Ron Paul would Vote NO on Prop 102...

[tarabyte]

Hi All,

Legislating morality is dangerous. Ron Paul wouldn't approve of amending our state constitution to restrict religious freedom.

Prop 102 is a push mostly by some Mormons to legislatively discriminate against gay people.

Not all Mormons believe this way, if you are Mormon here are some videos you should watch:
http://noprop102mormons.blogspot.com/

Vote NO on Prop 102 the so-called “Marriage Amendment”

-> Vote NO to keep politicians out of marriage. Arizona has a
budget deficit and our schools need help. But what does the state
legislature spend their time debating? Marriage— even though it’ s
already defined in state law as between a man and a woman and
even though we voted on this two years ago.

-> Vote NO to tell politicians that we aren’t dumb. Why won’t
Phoenix politicians listen to us? Do they think we’re dumb? In 2006
we voted no, now they are back at it, putting divisive issues on the
ballot. We must stop spending time debating the definition of
marriage.

-> Vote NO to tell a religion to stop using government to force its
beliefs on the people. No religion should force its views on the
people, using government to control our state. No religion should
have the ability to amend our Constitution.

-> Vote NO to tell politicians to get to work on real issues that
matter to Arizona families. Voting on the marriage issue isn’t
important to people, we must focus on more important issues:
health care, immigration, energy policy, the economy.

-> Vote NO to leave marriage alone. Marriage in Arizona is already
defined in state law as between a man and a woman. There’s no
reason to change the Constitution.

-> Vote NO again. Trust the people. Voters made their views known
on the issue of marriage two years ago by defeating the so-called
“Protect Marriage Amendment.” Forty nine legislators should not be
able to overturn the voters on this issue.

[heavenlyboy34]

+1776 :)

[Thane Eichenauer]

Of the above 6 reasons listed, reason 1 and 3 are strong, the rest quite weak.

All advocates of limited government agree that government should not be regulating religion or individuals personal beliefs.

Reason 2 is weak as it attempts to imply that anti-smart voters should vote no because otherwise they will be assumed to be dumb.

Reason 4 has been proven weak as 56% of the voters who cast ballots chose to vote yes in favor of Proposition 102. People are interested in Prop 102 and the government definition of marriage, apparently as much as "health care, immigration, energy policy, the economy"

Reason 5 "Marriage in Arizona is already defined in state law as between a man and a woman. There’s no reason to change the Constitution." This is nearly a false statement in my opinion. Massachusetts and California and their state Supreme Courts are the whole reason this referendum is on the ballot.
The voters don't want judges invalidating mere statutes (laws) that currently prohibit gay marriage (or plural marriage - or marriage between a man and his bicycle).

Reason 6 is pretty weak, it asserts that 49 legislators control the definition of marriage as found in the Arizona constitution - false. The voters will decide (have decided).

If equality under the law advocates want to prevent initiatives and referendums such as Proposition 102 from passing in other states they should stick to their strongest arguments and leave the false assertions behind, one false assertion is enough to poison a prospective voter against all offered reasons.

Thane Eichenauer
LP 2008 candidate for AZ CD-1
http://www.LibertarianSolution.tk/
http://www.unmarried.org/