Saturday, October 25, 2008

"Yes on Prop 8" is Worried that they will Lose if they can't Raise enough Money

I've donated....won't you join me? For information on Christian persecution in states and countries where same sex "marriage" is legal, please visit the Ruth Institute online. There is a summary video of Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse's talk on the right side of the home page. In Christ,Margaret

--- On Fri, 10/24/08, Faustina Nguyen wrote:

From: Faustina Nguyen
Subject: Fw: Code Blue for Marriage!
To: "Faustina Nguyen"
Date: Friday, October 24, 2008, 11:49 PM



--- On Thu, 10/23/08, Robert & Cathy Siderine wrote:

From: Robert & Cathy Siderine
Subject: Fw: Code Blue for Marriage!
To: "
Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008, 1:48 PM

Hi Faustina,I don't know if you get these mailings... But if you could let people know about this, that would be great."Yes on Prop 8" is worried that they will lose if they can't raise enough money to compete with ads being aired by the opposing campaign.A recent poll showed that Prop 8 definitely has a chance to pass, if we keep enough people on board.Thanks and God bless you!Cathy



-----Forwarded Message-----
From: "Frank Schubert, Campaign Manager, Yes on 8"
Sent: Oct 23, 2008 4:31 PM
To: rsiderine@earthlink.net
Subject: Code Blue for Marriage!



Dear Friend,

The institution of marriage is in cardiac arrest in California and I am pleading with you to help save it. Please set aside what you are doing for a minute and pay close attention to what is happening with Proposition 8. Marriage as we know it is in a life or death moment.

Gay activists held a fundraiser on Tuesday night at billionaire liberal Ron Burkle’s mansion in Beverly Hills where they raised an astonishing $3.9 million. Even as guests were being entertained by Barbra Streisand, Melissa Etheridge and Mary J. Blige, No on 8 operatives were busy launching a sneak attack on the institution of marriage. They began dumping $3 million into television commercials this week alone. That is on top of the nearly $4 million in air time they already had purchased for this week, meaning they are spending an unbelievable $7 million on air time this week alone!

In the middle of the night last night, they began airing a new commercial featuring liberal Democrat Jack O’Connell, the California Superintendent of Public Instruction, designed to trick voters into thinking that gay marriage won’t be taught in California public schools. The No on 8 campaign realizes that this is their Achilles heel, and they are going to say and do whatever they need to in order to confuse and trick voters.

O’Connell slyly but shamelessly misrepresents the law, saying that California does not “require” that anything about marriage be taught in public schools. What he doesn’t say is that his own Department of Education reports that 96% of schools DO TEACH the courses that include marriage. The Supreme Court’s legalization of gay marriage unquestionably means that young children will be exposed to gay marriage in school, just as they are in Massachusetts.

Here is the situation we face: Unless we raise $3 million in the next week, we’re going to lose.

Our campaign is presently on the right track and has momentum, but we cannot withstand this onslaught of spending – getting outspent by $3 million this week and by who knows what next week. We have emptied our accounts to put $1 million more on TV to respond, but that leaves us bare. We need to add $1 million more to our advertising schedule in the next 24 hours for this week, and at least $2 million more for next week.

If you love the institution of marriage, this is one of those moments that you will remember the rest of your life. This is the moment when people of faith were given the chance to make a great sacrifice and save this precious institution. We have all worked hard as volunteers and contributors, but this is the moment when traditional marriage as we know it will either live, or it will die.

Years from now, when we look back on our lives, this will be a day to remember. The day when marriage went into cardiac arrest, the victim of a ruthless and false assault on the truth. The day when you had a chance to sacrifice greatly to save God’s precious gift to us.

This is Code Blue for marriage. What is your response?


Frank Schubert
Campaign Manager
ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8


www.protectmarriage.com © 2008 ProtectMarriage.com. All Rights Reserved. ProtectMarriage.com is a project of California Renewal (I.D. #1302592) | Contact UsUnsubscribe



ReplyReply All Move...Go to Previous message | Go to Next message | Back to Messages Select Message Encoding ASCII (ASCII)Greek (ISO-8859-7)Greek (Windows-1253)Latin-10 (ISO-8859-16)Latin-3 (ISO-8859-3)Latin-6 (ISO-8859-10)Latin-7 (ISO-8859-13)Latin-8 (ISO-8859-14)Latin-9 (ISO-8859-15)W. European (850)W. European (CP858)W. European (HPROMAN8)W. European (MACROMAN8)W. European (Windows-1252)Armenia (ARMSCII-8)Baltic Rim (ISO-8859-4)Baltic Rim (WINDOWS-1257)Cyrillic (866)Cyrillic (ISO-8859-5)Cyrillic (KOI8-R)Cyrillic (KOI8-RU)Cyrillic (KOI8-T)Cyrillic (KOI8-U)Cyrillic (WINDOWS-1251)Latin-2 (852)Latin-2 (ISO-8859-2)Latin-2 (WINDOWS-1250)Turkish (ISO-8859-9)Turkish (WINDOWS-1254)Arabic (ISO-8859-6, ASMO-708)Arabic (WINDOWS-1256)Hebrew (856)Hebrew (862)Hebrew (WINDOWS-1255)Chinese Simplified (GB-2312-80)Chinese Simplified (GB18030)Chinese Simplified (HZ-GB-2312)Chinese Simplified (ISO-2022-CN)Chinese Simplified (WINDOWS-936)Chinese Trad.-Hong Kong (BIG5-HKSCS)Chinese Traditional (BIG5)Chinese Traditional (EUC-TW)Japanese (SHIFT_JIS)Japanese (EUC-JP)Japanese (ISO-2022-JP)Korean (ISO-2022-KR)Korean (EUC-KR)Thai (TIS-620-2533)Thai (WINDOWS-874)Vietnamese (TCVN-5712)Vietnamese (VISCII)Vietnamese (WINDOWS-1258)Unicode (UTF-7)Unicode (UTF-8)Unicode (UTF-16)Unicode (UTF-32) | Full Headers


Search Mail


Copyright © 1994-2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Guidelines
NOTICE: We collect personal information on this site.
To learn more about how we use your information, see our Privacy Policy

1 comment:

emily said...

Children have a right to a mom and a dad. The state of California allowing same-gender marriage may seem progressive to some– –but what it says to me is that the state of California sanctions a relationship that does not best serve children.

While no heterosexual parents are perfect, and some situations are down right abusive and traumatic, the response is not to eliminate a child’s right to a mom and a dad. The response is to better educate, better encourage, better help parents be better.

While a lesbian couple or a gay couple may provide a stable home, love, and support to a child. By definition, a same-gender marriage cannot provide them a mom and a dad. Every child has the right to a mom and a dad.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/feb/06021601.html

Society should sacrifice for the health and well being of its children.

This is why I am voting “yes” on prop 8 (on my absentee ballot).

http://prop8discussion.wordpress.com/category/legislation-and-social-issues/

yes on prop 8!