- from www.westseattleblog.com, October 18, 2009

In West Seattle news, West Seattle people

West Seattle people in support of Referendum 71

One week after they staged an impromptu, handwritten-signs-and-all counterdemonstration when a Referendum 71 opponent showed up outside the West Seattle Farmers’ Market, this contingent of Referendum 71 supporters is “back in action” today, as the subject line in a note from Corianton, sent along with that photo, put it. He says there’s been no sign today of anyone on behalf of the opposition, but pro-71 clergy members were planning to join them. (If you’re just catching up – a vote to approve Referendum 71 means the domestic-partnership-rights bill passed by the Legislature will take effect.) Here’s more info in the state voters’ guide; once again, we are voting entirely by mail now, so your ballot needs to be mailed or dropped off – here’s the list of boxes, including one in White Center – by Election Day (Nov. 3). ADDED 9:09 PM: We received photos of the interfaith pro-71 demonstration too, thanks to Kari Kopnick from Westside Unitarian Universalist Congregation.

Westside Unitarian Universalist Congregation

ID’s from Kari: “From left, that’s Carmen McDowell, Unitarian Universalist Student Minister; Rev. Diane Darling, Alki Congregational United Church of Christ; Rev. Dr. Joanne Carlson Brown, Tibbetts United Methodist Church; Rev. Ann J. Eidson, Admiral Congregational Church; Rev. Peg Boyle Morgan, Westside Unitarian Universalist Congregation. Not pictured: members of Kol HaNeshamah, but they were there.”

Westside Unitarian Universalist Congregation

Kari says Approve R-71 supporters will be back next Sunday, too.

By The Associated Press, 10/22/2009

AUGUSTA, Maine — The biggest contributor to the group trying to overturn Maine’s gay marriage law is suing the state over its campaign reporting requirements.

The state ethics commission voted Oct. 1 to take a closer look at contributions by the National Organization for Marriage after it was accused of circumventing Maine law by not reporting the names of many donors. The group responded with a constitutional challenge filed Wednesday in federal court in Bangor.

The National Organization for Marriage is the biggest contributor to Stand for Marriage, which is leading a referendum drive to overturn Maine’s gay marriage law. Joining in the lawsuit is a second group, American Principles in Action.

There’s no practical impact to this election cycle because the ethics investigation won’t be completed until after the Nov. 3 election.

- Joe Mirabella, Oct 21, 2009 Seattle PI

I rarely use the word homophobic. I like to save it for those times when there is not a better adjective. In Protect Marriage Washington’s case, homophobic is the best adjective to describe their latest e-mail to supporters urging them to reject referendum 71. The letter was written by Senator Val Stevens. She wrote:

Could this be the final battle?

Are the homosexuals finally going to take control of our culture and push their depraved lifestyle on our children and families?

Senator Stevens clearly does not understand the bill. We are simply trying to protect our families and children in times of crisis, like having the ability to take unpaid leave from work to care for a loved one without being fired. I’m not quite sure how that affects her family. Fortunately for us, she elaborated:

Passed last spring in the legislature, SB5688 would strip away the protections of traditional marriage that were ensured with the passage of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) just a few short years ago.

Senator Stevens probably did not have a chance to read the bill. If she did, she would be happy to know SB5688 does not take anything away from anyone. It simply makes the existing law fair so that all families are treated equally under the law. She will not lose anything. I wonder what other fear tactics she had up her sleeve?

Do you realize what is going on here? Consider the following:

In 1970, (on the heels of a “free love” 60′s radical culture) sodomy laws were repealed in Washington State, with government turning a blind eye to a behavior commonly considered perversion – and still the case with a majority of Americans.

First of all, the domestic partnership bill has nothing to do with 1960s style “free love”. But since she brought it up, did you know that Sodomy was legally defined as any sexual activity that was not designed to create children. That means Protect Marriage Washington and Senator Stevens are trying to make nearly every Washington adult (gay or straight) feel ashamed.

As a reminder, if you approve referendum 71 and the domestic partnership bill, families will be able to share health insurance. Referendum 71 is not a time machine that will take us back to the 1960s.

If you thought that was crazy, just wait. It gets better…

Senator Stevens thinks about pedophilia:

Organizations, such as NAMBLA, (North American Man Boy Love Association) appeared on the horizon seeking to repeal “age of consent” laws (NAMBLA is still in business today).

Wow! Fortunately the domestic partnership bill is not about any of that. If you approve referendum 71 you will protect children by giving them a more secure home. For example, if a police officer is killed trying to save your life, his or her children will have access to death benefits vital to those families in their time of crisis.

Gladly, no reasonable person condones pedophilia. Clearly though, Senator Stevens spends a lot of time thinking about it. What else is Senator Stevens thinking about?

After 27 years of relentless pursuit, homosexuals finally received protected class status from the Washington State Legislature in 2006, making it illegal for you to refuse to rent them a house, or hire them on account of their homosexuality.

That’s right. Senator Stevens and Protect Marriage Washington not only want to hurt Washington families seeking basic protections in times of crisis, they would like them to be homeless and jobless too. Fortunately, referendum 71 has nothing to do with either of those issues. Referendum 71 does allow seniors, 62 or older to care for each other without losing their social security income. But please, Senator Stevens, do go on. I’m not scared enough yet.

Canada already has laws making it illegal to speak against homosexuality on the streets. Bills exist presently in the U.S. Congress to do the same. In the last few weeks a Canadian church pastor was arrested for speaking against homosexuality.

Let me remind Senator Stevens that Canada is not the United States. In the United States we have something called the First Amendment. Since she has a little problem with law (and the truth), allow me to remind her the First Amendment protects free speech — even the most homophobic, false, and ugly speech, like the speech of Senator Stevens and Protect Marriage Washington. Just so there is no doubt, approving referendum 71 will not effect free speech. If you approve referendum 71 you will allow a teacher who works 20 years teaching about the Constitution to share his or her hard earned pension with his or her loved one.

Washington residents are smarter than Senator Stevens and Protect Marriage Washington think. We can see through lies and homophobic speech. I hope we deliver a resounding answer to these fear tactics and absurdities by approving referendum 71 to keep the domestic partnership law. Vote early, ballots are due no later than November 3.

- from Pam’s House Blend Wed Oct 21, 2009 

Are the homosexuals finally going to take control of our culture and push their depraved lifestyle on our children and families? — Val Stevens
Tuesday, Larry Stickney posted to his Protect Marriage Washington website a letter from state senator Val Stevens. Gone is the disingenuous claim that “Our opposition is not about hate. It’s about love.” Finally PMW is being honest about their true reason for opposing the domestic partnership law: raw animus against “homosexuals”. They’re so overflowing with it that they can’t even use the more common, non-sexualized terms “gays and lesbians”.
The author of this hateful letter is state senator Val Stevens. Last we heard of her, she was calmly accompanying Roy and Valerie Hartwell as they committed fraud by apparently signing the petition circulator affidavits on petition sheets they did not circulate. Senator Stevens presents herself as a moral giant, but I wonder why she isn’t being impeached.

The entire message is below the fold, with my annotations. Count how many times Stevens lies and tries to dehumanize gay people.
Important message from Sen. Val Stevens on R-71!
Could this be the final battle? Senator Val Stevens
Are the homosexuals finally going to take control of our culture and push their depraved lifestyle on our children and families?

Senator Val Stevens

Ballots were mailed last week to over 3 million voters in Washington State asking them to either approve or reject Senate Bill 5688. Passed last spring in the legislature, SB5688 would strip away the protections of traditional marriage that were ensured with the passage of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) just a few short years ago.

What kept SB5688 from being signed into law (1)by a very willing governor were a few courageous people who came together to file a referendum to allow the voters to make the final decision – to REJECT this bill.

Frankly, it was nothing short of a miracle that R-71 qualified for the ballot. (2)

Amidst harassment and even death threats by the homosexual radicals pushing this into our faces, just enough signatures were gathered to give you the final say on the upcoming ballot.

And now, we need one more miracle to stay the course and ward off – what could be – the final assault on our families and American culture by the homosexuals.

You may just be that miracle…

Do you realize what is going on here? Consider the following:

· In 1970, (on the heels of a “free love” 60′s radical culture) sodomy laws were repealed in Washington State, with government turning a blind eye to a behavior commonly considered perversion – and still the case with a majority of Americans.(3)

· Organizations, such as NAMBLA, (North American Man Boy Love Association) appeared on the horizon seeking to repeal “age of consent” laws (NAMBLA is still in business today).(4)

· Various pro-homosexual websites (most now taken down) have shown that homosexuals’ real intent is to “normalize” homosexuality – which means pushing the lifestyle through public schools, beginning with elementary school-aged children. They will settle for nothing less than your full-scale acceptance – whether you like it or not!(5)

· After 27 years of relentless pursuit, homosexuals finally received protected class status from the Washington State Legislature in 2006, making it illegal for you to refuse to rent them a house, or hire them on account of their homosexuality.(6)

· Canada already has laws making it illegal to speak against homosexuality on the streets. Bills exist presently in the U.S. Congress to do the same. (7) In the last few weeks a Canadian church pastor was arrested for speaking against homosexuality.

Now do you see what’s happening? Like the proverbial frog who ends up paralyzed and unable to get out of the water as he waits too long and the temperature reaches boiling – the homosexuals have been winning incrementally, taking their time, while we’ve been asleep at the wheel.

But it’s still not too late … and I want this to be a wake up call.

And I hope you will put up a clarion call to your friends and family and let them know that we are on the verge of losing the battle of our lifetimes if we don’t stand up now!

Or … if we do stand up now … we’re on the verge of victory. It’s up to us.

This is a fight we cannot afford to lose – but one we can win now. And the only thing standing in the way of an easy victory on November 3rd is a few miserable dollars to reach the voters with the truth – that silent majority of people who, for whatever reason, won’t stand and fight.

To date (you can look it up your self on the Public Disclosure Commission website) the homosexuals have amassed over $1 million to sell this re-invention of marriage to an unwitting population.

That $1 million is in stark contrast to the paltry $60,000 we have raised.(8)

Meanwhile, if we lose on November 3rd, people will approach me on the street and ask me how it happened!?

My reply? “How big was the check you wrote?” (Most will have given nothing… )

We don’t have to lose. Every piece of research says that a large majority of people want to see our traditional definition of marriage remain intact. If the election were held before the media began, the homosexuals would lose by 7 to 8 points. That’s why they are raising so much money to sell this as something it is not and overcome the deficit.

That’s also why it is so very important that we raise enough money to reach voters with the real story and to combat the following:

· Ads cloaking this as a “fairness” bill – not being about marriage. (Senator Murray, one of the bill’s homosexual sponsors said marriage is the end game. It is a Trojan horse from homosexuals who seek to overturn thousands of years of sacred family tradition).(9)

· Ads showing homosexual couples with children trying to appear as normal American families. (The sociological effects of fatherless homes are clear from every study, and from experience as we see the devastation in Scandinavian countries where this is rampant. It also continues the objective of the feminization of the male in our society).(10)

· Ads showing older couples in support of SB5688. (Citizens aged 62 and older were included in the bill only to help the homosexual community garner their support. Yet, there is little of consequence in SB-5688 that heterosexual domestic partners 62+ cannot get now from a simple power of attorney. Seniors are being used.)(11)

Will you stand up now and come to the aid of marriage?

Larry Stickney, who is leading our effort, has put his life on hold to fight this fight on our behalf. His household bills have at times gone unpaid, while he has remained faithful to this cause. Now it’s our turn.

As a long time sitting State Senator, I’m asking you to join this fight – a fight easily winnable if we can just reach more people with the message you’re reading now. So far, we cannot even afford to buy TV ads at all.

Perhaps you’re a miracle person who can give many thousands of dollars for our TV ad campaign. Or, if you’re like a lot of us, you can only afford to give $1,000, $500 or less. No matter where you are, or what you can give, every amount large and small will help us save the sacred institution of marriage we hold so dear.

We have faced several defeats on this front in recent years. This is one we can win and set the homosexual agenda back. Will you help us?

Sincerely,
Stevens Signature
State Senator
Val Stevens

P.S. With just two weeks until Election Day, time is running out. Can you stop right now and send your most generous contribution? When you’re finished, will you commit to calling at least two friends and asking them to help? The homosexuals are betting you won’t. I’m hoping you will. Thank you!

(1) In fact Governor Gregoire did sign the domestic partnership bill SB 5688 into law on May 18, 2009. Placing Referendum 71 on the ballot only suspended enactment of the law.
(2) The “miracle” of the signature drive involved paid signature gatherers who lied to voters about the purpose of the petition and harassed them, and the erroneous acceptance thousands of signatures from petitions with fraudulently signed affidavits.

(3) Sodomy in both forms, anal penetration and oral sex, is widely engaged in by heterosexuals. inferring that sodomy is a gay-only practice is ludicrous.

(4) Sale of children into heterosexual sex slavery is a large and well-known problem in the United States. Yet prominent heterosexual Americans defend men who drug and rape girls. If the existence of NAMBLA is supposed to disqualify gays and lesbians from domestic partnerships, then winking at heterosexual child rape should disqualify heterosexuals from marriage.

(5) I don’t want Senator Steven’s acceptance, I want equal protection of the laws. This is the birthright of every American and is supposedly guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

(6) This is Sen. Steven’s true bone of contention. She deeply and consistently laments the inability to legally deprive gay and lesbian people of jobs and housing. No wonder she can’t stomach us striving to legally protect our families.

(7) It is disturbing when a state senator sinks below hyperbole into outright lies. The truth is, Sen. Stevens will always be able to stand on any street in the USA and tell the world how much she loathes “homosexuals”. It is her 1st Amendment right to do so.

(8) The PDC shows that Protect Marriage Washington and collaborators Vote Reject on R-71 and Faith & Freedom PAC have raised about $462,000 in cash and in-kind campaign services. They do appear to be out-spent by Washington Families Standing Together, but not by the wide margin implied by Sen. Stevens.

(9) Domestic partnerships are not marriage and never will be marriage. Domestic partnerships are not transportable across state lines, and do not qualify the couple for any of the 1,049 federal-level rights, responsibilities and obligations of marriage. Read the ballot language:

This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage.
(10) The phrase “trying to appear as normal American families” provides a clear example of how Sen. Stevens attempts to dehumanize gay and lesbian people.

As for Scandinavia, Denmark has been rated the happiest country in the world, with the other Scandinavian countries of Finland, Sweden and Norway coming in the top 20.

“The Scandinavian countries have long had a tradition of living together outside of marriage,” said Andrew Cherlin, a professor of public policy at Johns Hopkins University and the author of “The Marriage-Go-Round: The State of Marriage and the Family in America Today.”
“In places like Sweden nearly all of the non-marital births occur to couples in long-term relationships that often last as long as if not longer than American marriages…For us in the U.S. it’s important to be married, in Sweden it’s important to have a stable relationship whether they’re married or not,” said Cheriln.

(11) According to Sen. Stevens’ colleague Joseph Backholm of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, 1,000 straight senior citizens have registered as domestic partners. The Seattle Times wrote about the very real financial problems some seniors face upon remarriage.

As a postscript, here is what The Seattle Times had to say about Sen. Stevens in a May, 2007 editorial in a fit of endorser’s remorse:

Thursday, Stevens argued on the Senate floor against the domestic-partnership law for gay and lesbian couples. We support the legislation but understand some people disagree with it. Stevens went beyond disagreement, recalling her attempts last year to amend a gay-rights bill to exempt such activities as bestiality and necrophilia, vulgarly implying they had something to do with gay rights. Shame on her….
In 2004, we endorsed Stevens, who was first elected to the Legislature in 1992. Her challenger, Democrat Susanne Olson, was a high-school teacher who decided to run when she was concerned Stevens would have no opposition. We thought she was too inexperienced. Stevens is proving, however, experience isn’t everything.

This editorial appears in the Oct. 18, 2009, Yakima Herald-Republic.

Referendum 71 shouldn’t be confusing. But it can get that way in a hurry.

When backers of the referendum that would roll back domestic-partnership benefits for gay couples and senior domestic partners age 62 and older sought signatures to put the measure on the ballot, the petition filled 40 pages in tiny script. The legislation that the referendum signers wanted to overturn — Senate Bill 5688 — was also encyclopedic in length, covering more than 110 pages.

Even worse is how the referendum question is framed. Those who signed petitions to get Referendum 71 on the ballot don’t want voters to approve it. Instead, they want voters to reject the referendum.

Confusing? Yes, but there’s really no reason to panic. The question being asked of voters is easy enough to understand. It’s the rhetoric outside Referendum 71 that’s causing the double vision.

But first to the referendum itself.

SB5688 is central to the referendum and represents the third time the Legislature has extended benefits to domestic partners.

In 2007, lawmakers created the domestic partnership registry and secured certain marital benefits like hospital visitation and power of attorney to same-sex couples. More than 6,150 domestic partners have added their names to the registry.

Then last year, another series of changes cleared the Legislature covering such matters as estate planning, dissolutions and guardianship.

SB5688 took the final step and granted the remaining benefits to domestic partners that are enjoyed by married couples. In essence, the legislation rewrites 201 statutes by adding domestic partners next to the words “married couple.” These statutes affect such matters as labor and employment rights as well as pensions and death benefits, which extend to gay firefighters and police officers who die in the line of duty.

For voters who want to keep the changes created by SB5688 intact, they need to mark the box “Approved” on their ballots. That’s the simple part.

When the legislation passed earlier this year, supporters proudly referred to it as the “everything but marriage” act.

State Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, who championed the domestic-partnership law, has gone one step further and declared the next move would be to legalize gay marriage.

“I think we are going to win in November,” Murray said recently. “And then it will be only a few years till we get to full equality.”

Now this is where the rhetoric heats up.

Those who want voters to approve Referendum 71 say the Senate bill has nothing to do with legalizing gay marriage. It does not, they argue, overturn the Defense of Marriage Act that the Legislature passed in 1998 defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

In fact, when gay couples register with the state, it’s a business deal. They don’t get a marriage license but file papers with the Secretary of State’s corporations division.

SB5688 also has no effect on the more than 1,130 federal rights and protections granted to married couples.

But Larry Stickney, campaign manager for Protect Marriage Washington, which helped place the referendum on the ballot, isn’t convinced this will be the end of what he considers another minority group being granted special privileges.

“We believe this is the last opportunity for citizens to protect marriage,” Stickney said in a recent Seattle Times story. “Ultimately, it is marriage. And if people understand that, we will prevail.”

It’s clear gay marriage is an explosive topic. And Stickney has a good point. It’s disingenuous of gay-rights advocates to say a move to legalize gay marriage is not in their future plans. Murray, prime sponsor of SB5688, has said so, repeatedly.

But that question is not before voters at this time. That’s why Referendum 71 can be so confusing. It’s about granting the same rights and responsibilities of married couples to same-sex couples and to senior domestic partners. We have no argument with this, given the state and federal constitutions’ clear guidance on equal rights.

That’s why we urge voters to approve Referendum 71 and confirm the equal rights that lawmakers passed in SB5688.

What happens next in this debate is a whole different matter entirely. Pushing that to the sidelines is the only fair way to consider this referendum.

* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Bob Crider, Spencer Hatton and Karen Troianello.

- Joe Mirabella, Seattle LGBT Issues Examiner Oct. 20th 2009

The approve referendum 71 campaign to keep domestic partnerships reports over 200 hundred endorsements from the faith community. They include respected leaders from throughout the state, and organizations from a variety of faiths, including the Jewish Community, Christian Community, Unitarian Community, Buddhists, Quakers, Mennonites, and more.

Faith community strongly endorses Approve 71 campaign to keep domestic partnerships

Josh Friedes, Campaign Director for Washington Families Standing Together, a group working to Approve Referendum 71 said, “Clergy and people of faith have long been among the unsung heroes of the LGBT civil rights movement. Personally as a person of faith myself it has been so deeply meaningful for me to hear my synagogue constantly urging its members not only to approve referendum 71, but to be active in the campaign as well.”

Faith communities signed a joint statement. Together they proclaimed, “As faith leaders, we care about all Washington families. We have seen first-hand the burdens on a family facing death or illness without important legal and financial protections, from access to healthcare, to the right to visit a partner in the hospital, to the right to make medical decisions for one’s own children. We have felt the worry that exists when a parent who is a firefighter or police officer goes off to work each morning knowing that if something happens to her, there won’t be support for her family.

The domestic partnership law is about the relationship between the State and families. Clergy and faith communities will remain free, just as they always have been, and always will be, to determine for themselves their own religious matters.”

View the complete statement and list of supporters at http://approvereferendum71.org/faith-coalition

Voters in Washington should have their ballots by now. They arrived in most counties by mail. Please return your ballot early, but no later than November 3, 2009.

By Lornet Turnbull

Seattle Times staff reporter

Only two weeks before the Nov. 3 election, many voters remain confused about Referendum 71.

The measure will ask voters to approve or reject the most recent expansion of Washington state’s domestic-partnership law, which extends marriagelike state benefits to registered gay and some senior couples.

A vote on this might seem pretty straightforward: Approve Ref. 71 if you want registered domestic partners to have these additional benefits, or reject it if you don’t.

Yet, for untold numbers of voters, it’s apparently not so clear.

Part of the confusion stems from the two-step referendum process for putting contentious pieces of legislation up to a public vote before they become law.

Usually, referendum supporters are for them before they are against them.

In the case of Ref. 71, religious conservatives who originated the referendum and gathered signatures for it did so in the hopes that voters would throw the legislation out. They were “for” getting it on the ballot but now want people to reject it, thereby preventing the legislation from taking effect.

Supporters of gay rights, meanwhile, who were opposed to the referendum during the signature-gathering phase — why jeopardize something you believe in by putting it to a public vote? — now are asking voters to approve Ref. 71, thereby allowing the legislation to take effect.

A poll this summer by pollster Stuart Elway suggested some people have a hard time connecting those dots. Elway said some 10 percent who took part in the poll were unknowingly intending to vote on Ref. 71 in a way that would be contrary to their actual position.

There’s so much confusion, Secretary of State Sam Reed takes time in public-service addresses to spell out the process for voters.

Gifford Jones, a retired airline captain, called The Seattle Times to explain where he got confused.

Because Ref. 71 was initiated by people with whom he disagrees on gay rights, he figured he should vote against a measure they wanted to put on the ballot.

“It’s counterintuitive,” Jones said.

That’s because Washington voters are far more familiar with initiatives, such as those brought by promoter Tim Eyman.

Unlike referenda, which allow voters to second-guess the Legislature on measures it passes, the more common initiative process allows people to initiate legislation — to place a proposal directly on the ballot or submit it to the Legislature for that body to approve.

And while both initiatives and referenda require a sufficient number of valid signatures before they can be considered, there’s seemingly more continuity with initiatives.

Because initiative backers are creating new law — not trying to repeal it — people who sign a petition to put an initiative on the ballot also are expected to vote for it.

Between 1912 and 2009, nearly 1,500 initiatives have been filed with the state, compared to 72 referenda. Petitions for some never were circulated, and some never received sufficient signatures to reach either the Legislature or voters.

Another area of confusion surrounds Ref. 71: What exactly is at stake?

A vote on the measure will affect only the expanded benefits the Legislature approved this spring, and not the entire domestic-partnership law, which was passed in 2007.

Regardless of the outcome on Ref. 71, the 240 rights and responsibilities the law already confers on registered domestic partners will remain in place.

Lornet Turnbull: 206-464-2420 or ltur...@seattletimes.com

Copyright © The Seattle Times Company

Tuesday, October 20, 2009 www.tdn.com
By Erik Olson

Sixteen people took to the streets of Longview on Monday afternoon, calling for the approval of Referendum 71 to maintain the rights of same-sex couples with domestic partnerships.

“To take any of the rights would be basically depriving families,” said Richard Dominiak, an 18-year-old marcher from Kelso.

The group walked east along Kessler Boulevard wearing bright, rainbow-colored clothing, then they turned onto 15th Avenue. They carried signs saying “Approve Equality” and “Love Knows No Boundaries.”

Organizer Jared Mitchell said he found the marchers through online social media sites, such as Facebook and Twitter. They were motivated by an opposition rally last week in Lynnwood, which drew hundreds.

“If they can do that, then we can do this,” said Mitchell, a 23-year-old openly gay Longview resident.

In the Nov. 3 general election, R-71 asks voters to approve this year’s legislative expansion of a laundry list of marriage benefits to same-sex and unmarried elderly couples. The ballot measure would give registered domestic partners power of attorney, pension and death benefits and hospital visitation rights. However, while it dramatically expands the rights of same sex or senior domestic partners, the measure does not make domestic partnership the legal equivalent of marriage.

Arlington-based Protect Marriage Washington led the charge to gather enough signatures this summer to force a public vote, hoping to repeal the Legislature’s work.

The group says the measure gives special privileges to gay and lesbian couples and will give same-sex couples ground to sue and force the state to approve gay marriage.

Protect Marriage Washington also argues that marriage between a man and a woman is best for children, and the groups fears R-71 could lead to a backlash against people who don¹t believe in gay marriage.

The Longview marchers encountered mostly positive honks from passing motorists along 15th Avenue, except for a couple instances. One man yelled a slur out a car window, and another group of people yelled at them on the sidewalk.

All in all, the response was good, said Dominiak, a 2008 Kelso High School graduate who¹s been called names for being openly gay and been accepted by friends.

Several people also walked up to the marchers seeking information about R-71, Mitchell said.

“At least we got it out there. These people know what (R-71) is now.”

To Mahal Frederickson, it¹s about equality. The 18-year-old Lower Columbia College nursing student is straight, but she hit street in support for gay friends and family members, she said.

The expansion of partnership rights was a thrill for gay couples, and Frederickson said voters should let them keep those rights.

“If you take them away, it¹s not fair,” she said.

On the Net:

Approve Referendum 71: http://approvereferendum71.org/

Referendum 71 information from Secretary of State: www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/Referendum71QuickLinks.aspx

Click here to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUPieANcmNk

- www.utalkmarketing.com

An advert in support of gay marriage has won critical praise – a move all the more surprising since it comes from the Roman Catholic bastion of Ireland.

The work was recently released by marriageequality.ie,  an initiative that works for civil marriage rights for gay and lesbian people in the Emerald Isle.

In the ad, a man is seen knocking on the doors of various households asking their occupants for permission for ‘Sinead’s Hand’ in marriage.

From country lanes to city tower blocks, the smartly dressed man in the suit covers them all. And each time he asks his question, he’s told “Yes.”

The work closes with the line, “How would you feel if you had to ask 4 million people for permission to get married? Lesbians and gay men are denied access to civil marriage in Ireland.”

In light of the recent death of Boyzone’s Stephen Gately, it’s perhaps not surprising that the issued of gay rights in Ireland has come under the spotlight once again.

So far, since launch, the video been viewed on YouTube by almost 250,000 people and comments have been unquestionably positive.

“Commercials in support of gay marriage are everywhere these days,” said Tim Nudd from AdFreak.com

“Lots of them are less than impressive. Here’s one of the better ones, from Ireland, showing a straight man who’s faced with quite a task in trying to secure his girlfriend’s hand in marriage.”

It’s since been pointed out that the creative idea has been, ahem, ‘inspired’ by a similar piece of work created by Publicis in New York for MTV back in 2005.

But we guess “If the wheel’s not broke….”  and  if the concept works in one geographic territory, then why not another.

Make your own minds up by watching it below.

http://www.utalkmarketing.com/pages/Article.aspx?ArticleID=15743&Title=Gay_Marriage_advert_from_Catholic_Ireland_earns_critical_praise