 Californians were
victimized by hate crimes last year alone. California has had
enough of the politics of fear and hate. Voting "No" on 22 will
send that message.
PROPOSITION 22 IS UNFAIR. Even when gay or lesbian
couples have been together for many years, one companion
often has no right to visit a sick or injured companion in the
hospital. They often can't get basic health insurance for
dependents. They have no inheritance rights. That's wrong.
And Proposition 22 will make it more difficult to right this
wrong—by singling out lesbians and gays for discrimination.
Proposition 22 doesn't solve any problems . . .
It adds more government interference to our lives . . .
It singles out one group for attack . . .
It tears us apart instead of bringing us together.
VOTE NO ON 22.
ANTONIO R. VILLARAIGOSA
Assembly Speaker, California State Legislature
THE RIGHT REVEREND WILLIAM E. SWING
Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California
KRYS WULFF
President, American Association of University Women,
California
|
|
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 22
|
|
We are proud to join Focus on the Family and nearly 700,000
California voters who signed petitions in support of Proposition
22. Here's why:
"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or
recognized in California."
That's all Proposition 22 says, and that's all it does. It's just
common sense.
Opponents say anybody supporting traditional marriage is
guilty of extremism, bigotry, hatred and discrimination towards
gays, lesbians and their families.
That's unfair and divisive nonsense.
THE TRUTH IS, we respect EVERYONE'S freedom to make
lifestyle choices, but draw the line at re-defining marriage for
the rest of society.
Opponents say Proposition 22 is unnecessary.
THE TRUTH IS, UNLESS WE PASS PROPOSITION 22,
LEGAL LOOPHOLES COULD FORCE CALIFORNIA TO
RECOGNIZE "SAME-SEX MARRIAGES" PERFORMED IN
OTHER STATES.
That's why 30 other states and the federal government have
passed laws to close these loopholes. California deserves the
same choice.
Opponents claim 22 will take away hospital visitation and
|
inheritance rights, even throw people out of their homes.
THAT'S ABSOLUTELY FALSE! Do they really expect voters
to believe that?
THE TRUTH IS, PROPOSITION 22 DOESN'T TAKE AWAY
ANYONE'S RIGHTS.
Whatever you think of "same-sex marriages", we can all
agree that our opponents' use of scare tactics and deceit is the
wrong way to address important issues.
THE TRUTH IS, "YES" on 22 sends a clear, positive message
to children that marriage between a man and a woman is a
valuable and respected institution, now and forever.
PLEASE VOTE "YES" ON PROPOSITION 22.
DANA S. KRUCKENBERG
Board Member, California School Board Leadership
Council
AMY WILLIAMS
First Vice-President, San Jose-Edison Parent Teacher's
Organization
STAR PARKER
President, Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education
|
|
Source: California Secretary of State
|
|
|
|
