Last month, we published an editorial urging Mayor Jerry Sanders to get more involved in the campaign against Prop. 8, which would eliminate the right of same-sex couples to get married in California. In a way, he is getting more involved—through his daughter Lisa, who’s telling her story as a way to raise money for the No on 8 campaign. Here’s the text of a message Lisa Sanders wrote for a No on 8 group, The Center Advocacy Project:
Friends,
The new Vote No on Prop. 8 television ad reminded me of my own story here in San Diego. My story is a little different than the Thoron family’s, but the themes are the same.
More than 100,000 people around the world have now watched replays of my Dad’s news conference on YouTube (you can watch it here.)
As a former chief of police and a Republican Mayor of the City of San Diego, my Dad displayed a special kind of courage when he announced his support for the freedom to marry.
He held a public news conference announcing his support for me — He said that it is wrong for our society to give one set of rights to one set of people and a different, second- class set of rights to me.
Now Prop 8 threatens to destroy the work my father and so many other brave and hard-working people have done to make marriage rights equal in California. We need your help today to ensure the defeat of Proposition 8.
In less than 43 days all of my Dad’s good work will be undone if Proposition 8 is approved by voters. If they are successful they will eliminate my right to marry, and the right to marry for thousands of California couples.
We cannot stand by while a few groups define fundamental rights for the rest of us.
It is urgent that we raise every possible dollar now to match the powerful forces working to take away our newly achieved equality. The campaign must have the funds it needs to keep ads like the Thoron story on the air.
This is an incredibly close election and today we are being out-fundraised! Money is vital if we are to have our messages heard. If you can help, please do it right now.
Please go online now to www.centeradvocacy.org.
Thank you for being an important part of making history. This can be a victory that we can each hold in our hearts forever as the day we turned the tide for full equality across America.
Lisa Sanders
September 25, 2008 - 2:37 pm at 2:37 pm
Really? give her a soabbox why not. The traditions of marriage are dear to our community. Redefining them with an ‘alternative’ interpretation is a drastic change as it is an insult to our values. I hope you give the same soab box to those spokespersons who are in favor of this proposition as you have given to Lisa. Mayor Sanders ought to be ashamed of himself for the bait and switch on his stance.
September 25, 2008 - 2:42 pm at 2:42 pm
Nope, JR, that ain’t gonna happen. We’re wholly against Prop. 8 and won’t be providing soapboxes for people to spew faith-based bigotry. The U.S. Constitution provides for equal treatment under the law. Period.
September 26, 2008 - 3:09 pm at 3:09 pm
Hey, Lisa Sanders is stepping up and has her Dad behind her. Last weekend they both highlighted an important fundraising effort for the No on 8 campaign in Rancho Santa Fe. Good for them! Even after year this is an inspiration.
September 27, 2008 - 6:43 am at 6:43 am
Bravo to Mayor Sanders and his daughter Lisa for standing up for the equal civil rights of all Californians. What are the hate-mongers so afraid of? Take care of the your own shaky marriage and stop stepping on my rights.
September 27, 2008 - 11:54 am at 11:54 am
JR, what are your values? Mine include equality for all people, respect, and the ability to realize when you’re wrong. These are what Mayor Sanders exhibited when he finally decided to cast his vote to join the City’s amicus brief in the In Re Marriage cases, which was the precursor to the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of same sex marriage. How does same sex marriage affect your life? Are you even married? I just find it difficult to comprehend people who have a knee jerk anti gay bias about marriage when they have no facts. NO ON PROP 8!
September 29, 2008 - 1:59 am at 1:59 am
Meanwhile, the Grossmont Union High School District has endorsed Prop. 8 because its Governing Board fears the East County electorate. When the item was discussed at a GUHSD Board meeting in August, low-life sleaze Gary Cass and GOP big wheel Tony Kravaric [sic?] were there to get the message across (support Prop. 8 or lose the next election.) Grossmont Union was the first HS district to endorse the proposition.
September 29, 2008 - 4:28 am at 4:28 am
The founding fathers wrote extensivly about the need to not allow a transient majority to deny rights to the minority composition of society. Origionaly only male landowners could vote. We’ve come a long way to true freedom.
To backpedel would send the wrong message. No on 8.
September 29, 2008 - 7:55 am at 7:55 am
Interesting update…. now what about our vote 5-years ago when the voters said NO!
September 29, 2008 - 11:23 am at 11:23 am
God willing, the voters will get it right again. But the homosexual lobby will not stop. All Christians need to be praying right now that Prop. 8 is approved. Otherwise, it will become a crime for churches and pastors throughout our state to preach the truth of the Bible - that marriage is intended to be between a man and a woman. The real goal of the homosexual lobby is to make this a crime - nationwide - and we should do everything in our power to stop it. The best environment for a child (which is the real goal of marriage) and for society is one father and one mother. It is cruel to knowingly force a child to grow up without his or her father or mother (sole exception is adoption, which still is not ideal). Psychological and sociological studies prove this to be true. A firm and solid society relies on this foundation.
September 29, 2008 - 2:05 pm at 2:05 pm
CLB - You are woefully ignorant of the U.S. Constitution — or maybe you’re just trying to misinfom? The government cannot abridge the rights of churches to deny *religious* marriage to its followers. That’s a fundamental tenet of the 1st amendment. But we can compel an end to discrimination by the government in not allowing same-sex couples to marry. MARIA — you also are ignorant. If the majority of California voters said they wanted to force black people to ride different buses and go to different schools, the Supreme Court would be the one to rule on the legality of that law under the Constitution, and they would rule it unconstitutional — as they have the law that same-sex couples cannot be married. Ever hear of the “tyrrany of the majority”? That’s what our Founding Fathers sought to protect us from.
September 30, 2008 - 7:26 am at 7:26 am
Thank you Raquel for setting CLB straight about the U.S. Constitution. CLB, I would like to know where you found psychological/sociological studies to “prove” that the only way to raise a child is with a mother and a father? Love is the most important factor in the well being of a child. Two mothers or two fathers can provide that also. Having emancipated from a group foster home, I would have loved to had two loving parents — no matter the sex.
September 30, 2008 - 7:28 am at 7:28 am
God, what a sick, perverse humanity promoting unnatural marriage. It takes a goose and a gander, not goosing a goose, to reproduce. Homo Sapien has been clipped to Homo for lack of wisdom.
September 30, 2008 - 8:28 am at 8:28 am
Just the fact that the voters of San Diego are being asked to cast their vote on a same sex marriage proposition tells a lot of how are society has plummeted like our economy.
Special interest groups are consuming our way of life and these are changes the world can’t afford.
Now what say we spend more time on fixing the potholes in our streets and solving our water shortage problems. The money spent on Prop 8 would probably make great strides in accomplishing both these goals.
September 30, 2008 - 9:08 am at 9:08 am
The anger and insults from the “No on Prop 8″ folks on this blog is very telling. Liberals are such an angry class and so hard to identify with.
That said, I’m undecided on the issue of gay marriage and I have a legit question; what “right” is being denied homosexuals by not being able to marry? Regardless of the status of “married”, aren’t gays afforded the same rights under the constitution regardless of whether or not they are married? Do they have the same tax rights? the same rights to visit a loved one in the hospital and assume joint property after death?
September 30, 2008 - 9:25 am at 9:25 am
KHM - actually, no, the rights of civil unions and marriage are NOT the same. Civil unions do not give you the same level of respect under the law. A paramedic doesn’t tell a SPOUSE that he/she cannot get into an ambulance his/her spouse. Married couples can automatically make life or death decisions for each other in these crisis situations, no questions asked. Not so with domestic partners.
October 1, 2008 - 4:07 pm at 4:07 pm
The wording of the summary on the Ballot Initiiative petition to be placed on the Novembeer ballot, noiw known as Prop 8 contained the same fifteen words as the 2000 law so wrongly struck down by the california supreme court:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
The GLBT’s are quite pleased with themselves that they have sucessfuly used activist courts to attain their advantage over those of us who accept the outcome
of ballot box decisions; we may not always be “winners”,
we just move on.
The term “Freedom and Rights” are now the property of the Homosexual community. So revel in these times
of getting it over all the groups,that are victims of activist
courts for your “freedom and rights”
October 5, 2008 - 10:55 am at 10:55 am
I dont understand why the minority cant take the fact that they are the minority. The Majority of Calif and the usa are not gay’s. So, when the majority become gay or come out gay, then the gay’s can vote something in over their minority. Remember the constitution!! If the vote passes, then we the supporters will have had our day. If the vote fails then the minority won and this is how the process works in the USA. I would not want it any other way. But, to say it is ok for our society to become controlled by the minority, well, that is not what we have fought for. I dont want this taught in our schools as ok. I dont want to know about your sexual preference. Why cant the gay’s just do what you want, but dont affect the rest of us. our a lost bunch. I am voting and praying for prop 8 to pass and finally end this madness.
October 7, 2008 - 8:40 pm at 8:40 pm
This whole equal rights argument is nonsense. Equality in marriage was there before any discussion of Proposition 8 or any California proposition for that matter. I am a straight man, I cannot marry a man. I can marry a woman, provided I follow the other provisions of the law. The same thing is a true for a gay man. Those promoting the homosexual agenda would do better not to costume themselves as brave freedom fighters and be a little more honest.
October 8, 2008 - 3:41 pm at 3:41 pm
I always wonder about the mayor now. Had his daughters been small children and had to personally witness a drunk guy urinating on the beach in front of HIS OWN little girls, or if they had gone to the beach to enjoy their day, only to have it ruined by all the drunks, fights and vulgar language, would he THEN have supported Prop D because his own little girls were involved?
October 14, 2008 - 7:11 pm at 7:11 pm
The whole concept of the constitution and equality and whatnot is inherently flawed. Equality doesn’t come from redefinition of marriage. It would come from enacting laws to maintain the rights within a domestic partnership. Encroaching on the nature of marriage for heterosexuals is in all realty a removal of rights from those who enjoy such life existence. No bigotry, no extreme faith based rationale. Just reason. I am for rights, pursue them for same sex individuals as needed, but it is not proper to change and alter the rights of others just for a title. That, is bigotry and hypocrisy in the No on prop 8 logic series.
October 15, 2008 - 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm
Marriage is a contract between two people. What is the purpose of this union? To provide a stable and committed relationship wherein new arrivals to this planet can arrive to learn and grow.
Same-gender marriage, lacking the ability to have children, is simply a commitment to perversion. Many may label this bigotry. I would say those who label others as bigots cannot be anything other than that themselves.
Voting yes on proposition 8 will be a solid step in the right direction toward moral behavior and a better world for our children.
October 19, 2008 - 2:42 pm at 2:42 pm
Forget the rhetoric about who thinks who is wicked. There are practical and real religious freedom consequences. Check out this website http://www.prop8info.com. It has real news clips about real consequences, including Catholic Charities withdrawing adoption services from MA. This is not rhetoric or predictions, this is factual.
October 20, 2008 - 3:32 pm at 3:32 pm
I think Prop 10 would have typographically been a wiser choice
from a graphic designers point of view. We all know what 1 and 0 can accomplish behind closed doors, but it scares some to think what 1 and 1 do, so Prop 11 wouldn’t work either, But most 1’s love to see a little 0 on 0 action if you know what I mean, so Prop 00 is out too.
But then prop 8 only has 2 holes, which leaves 1’s and 0’s both confused as to which hole they prefer.
But then who cares, 1’s and 0’s should just stick to whatever equation makes them equal and leave the rest of the math alone, since most people think 2+2=5 anyways. If you have read your Orwell, you know what I’m getting at.
-BoyCanFly
October 27, 2008 - 9:18 pm at 9:18 pm
While I am not a proponent of Prop. 8, I don’t think being one is “spew[ing] faith-based bigotry.” If you look at this issue without slinging around all the emotive and misleading crap about inequality you’ll see that California has long provided every single right of marriage to gays through civil unions. It’s not about equality, it’s about beating the other guy, and I’m saddened that opponents of Prop. 8 think that you have to vilify others and be divisive to do it. Proponents of Prop. 8 are just scared that the gay community is going to follow up by trying to take away their rights to free speech and free exercise of religion. Comments like “spew[ing] faith-based bigotry” only reinforce their conviction that that’s the case. If you want to defeat Prop. 8, do it without showing you’re less tolerant than they are.
November 1, 2008 - 11:29 pm at 11:29 pm
Why do supporters of “No on 8″ say Constitutional Rights are being taken away? They can still Vote, They can still get a J-O-B….they can still collect taxes and get Medical Attention. Marriage is clearly defined as one Male and one Female. Marriage is for Creation, not Recreation. If these No on 8 folks want “just a title” then say so, but don’t try to say that Gay or Lesbian right s are taken away. We live in a Fallen World and we are allowing our future generations to accept immorality. What’s next? Polygamy? Marriage among family members? Under age Marriage? We are opening the doors to deeper situations. Vote according to your will, I’m not here to judge…just to voice my opinions.