Measure 36

Argument in Favor

CULTURE WAR!

Traditional values are under attack, and sexual perverts are attempting to strain the definition of marriage far beyond what God has ordained. The Word of the Lord must be legislated as Oregon public policy.

In the Holy Bible, Saint Paul says that Christians should remain single and abstain from sex. The New Testament says that people should get married only if they are too weak-willed to abstain from sex:

"It is well for a man not to touch a woman…. It is well … to remain single as I do. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion." (I Corinthians 7:1, 8-9)

Marriage is not sacred. Marriage is for wimps and sissies!

Oregon public policy should define marriage in accordance with divinely inspired Scripture. Therefore, marriage licenses should be granted only to those persons who have been certified by professional psychiatric examination to be too weak-willed to abstain from sex.

Oh, by the way, although Jesus never said a single word condemning homosexuality, if heterosexuals can't get married, homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry either—well, unless they're too weak-willed to abstain. Sissies!

The sissy institution of marriage must not be perverted by sinners who are capable of abstaining! The sacred union of church and state must prohibit the immoral union of men and women capable of the discipline of sexual abstinence. We are not saved by either faith or good works. We are saved by religious-right legislation!

Freedom of religion and equal treatment under law is simply the special right to sin, because our tradition is the one and only truth! And our tradition (that is, our personal moral opinions) should become law.

AGREE WITH US OR BURN IN HELL!

(This information furnished by M. Dennis Moore, Traditional Prejudices Coalition.)


Argument in Favor

MARRIAGE IS SACRED!

The Bible says that marriage is for procreation. God made Adam and Eve, and Adam and Eve made Cain and Abel, not an empty nest.

Marriage is for procreation. If you're not pro-Creation, you're anti-God. And once a marriage has been solemnized, sex is serious business. The solemnity of sex must not be abused for sinful pleasures. Sex is for procreation, not recreation. And marriage is for breeding purposes.

Therefore, it should be Oregon public policy that

And couples who fail to conceive within two years ought to have their marriage licenses revoked.

Additionally, the Bible says that

This is the sacred word of the Lord, steadfast and unchanging.

Traditional morality must become Oregon public policy. All of it. And the older the tradition, the better. The separation of church and state be damned. In order to protect the sanctity of marriage and the sacred institution of heterosexual procreation, unequal treatment and discrimination must be legislated consistently against all persons who cannot or will not breed as God intended. It is God's will that we multiply and fill the Earth and finally subdue it when the population explosion self-implodes. Praise God!

Love is not good enough a reason to marry, because marriage is only for

HETEROSEXUALBREEDING.COM

(This information furnished by M. Dennis Moore, Defense of Heterosexual Breeding Coalition.)


Argument in Favor

THE TRADITIONAL FAMILY IS UNDER ATTACK!

Frightening new unprecedented social changes are threatening old traditional values. And these attacks on tradition have been escalating--for millennia!

First there was Original Sin when Eve disobeyed God! Then the Flood! Then Abraham abandoned the traditional practice of human sacrifice! Then Jews instituted the modern covenant of circumcision! Then Moses brought down from Mount Sinai a bunch of new-fangled Laws on stone tablets! And later Jesus abolished them and preached instead the radical new Golden Rule!

Polygamy fell out of favor! Women were no longer mere pieces of property belonging to men! Next these uppity women demanded the right to vote! Families could no longer own slaves! Prohibition saved the family from destruction by Demon Rum! The nineteenth-century extended families on American farms were destroyed by the 1950s social engineering of the "Leave It to Beaver" suburban cookie-cutter nuclear families! Blacks refused to ride in the back of the bus! Women demanded equal pay for equal work! Single parents demanded respect! Gays and lesbians demanded an end to hatred and oppression! Flower children protested traditional mass-murder warfare and genocide! Divorce skyrocketed! The silence surrounding child abuse was broken!

Frightening social changes continued! And then the religious right began a righteous backlash! First they accused gays and lesbians of being promiscuous! And when this failed, they began accusing them of having long-term committed monogamous relationships and wanting to get married!

Where will it all end? After 6,000-some years of frightening attacks on old traditional values, will history never cease to unfold? Will God never stop throwing all of these radical social changes at us?

My friends, there is a simple answer. All you have to do is

VOTE TO TURN THE CLOCK BACK!

It's really that simple!

Now, which one of these radical social changes will this measure turn the clock back to? Oh, come on, let's just

LEAVE IT TO BEAVER!

(This information furnished by M. Dennis Moore, The Beaver State Defense of Beaver Coalition.)


Argument in Favor

As you know, Oregon once again is in the spotlight on an issue that has national implications---the definition of marriage.

I am very concerned about what has taken place in Multnomah and Benton Counties regarding same-sex marriage. Clearly, the institution of marriage is being challenged and we must stand up as citizens to protect traditional marriage in Oregon and America.

I strongly urge you to vote yes on Ballot Measure 36 and defend the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Without the passing of this measure, I am afraid that the actions of Multnomah and Benton Counties will lead to an unfortunate conclusion by the Oregon Supreme Court.

This issue cuts to our core values. Defining marriage is so important that a huge number of Oregonians joined together in successfully qualifying this measure for the ballot in a very short time. Clearly, Oregonians want an issue of this significance to be decided directly by voters, not Supreme Court Justices.

Measure 36 is on your ballot. It is now time to vote. Your yes vote will change Oregon's constitution, defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman. This will strengthen the historical definition that is in Oregon statute, and protect our traditional idea of marriage by adding it to the Oregon Constitution.

Our core values are too important. Don't let them be defined by the courts, behind closed doors. Let YOUR voice be heard. Vote yes on Measure 36.

(This information furnished by State Representative Susan Morgan.)


Argument in Favor

Measure 36 - Why Does It Matter?

The Children

A mother and a father are necessary for a child's emotional
well-being and development. Many of us know the pain of not
receiving a father's or a mother's love and attention. In same-
sex marriage, this is not even a possibility.

If we "normalize" homosexual marriage, the state will be forced
to place foster children in same-sex households. Schools, and
society, will be teaching the next generation the "equality" of
same-sex marriage, changing our views of the importance of
gender and the nature of the family. It will cause kids to question
their sexual identity, and increase experimentation with a
behavior that is neither emotionally nor physically healthy.

Marriage between a man and a woman provides the best
environment for our childrens' success.

Societal Structure

The basic ties in relationships that keep our society together, are
found in the family. Where the family struggles, so does the
society. Changing our view of this important "building block"
will affect us all!
We need to reserve the approval of society for those behaviors
that further its success. If we must affirm every behavior, then
disorder is the ultimate result.

Measure 36 affirms society's ability to support those
behaviors that lend it stability and coherence.

Measure 36 is not about denying "rights".

The real issue is about approval, and gaining the respect of
society. Homosexuals already have the same individual rights
as everyone else, and can live as they please without threat from
the law.

Measure 36 is not about hate.

We continue to interact with, be friends with, and live in the
community with those who follow a different sexual orientation.

Measure 36 is about promoting the common good.

This is best for society, and best for our children.

Vote Yes on Measure 36!

(This information furnished by Jeff Roth.)


Argument in Favor

A Timeless Institution

Throughout history there has been one consistent outlook for civilization: mom and dad. It's possible for unforeseen circumstances to defy people's original intent. My father died very young. Despite the hurdles it presented for my heroic mother, we all knew the context of our family's origin.

A missing father or mother frequently sends children on a journey to find or learn about their parent. These natural inclinations remind us of the unique role both mother and father have in a family.

Men and women have distinct approaches to most issues. These distinctions give parenting incredible balance for the health and development of children. Research continues to document this. In truth, the further we go down the road of both experience and social understanding, the more we confirm the uniquely powerful contribution that fathers and mothers make in their child's life.

Many well-intended social experiments in the past 35 years have left us short-changed in the end. Change is not always good just because it's new. It's possible at the end of a dramatic proposal to find many unsuspected consequences. This clearly would be the case if we were to dramatically alter the reserved design for marriage between a husband and wife.

Traditional marriage doesn't reduce anyone's value or impinge on anyone's rights. One man's inability to bring the unique benefits of mothering to a marriage doesn't reduce his significance anymore than it would for two men. It's simply true that the beautiful manner of motherhood is uniquely performed by mom, and fatherhood by dad. Otherwise we must recognize all proposals for marriage on the basis of equal significance.

Redefining marriage will not enhance anyone's worth, but will reduce the rights of children to live in a culture that by design affirms the role of marriage to give them a mom and dad.

We urge you to vote yes on measure #36.

Michael Howden
Executive Director
Stronger Families for Oregon

(This information furnished by Michael Howden, Executive Director, Stronger Families for Oregon.)


Argument in Favor

Marriage Created, Not Contrived

Marriage is not a convenient contrivance of man but the creation of God for the well-being and happiness of mankind. It is intended by God to be a lifelong unity of loyalty and love between a man, a woman, and God—the natural offspring of that unique, God ordained relationship being children—in a safe and healthy God centered family.

Marriage between a man and a woman is the fundamental institution of any society. It provides the only healthy context for procreation and the development of normal, healthy, and godly human relationships.

The physical, emotional, spiritual, intellectual and moral development of children, parents, and the larger society, is best provided in this context.

To radically and fundamentally change the definition of marriage to include what God considers an "abomination" is to reject God's purpose in marriage for men, women, children, and a nation; to "exchange the Glory of God for a lie", and to reject the "eternal rules of order and right" which God has ordained.

Providing equivalent legal standing to unnatural relationships will force devastating and irreversible changes to our society. The rights of conscience, and the accompanying freedom to make moral distinctions will be severely curtailed. Public schools and curriculum will be required to teach that homosexual 'marriage' is the moral equivalent to traditional marriage. Religious freedom, healthcare, and Social Security will all be negatively impacted.

"Professing to be wise, we become fools" (Romans 1:18-32) if we believe judges and elected officials can arrogate to the state the right to change what God has ordained, for light, temporal, personal or political agendas.

Vote "YES" to amend the Oregon Constitution to preserve marriage between a man and a woman only. Traditional marriage must be protected from those who disdain it's origin, purpose, and Creator.

(This information furnished by David Crowe, Restore America.)


Argument in Favor

Oregonians, Not Judges and Liberal Multnomah County
Commissioners Should Define Marriage in Oregon

Most Oregonians thought marriage was already concretely defined in the Constitution. We were all shocked when four liberal Multnomah County Commissioners decided to circumvent the public process and engage their County Legal Counsel to redefine marriage in Oregon's Constitution. It was wrong, and Oregonians should be outraged.

Marriage Laws Defined as Being Between One Man and
One Woman Have Been on the Books in Oregon Since 1862

No where in the United States is same sex marriage legally recognized. In Oregon, statutes have been in place since 1862, defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. Here is what the statute reads;

According to Chapter 106 of the Oregon Revised Statutes, marriage can only be between males of 17 years of age and females of 17 years of age. This law has been in place since 1862.

Children do Better With a Mom and a Dad

All research is conclusive. Children do better with a mother and a father. Kyle Pruett, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Yale, explains that fathers have distinct style of communication and interaction with children. Infants, by 8 weeks, can tell the difference between a male and female interacting with them. This diversity in itself provides children with a broader, richer experience of various relational interactions- more so than for children who are raised by only one gender.

We Don't Want Oregon to be the Only Place in America
Where Same Sex Marriage is Allowed

Few issues are more important than protection marriage in Oregon. By not passing measure 36, and affirming what everyone thought was already in the constitution, we will redefine the culture of Oregon in ways we can not see or predict.

Please, Defend Marriage in Oregon, Pass Measure 36

(This information furnished by Representative Wayne Krieger, House District 1.)


Argument in Favor

Our nation's laws are excellent teachers for young people. All laws attempt to draw a line, to say something is good, or something is not good and should be discouraged. Oregon's laws have always limited marriage to a union between one man and one woman, establishing a policy that only male-female marriage is proper.

Now, some are calling for Oregon to put its stamp of approval on same-sex marriage, a practice that God in the Bible clearly calls wrong. Obviously, this would be a significant change in public policy that would influence the values of many young people.

The proponents of same-sex marriage have used activist judges in their attack on traditional marriage. But the problem is not ultimately activist judges. If Oregonians decided that stealing was good, we would approve of judges overturning the will of the people, because God says stealing is wrong. If our culture was traditionally homosexual, we would call for overturning a tradition that is wrong.

The question is, should the State of Oregon put its stamp of approval on what God has clearly said is wrong? Right and wrong are not ultimately determined by people, but by the God who created them. Rulers are to rule in a way that pleases Jesus Christ. When they do, they act in the best interests of all people. Youth thinking about entering into same-sex intimate relationships should not be encouraged by the government, but discouraged from something that brings God's displeasure.

There is no automatic right to marry. You have to be of age, you can't marry a close relative, you can't marry more than one person at a time, and you must marry someone of the opposite sex. This is the line we have always drawn here in Oregon, and it is the right line. It pleases God and helps our youth.

Dennis Tuuri for the Parents Education Association
Box 847, Canby, OR 97013 503-263-8337 peapac.org

(This information furnished by Dennis Tuuri, Executive Director, Parents Education Association.)


Argument in Favor

BALLOT MEASURE 36 AFFIRMS STATE LAW

Ballot Measure 36 affirms what Oregon law and our citizens have long held as true. State law currently defines marriage in Oregon Revised Statute 106.010 as being "entered into, in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age." The law was created in 1862, only three years after we became a state. Unfortunately, the courts think those who wrote the Oregon Constitution and our marriage law where not clear enough in their intent.

JUDGES AND MULTNOMAH COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF
MARRIAGE FOR THE ENTIRE STATE

Never before had people questioned the intent of our marriage law. If it had not been for activists on the Multnomah County Commission meeting secretly and without public input this matter would not be before us. Today we are faced with letting a questionable opinion stand or standing up and making our opinion known.

IF MEASURE 36 FAILS AT LEAST 350 STATUTES
MUST BE CHANGED

If Oregonians don't pass Ballot Measure 36 the legislature will be confronted with changing at least 350 statutes. Laws ranging from insurance, divorce, child custody, and taxes would need to be changed. There will be plenty for the legislature to do in the next session, without having to rewrite all the statutes that in any way affect marriage. The task of rewriting more than 140 years of marriage laws would be a daunting challenge by its self, without having the other duties of a regular legislative session.

I URGE YOU SUPPORT OF BALLOT MEASURE 36

ROGER BEYER
STATE SENATOR
DISTRICT 9

(This information furnished by Senator Roger Beyer.)


Argument in Favor

A Career Educator Urges Yes Vote on Measure 36

Measure 36 Is Essential to Quality Education

Oregonians have consistently demonstrated a deep commitment to the welfare and education of children. In other words, in Oregon kids come first! That is a commitment we can all be proud of.

But successful education does not begin in the classroom. It begins at home. Educators discovered long ago that the greatest contributor to student success is parental involvement.

The Breakdown of Marriage Hurts Kids

The breakdown of marriage and family in recent years has taken its toll on children. It has contributed to increased emotional, behavioral, and health problems that have resulted in lower academic achievement.

Certainly, there are exceptional parents in even the most challenging family circumstances, and these families deserve our support and admiration. But on the whole, students do best when living in a home with a married mother and father.

Measure 36 will benefit Youth Today and Tomorrow

School has always been more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. Next to home, it is where most students develop the character and values that will shape their lives. Marriage between one man and one woman is the ideal, is what the community expects, and that is what should be upheld!

Without Measure 36, it is possible that non-traditional relationships will have to be presented as an option equal to marriage between one man and one woman. This will lead to confusion for students and a conflict with what is taught at home resulting in a breakdown of trust in the local school.

That is why Measure 36 is essential for education, because more important to education than stable funding is a stable and healthy family! Please vote YES on 36! It is the most important investment you can make to a child's education.

Please vote YES on Measure 36

Clark Brody
Retired Deputy Superintendent, Oregon Department of Education
Education Consultant

(This information furnished by Clark Brody, Retired Deputy Superintendent, Oregon Department of Education, Education Consultant.)


Argument in Favor

Oregon Teachers & Educators Vote Yes on 36

As teachers and educators across the state of Oregon, we love kids and we've dedicated our lives to their education. We also understand just how much teachers and educators can help shape the character and values of their students. It happened for us as children, and we see it every day in our schools and classrooms.

That's why as teachers and educators, we are urging all Oregonians to join us in voting YES on Measure 36. Measure 36 sends a simple, positive message to children that marriage should be between a man and woman. It just makes sense.

Please vote Yes on 36.

Christopher W. Alsop
Mindy Cornett
Wendi Manthey
Linda Thornton
Donald Lentz
John Dracon
Mark Dorr
Shirley Burrows
Deborah L. Bush
Gerald Christenson
Rodney Bragato
Janet Crossan
Lauralee Furse
Karyn Lentz
Connie Thrush
John Nimmo
Thomas Stuch
Carol Funk
Ronald Suchanek
Kenneth Bush
Kevin Keeney
Ruth Wilhelm
Michael Davis
Gwen Hatt
Barbara Precechtil
Patricia Gerig
Timothy Zietlow
Allison Hart
Reyna Butterfield
Scott Ball
William McLaughlin
Nancy Jacobson
Mary Kuraspediani
Michael Quinn
Elaine Hardman
Nancy Womersley
Susan Akers
Colleen Corcoran
Kelly Benjamin
Gayle Nelson
Rita Kenniston
JoLynn Miller
Randall Law
Cherry Binder
Becky Blakely
Larry Verdoorn
Connie Franklin
William Suminski
Mary Jo Law
Janice Hotrum
Steve Smith
Marla King
Linda Quinn
Paul Boring
Gary Kelley
Edward Guenther
Rick Harris
Marv Walker
Raymond Garboden
Linda Verdoorn
Tom Demarest
Ella Garboden
Loren Gerig
Robin Manning
Dale Robbins
Joe Amsberry
Ben Cornelius
Linda Nimmo
Donna Basting
Elaine Hall
Mark Manthey
Oscar Stenberg
Ronald Lepp
Sara Beyer
Betsy Brown
Kim Bates
Elaine Suminski
Eldon Andres
Judy Huber
Mary Lau
Karen Callison
Pamela Robinson
Mary Heaney
Marcia Robbins
Brian Gerards
Pamela Hardy
Norm Scott
Eric Fuchs
Shirley Mann
Nancy Cornett
Charles Felton
James De Young Th.D.
Nina Rapp
Bob Callison
Joanne Nelson
Sharon Erck
Mary Ann Holloway
David Bradshaw
Ellen Demarest

Due to word limitations, this is a partial list.

(This information furnished by Christopher W. Alsop.)


Argument in Favor

Support Measure 36 -- Support Marriage

We all know what marriage is – the union of one man and one woman. Oregon law has recognized this historical definition since 1862. But a few activist county commissioners in Multnomah County decided they were going to take advantage of a perceived loop-hole in the Oregon Constitution, and redefine marriage on their own.

Process subverted

They didn't hold any public hearings. They didn't give any advance warnings. They simply began issuing marriage licenses that were in clear violation of state law and what we all know marriage to be. Their actions were arrogant and wrong.

We never thought we'd have to defend marriage through a citizen initiative. But because the Multnomah County Commission purposefully subverted the public process to redefine the law – we have no other choice.

Measure 36 ensures the law continues
as we've understood it

The Commissioners' goal was to force this issue into the courts. But we all know that marriage shouldn't be defined by judicial action. Marriage has already been defined in the law and through countless years of tradition.

This measure is about protecting an institution that has been a foundation of our society for centuries. It is about ensuring that the law continues to reflect the values and beliefs that the overwhelming majority of Oregonians already believed were enshrined in the law.

Overwhelming support

Earlier this year, 270,000 Oregonians signed petitions to put this measure on the ballot. Those signatures were collected in only five weeks – a record show of support for the institution of marriage.

Thirty-nine other states have a similar definition of marriage as would be enacted under this measure. It is sensible, mainstream and ensures that marriage will continue to be what we have always understood it to be: the union of one man and one woman.

(This information furnished by House Speaker Karen Minnis.)


Argument in Favor

Marriage Laws Were Defined in 1862.

Most People don't realize that in Oregon, marriage laws have been on the books since 1862 defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. If you were to look up the statute, Chapter 106 of the Revised Statutes states, marriage can only be between males of 17 years of age and females of 17 years of age. The statute couldn't be more clear.

39 States Have Already Established Marriage Laws

39 states have established either through their constitution, or through statute the meaning of marriage as being between one man and one woman. No where in America is same sex marriage legal, and it shouldn't be made legal in Oregon.

Over 350 Oregon Statutes Would Have to be Rewritten if
Measure 36 Fails

At least 350 Revised Oregon Statutes would have to be rewritten or thrown out placing future legislatures in a quagmire of confusion and litigation. Marriage laws, insurance laws, probate, child custody and many many more laws would have to be rewritten to acknowledge same sex marriage.

The ACLU Will Demand More

If measure 36 fails, there will be mass confusion over the definition of marriage in Oregon. The ACLU will surely force costly litigation on the state and school districts demanding that same sex marriage become a normal component of school curriculums. Teachers will be forced to teach sex education to middle school children based on the new interpretation of marriage in Oregon.

Measure 36 Deserves Your Support

It is important to affirm what we all thought was already in the Oregon Constitution—marriage is a sacred covenant between one man and one man.

House Majority Leader Wayne Scott

(This information furnished by House Majority Leader Wayne Scott.)


Argument in Favor

Measure 36 Doesn't Change Oregon's Constitution…It Affirms What We All Thought Was Already There

Because of the actions of some renegade County Commissioners, we are faced with the battle over the meaning of marriage in our great state. Personally, I am outraged by the arrogance of four county commissioners who thought they alone could rewrite over 140 years of Oregon law.

The average person on the street thought Oregon's constitution was clear and without compromise. But times have changed, and open democracy has been replaced with judicial activism and political backroom deals. I believe most Oregonians are as outraged as I am about the actions that have brought us to this place in time.

The ACLU and Basic Rights Oregon are the Leaders Behind the Scenes

Four Multnomah County Commissioners, the ACLU and Basic Rights Oregon are the ones who made this happen and who forced us to collect over 270,000 signatures in just five weeks to allow citizens of this state to have our say on the issue of defining marriage in Oregon. Their radical agenda went forward without a single public hearing or open meeting discussing the implications of rewriting Oregon's sacred marriage laws, which date back to 1862.

Now, Oregonians Can Have Their Voices Heard

Given just five weeks to gather the necessary signatures, Oregonians have already spoken with a loud voice by submitting record numbers of signatures to qualify this measure for the ballot, but now that voice must be heard on election day.

Recently, Missouri passed their amendment with over 70% of the vote, and now it is time for Oregon to do the same, if not stronger.

Take a stand: Vote Yes on Measure 36.
Defend the greatest institution we have left standing.

State Representative Linda Flores

(This information furnished by State Representative Linda Flores.)


Argument in Favor

An Open Letter from Senator Ben Westlund

I have worked hard in my career to open and balanced as I have deliberated on important public policy issues. At times, I have been at odds with my own party about various issues ranging from tax policy to healthcare reform. I am proud of my independence.

Recently, I have had long meaningful discussions about Measure 36, the constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. While many people might expect me to break once again from my party and oppose Measure 36, they will be interested to know that I am a strong supporter of Marriage being defined as being between one man and one woman.

First of all, most of us believe that the Constitution intended for marriage to be defined as being between one man and one woman. In fact, an early Oregon statute dating to 1862 reinforces this fact. Most people, if they were being honest with themselves would agree that the culture of 1859 and the legislature of 1862 had no other intention.

More importantly however is my own strong personal beliefs about how important it is to our culture and society that we hold on and reinforce this very important institution we know as marriage. Study after study and psychiatrist and psychologist alike point to the value and the importance of children having both a mother and a father as role models.

Measure 36 is simple. If it passes, and I hope that it does, it will simply confirm what most of us thought already to be true—Marriage in Oregon is legally defined as being between one man and one woman. Of all our cultural institutions, few are more important and more worth protecting than marriage.

Please, Vote Yes on 36.

Senator Ben Westlund

(This information furnished by Senator Ben Westlund.)


Argument in Favor

Measure 36 is the Only Way to Protect Marriage

Oregonians expect much more of their elected officials.

Our nation has the finest system of government in the world. It's the reason I've dedicated so much of my life to public service. It's also the reason I was deeply grieved when members of the Multnomah County Commission authorized same-sex marriage licenses without any public hearings, testimony or debate.

When dealing with matter as dear to the public as marriage it's imperative to hold fair, honest and open debate. With an issue this big, every one deserves a chance to be heard.

It also gives policy makers the chance to weigh critical research and understand the lasting ramifications of their decisions. In the case of marriage, the evidence is very strong.

The Evidence Supports Historic Marriage

Children do best when raised in a home with a married mother and father. That evidence is indisputable. They enjoy better health, and experience fewer social, emotional, and behavioral problems. They even score better as a group in school.

That doesn't mean children in other family arrangements can't succeed, of course they can. And usually that's the result of a dedicated parent or parents. But taken as a whole, marriage is very good for children, for families and for the community. It's an institution that deserves our support.

Measure 36 Is the Only Way to Protect Marriage.

The actions of the Multnomah County Commissioners speak very loudly. There is a small extreme group that will try to change marriage anyway they can. They will even skirt clear laws that have been on the books for years.

That's why it's critical to vote Yes on Measure 36. Because amending the State Constitution is the only effective way to protect marriage.

Marriage has always been a special relationship only between a man and a woman. Let's keep it that way. Please Vote Yes on Measure 36.

State Representative Gordon Anderson

(This information furnished by State Representative Gordon Anderson.)


Argument in Favor

Vote YES on Measure 36
It Just Makes Sense

Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. In 1863, the Oregon Legislature authorized marriage only between members of the opposite sex. This statute reads:

Marriage is a civil contract entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age …"

Oregon now has over 350 laws recognizing marriage as between a man and a woman.

The Laws of Nature

Of course this 141-year-old law isn't surprising. From the earliest annals of recorded history, marriage has always been between a man and a woman.

As a State Senator in rural Oregon representing hundreds of ranchers and farmers, the historic record makes perfect sense. It takes a male and a female to produce offspring. It's just a law of nature.

This does not mean that only married people make good parents. Both history and our own neighborhoods are filled with wonderful examples that prove otherwise. But they aren't called marriage. Marriage has always been a unique relationship between one man and one woman.

40 States Recently Passed Laws Like Measure 36

To my knowledge, every state in the nation defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Like Oregon, these laws were thoughtfully debated and overwhelmingly passed. Then in 1996, because some of these laws were being challenged in the Courts, the Federal Government, under President Clinton passed the Defense of Marriage Act. This allowed states to protect their marriage laws. In the last 8 years, 40 states have done so. And this election, 10 states are pursuing Constitutional marriage amendments like Oregon's Measure 36.

Measure 36 is the only way to preserve marriage. Without Measure 36, marriage will always be just one court decision away from becoming history.

Please vote Yes on Measure 36

Gary George
State Senator

(This information furnished by Gary George, State Senator.)


Argument in Favor

Seven Reasons to Vote YES on Measure 36

Vote YES on 36, Because Oregon Laws Deserve Open, Honest Debate. Tell elitist Multnomah County Commissioners that Oregonians don't make laws in secret meetings with powerful special interest groups.

Vote YES on 36, Because Children Do Best with Both a Mom and Dad. The research is overwhelming, children with a married mother and father consistently do better in every measure of well-being. It's more important than race, economic status, educational background or neighborhood.

Vote YES on 36, Because Oregon Law Already Says Marriage Is Between a Man and a Woman. Measure 36 is not a new concept in Oregon. Over 350 Oregon statutes affirm what most people have always believed: marriage is a union between one man and one woman.

Vote YES on 36, Because It's the Way Nature Meant it to Be. A Marriage between a man and woman is more than just about a loving relationship, it's also about the laws of nature. Every species requires a male and a female to produce offspring.

Vote YES on 36, Because 40 States Already Have Defense of Marriage Acts. In the past eight years, 40 states have passed new laws protecting marriage between one man and one woman. This election ten states have Constitutional marriage amendments on their ballots.

Vote YES on 36, Because It's Our Last Chance to Preserve Marriage. Oregon laws are already clear about marriage; it's between a man and a woman. But one activist Judge could change that with a single decision. That's why Measure 36 is so important. Because even a Judge cannot change the Constitution.

Vote YES on 36, Because Preserving Marriage Is Not Discrimination. Measure 36 does not prevent anyone from having a committed relationship and does not hinder benefits. It just preserves marriage as a unique relationship between a man and a woman, that's not discrimination.

Please Vote YES on Measure 36

(This information furnished by Michael White, Executive Director, Defense of Marriage Coalition.)


Argument in Favor

A Look Back Should Lead to 'Yes' Vote.

In the midst of important arguments about the meaning of marriage, it is important to remember how we got here.

Prior to March, 2004 there had never been any doubt about the meaning of the Oregon marriage laws, or their constitutionality. Then four members of the Multnomah County Commission decided, without any public notice or hearing, to take the law into their own hands and begin issuing same sex marriage licenses–making a mockery of the Oregon Open Meetings Law and basic principles of good government.

Multnomah County also claimed that same sex marriage licenses are required by the Oregon Constitution–although no court had ever so ruled, no Legislature had ever so voted, and no citizen input had ever been heard on the question! In the ensuing litigation over these actions, it became clear that the County, and the special interest groups urging them on, wanted the courts, not the People, to create a new constitutional right for same sex marriage. Indeed it became clear that they desperately wanted to avoid giving the People a vote. These groups apparently do not believe that we are smart enough, fair enough, or wise enough to decide such an important question. And they wonder why citizens no longer trust their government? But this subtly elitist view of government is not the view that was held by our founders. Jefferson said, "I know of no safe repository of political power but in the hands of the people, and if we think them not enlightened enough to hold it, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to enlighten them."

If Multnomah County succeeds in this ill-conceived move, they will not only have stolen an important constitutional question from the People, but they will have further eroded citizen confidence in our government. They are apparently willing to pay that price. I am not.

(This information furnished by Kelly Clark, Attorney at Law, Defense of Marriage Coalition.)


Argument in Favor

Uncovering the Myth of Same-Sex Marriage

Advocates of same-sex "marriage" use a number of arguments that can best be described as "myths." The reality is often quite different. For example:

MYTH: Defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman is "discrimination."

REALITY: Everyone has access to marriage on exactly the same terms and same set of restrictions. Age, family ties, marital status and gender all affect the ability to marry.

MYTH: Homosexuals suffer serious harm because they're denied the protections of marriage.

REALITY: Many of the "protections" granted by marriage are already available to same-sex couples through the use of private contractual arrangements, such as wills, durable power of attorney, health care proxies, and life insurance policies.

MYTH: Homosexual relationships are the same as heterosexual ones.

REALITY: Research shows that homosexuals are less likely to enter into long-term partnerships, be sexually faithful to a partner, and have relationships last a lifetime. Granting legal recognition to same-sex couples in the Scandinavian countries led to a weakening of society's commitment to marriage across the board.

MYTH: A "one man and one woman" definition imposes a religious definition of marriage on civil society.

REALITY: The definition of marriage is rooted in nature itself. The sexual union of a man and a woman is what reproduces the human race. The durable commitment of that man and woman to one another is what provides children with a mother and father. Overwhelming evidence shows that this family structure makes children happier, healthier, and more prosperous than any alternative family form.

The real "myth" is that the benefits of marriage for society, couples and their children can continue apart its timeless definition of a union between one man and one woman. The "reality" is that redefining marriage could bring unintended consequences on the next generation.

Peter Sprigg
Director, Center for Marriage and Family Studies
Family Research Council

(This information furnished by Peter Sprigg, Director, Center for Marriage and Family Studies, Family Research Council.)


Argument in Favor

Considering the Children in the Marriage Debate
Glenn T. Stanton

Why should Oregon keep marriage between males and females? Because to say "yes" to same-sex marriage is saying "yes" to same-sex families.

An Untested Social Experiment
No society has ever raised a generation of children in same-sex homes. To do so is a vast, untested social experiment on children. Two doctors admit publicly in their Lesbian Parenting Book, "It will be interesting to see over time whether lesbian sons have an easier or harder time developing their gender identity than do boys with live-in fathers." We all use products where we are assured that "no animals were harmed in the testing of this product." But the warning label on the same-sex parenting experiment reads: "It will be interesting to see…" It is never wise or compassionate to intentionally subject children to social experimentation.

And what drives this experiment? Not the needs of children, but rather the desires of adults. Lesbian mother, Rosie O'Donnell, told Diane Sawyer in a Primetime interview that her son asks why he can't have a father. When asked what she tells little Parker, Rosie responded, "…because I'm the kind of mommy who wants another mommy." Parker doesn't get a daddy because Rosie has certain emotional and sexual desires. And the growth of gay and lesbian families will intentionally deny thousands of children their mothers and fathers.

While compassionate societies always come to the aid of motherless and fatherless families, wise societies should never intentionally create them. But that is what the same-sex family does. Marriage should remain between men and women because children need mothers and fathers.

Glenn T. Stanton is the author of Why Marriage Matters: Reasons to Believe in Marriage in Postmodern Society.

Sources:
D. Merilee Clunis and G. Dorsey Green, The Lesbian Parenting Book: A Guide to Creating Families and Raising Kids, 2nd ed. (New York: Seal Press, 2003), p. 243.

ABC News: Primetime (March 14, 2002)

(This information furnished by Glenn T. Stanton, Director, Social Research & Cultural Affairs, Focus on the Family.)


Argument in Favor

A Legal Perspective and the Need for Measure 36

We are Oregon attorneys involved in defending the definition of marriage as "one man, one woman", which has remained substantially unchanged since territorial times. We urge a "yes" vote on Measure 36 so Oregon's Supreme Court cannot alter the definition of marriage.

Limiting marriage to one man and one woman is not a discriminatory practice that violates either the Oregon or U.S. Constitutions. The United States Supreme Court determined in Baker v. Nelson there is no federal constitutional right to same sex marriage. In the states where courts have decided their state constitutions require same sex marriage (Hawaii, Alaska), voters later rejected that conclusion by amending the constitution. The only exception to date is Massachusetts, and they may do the same soon after its legislature next meets.

The Supreme Court may or may not agree with our argument a proper interpretation of the history and purposes of Oregon's Privileges and Immunities Clause requires it to uphold Oregon's marriage statutes as they now exist. Measure 36 allows the people rather than the Supreme Court to decide.

If the Supreme Court concludes the Oregon Constitution requires two individuals of the same sex be able to marry simply because they want to, it is difficult to argue larger groups of individuals of any sex (polygamy or "polyamory") should not also be able to join in group marriage. When accommodating personal sexual preferences is the touchstone for constitutional analysis, all consensual relationships among adults become entitled to the same dignity. Litigation is now underway in Utah to overturn that state's ban on polygamy, and the Utah plaintiffs use the same arguments now being used in Oregon to attempt judicial rewriting of our marriage statutes. We disagree with an agenda already on record as favoring state approval of all private consensual sexual activity as equally dignified and appropriate.

We urge you to vote "yes" on Measure 36.

Herbert Grey

Kelly Ford

(This information furnished by Herbert Grey, Kelly Ford.)


Argument in Favor

DEFENDING TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE
ON BEHALF OF THE CHILDREN

I want to speak as a father in defense of traditional marriage.
As a father, I have helped raise three healthy, happy children
and it did not come about by accident. It happened as a result
of hard work on the part of their mother and me. Anyone
who insinuates that healthy children don't need both a mother
and a father have little understanding of what is required to
develop healthy families. I know the immeasurable importance
of their mother in the lives of my three kids. I now understand
from experience the importance a father can make
in the lives of his children.

A father-child relationship more than any other, defines a child's entire life. It affects their dating and marriage relationships, their identity, their sexuality, their work performance, how they express emotion, and how they become independent. A child's relationship with dad shapes their view of God, their significant life decisions, and ultimately who they turn out to be as individuals.

Marriage between a man and a woman was an institution designed with a purpose in mind. That purpose was to create an environment to enhance the development of healthy children.

Numerous studies have concluded that kids do best when they are raised by loving and committed mothers and fathers. They are less likely to be on illegal drugs, less likely to be held back in a grade, less likely to drop out of school, less likely to commit suicide, less likely to be in poverty, less likely to become juvenile delinquents, and for the girls, less likely to become teen mothers. They are healthier both emotionally and physically, even thirty years latter, than those not so blessed with traditional parents.

Please vote Yes on Measure 36.

Kent L. Walton, Chief Petitioner, Measure 36

(This information furnished by Kent L. Walton, Chief Petitioner, Measure 36.)


Argument in Favor

Portland Area Pastor's Urging Oregonians to Vote YES on 36

As pastors, we rarely speak out on political issues. But this election is different because Oregonians will decide one of the most important decisions ever placed on a ballot. It is Measure 36, the Defense of Marriage Amendment. And the outcome of Measure 36 will affect marriage and family for years to come.

We, as pastors -- who collectively minister to tens of thousands of people of virtually every color, nationality, age and gender -- are doing everything within our power to keep marriage defined as being between one man and one woman.

We love, support, and help care for almost every family arrangement conceivable, but marriage is a relationship like none other. Marriage is the way God designed nature to bring children into the world. And marriage provides the ideal environment to raise a child where each of the unique qualities of a man and a woman blend together for the balanced development of their offspring.

It doesn't mean married people are any more special than non-married people; it's the relationship of marriage itself that's special. This is why we strongly encourage every person to vote YES on Measure 36. It's simple; it's right; it's the way marriage should be defined – one man and one woman.

Frank Damazio
Pastor, City Bible Church

James Martin
Pastor, Mt. Olivet Baptist Church

Raymond Cotton
Pastor, New Hope Community Church

Dale Ebel
Pastor, Rolling Hills Community Church

T. Allen Bethel
Pastor, Maranatha Church

Carl Palmer
Pastor, Cedar Mill Bible Church

David Stevens
Pastor, Central Bible Church

Kelly Boggs
Pastor, Valley Baptist Church, McMinnville

Stu Weber
Pastor, Good Shepherd Community Church

Randall Sanford
Pastor, Sunnyside Foursquare Church

(This information furnished by Frank Damazio, Pastor, City Bible Church.)


Argument in Favor

Traditional Marriage Is Not a Civil Rights Violation

Defining marriage as between one female and one male does not violate anyone's civil rights. The civil rights battle African Americans faced was about basic human rights; the right to be treated as a full human being, the right to an education, to vote, to live where one chose and not to be limited due to the color of one's skin.

These true human rights violations however, cannot be compared to the issues posed by the same sex marriage community. The right to marry whomever one chooses is not fully given to any person. For example, no one can marry their sister, brother, mother or father. A parent cannot marry his or her children. And it's not considered discrimination to forbid marrying a child or having two spouses. These limitations apply to all people equally and make good moral and common sense.

Certainly, the dignity of human rights must be afforded every human being, but we cannot invent civil rights were there are none. Regarding key civil rights indicators, like access to education, employment and housing, gay Americans score above the national averages. And gay and lesbian citizens are not prohibited by law from having a relationship. It just isn't marriage.

I have been questioned about past laws that prevented members of an African-American community to marry into the white community. While it definitely was discriminatory, the issue concerned "ethnicity" and not same-sex marriages. The two are as different as oranges are to apples.

The same-sex marriage community wishes to appeal to voters who rightly say, "what happened to African-Americans should not happen to anyone else." With this I agree. However, I and the majority of African-Americans, do agree that keeping marriage between one man and one woman is not discrimination.

Rev. T. Allen Bethel
President, Albina Ministerial Association

(This information furnished by Rev. T. Allen Bethel, President, Albina Ministerial Association.)


Argument in Favor

Bend Area Church Support Measure 36

The Bend Ministerial Association representing a majority of churches in Bend urges voters to vote "Yes" on measure 36. Both church and state have a common interest in affirming marriage to be the union of one man and one woman.

First and foremost, the church recognizes the authority of our creator, God, to govern His creation and to require certain behaviors and to prohibit certain behaviors. In the very act of creation, God created two very similar by different human beings: man and woman. Man and woman are the very foundation of the family; incomplete in themselves, but together achieving the ability to create and nurture a family.

Jesus Christ affirmed marriage between a man and a woman when he asked: "Have you not read, that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife; and they shall become one flesh'?" (Matthew 19:4-5 ESV)

As ministers of the Word of God we are required by our Lord to teach and affirm that sex is a wonderful gift from God to be enjoyed by husband and wife within the sacred bond of marriage. We are also required by our Lord to teach that all sexual relations outside of marriage between one man and one woman are morally wrong and sinful. As pastors, we speak daily of God's love, compassion, and healing power to individuals and families who suffer the consequences of sexual sin: broken marriages and families, sexual addictions, poverty-stricken single mothers and sexually transmitted diseases, all of which increases the burden of civil government and public and private social agencies.

For these reasons, both the church an civil government have an interest in affirming marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Dave Miller, President

Terry Cowan, Secretary

(This information furnished by Dave Miller, President, Terry Cowan, Secretary; Bend Ministerial Association.)


Argument in Favor

United Methodist Statement in Support of Measure 36

The understanding of the 10-Million Member United Methodist Church is that Marriage is a God-defined Covenant between one man and one woman.

"We affirm the sanctity of the marriage covenant that is expressed in love, mutual support, personal commitment, and shared fidelity between a man and a woman. We believe that God's blessing rests upon such marriage, whether or not there are children of the union. We reject social norms that assume different standard for women than for men in marriage."

Paragraph 161.C (Social Principles, 2000 Book of Discipline)

Our Christian community administers/supports this exclusive Covenant only according to the definition given by the Biblical God. Our stewardship of the Marriage Covenant within the United Methodist Church is based upon Scripture's teaching concerning the origins of Marriage found in the Creation Narrative of Genesis, the Old Testament Prophetic Revelation (which uses Marriage as a picture of Covenant faithfulness with God) and the Teaching of Jesus in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark that Marriage is exclusively between one man and one woman.

This understanding presents a living witness to the larger society of what faithful living is. We are not given the authority to redefine the nature of this Covenant, doing so would be an encouragement to engage in sinful behavior, a liberty that Scripture never condones.

United Methodist Christians have historically rejected the practice of homosexual behavior while seeking to uphold the God-given worth/dignity of all persons. The 2004 General Conference continued a two-decade affirmation of this understanding as United Methodist Church policy. The delegates also affirmed by a wide margin that same-sex marriage is not recognized or to be practiced in our denomination.

We urge you to join with us in supporting Oregon Measure 36.

Sincerely,

Rev. Rand D. Sargent
Marquam, OR

Bob Youngman
Newberg, OR

(This information furnished by Rand D. Sargent, Robert M. Youngman.)


Argument in Favor

The Value of Preserving Marriage

Relationships involve personal decisions. But the institution of marriage is a public agreement, a foundation for how families relate to their communities in Oregon. Marriage brings order to social life within the diversity of our many private customs and practices.

Marriage contributes immeasurably to the human and economic health of society. Marriage helps nurture children into responsible citizens.

So the people of Oregon are right to be concerned about establishing fair rules determining who can marry. Our state sets a minimum age for marriage. It licenses certain people to perform wedding ceremonies, bans polygamy and the marriage of near relatives. The state promotes healthy and stable marriages that benefit everyone.

This public aspect of marriage reflects the shared values of the people of our state. While individuals are free to form households and domestic partnerships as they wish, marriage is the basic institution that the state registers and regulates. This amendment would not restrict people in their private relationship choices. Rather it would give clear support for the basic institution that has contributed to happiness and prosperity throughout the ages.

Until recently Oregonians routinely agreed that marriage is defined as a life-long commitment of one man and one woman. Recent challenges to this definition introduced a knot of confusion into our courts and into our lives.

An amendment to the state constitution is necessary to preserve the meaning of marriage. Passing Measure 36 would support the orderly regulation of marriage and protect the people of Oregon from the confusion of a radical redefinition of marriage. It would give clear direction to government officials as they determine public policy for marriage.

Marriage between one man and one woman has been the foundation of strong and healthy communities for thousands of years. Vote "Yes" on Measure 36 to preserve a stable understanding of marriage for the well-being of all.

Rev. Richard P. Zimmerman
Rev. Bruce Sexton
Rev. Gilbert Gleason

(This information furnished by Rev. Richard P. Zimmerman.)


Argument in Favor

LET'S VOTE!

The recent OCA signature drive for the "Divine Sovereignty Life Amendment," if successful, would have given Oregonians the extraordinary opportunity to vote on the existence of God, yes or no. Religious dogma would have been decided democratically by popular vote--essentially creating an official state religion with GOD ALMIGHTY enshrined in the Constitution as

Oregon State Deity!

Although this initiative drive failed, the "Christian" Coalition has now created a Commandment Amendment to the Constitution! Measure 36 ordains us to

VOTE ON THE THEOLOGICAL BELIEF

of whether churches, synagogues, and temples "shalt not" be permitted to marry gays and lesbians.

And this election thus establishes the glorious precedent for democratic electioneering on ALL of the

Official Oregon State Dogma!

COMING SOON
TO A THEOLOGY BALLOT NEAR YOU:

This is democracy! Religious beliefs belong on the ballot, and winning beliefs become public policy in the Constitutional Catechism! Minority adherents, straight and gay, should have the statesmanship to accept that religious freedom does not protect losing beliefs in a theological election.

Your special right to practice your moral beliefs (including marriage) is subject to the whims of popular vote!

It's not discrimination, it's electoral theology.

In Oregon, democratic dogma is inspired by initiative and referendum--in the

Holy Marriage
of the
One Official Oregon Church and State!

VOTE FOR OREGON:
State beaches, the bottle bill, land-use planning, and now
THE OREGON DOGMA!

www.oregondogma.org

(This information furnished by M. Dennis Moore, God for Oregon Deity-PAC (GOD-PAC) and Family Alliance of God.)


Argument in Favor

Same-sex marriage proponents argue this initiative amendment violates the civil rights of gays. For clarity, examine issues from a civil perspective.

Common ground

The right to marry exists.
A civil marriage union is a contract.

Problems

By its very nature, legal advocacy limits issues. Equal protection has provided an especially beneficial strategy for same-sex marriage proponents.

It has focused on the right rather than on the source of the right, marriage, the contract. It has forced opponents to counter within this legal delimiter. It has resulted in a highly divisive debate on an erroneous foundation of equal protection versus marriage.

The issue proves more complex, like the story of the 5 blind men describing the elephant. One blind man describes elephant by the tail, another by the foot, and so forth.

First, rights emanate from the institution from which they are derived. The institution (marriage/government/etc.) establishes the rights. Rights do not establish nor do they create the nature of the institution.

Therefore, we must understand the institution/source. We must consider contract law because that is the nature of marriage. The 4 elements are 1) mutual assent 2) consideration, promise for a promise,…the right to consensual reproductive sex 3) legality subject matter…not prostitution, bigamy 4) legal subject…of age? not incest, etc..

Second, legal confusion also occurs because equal protection focuses on individuals/equality whereas contract law focuses on two or more parties/exclusion…specifics of the contract.

Third, contractual elements direct us to the nature of marriage which is based upon the nature of man (m & f), the union of a man and a woman. For the nature of man, consider statistics (the norm, the bell-shaped curve), the natural law, and Aristotelian philosophy.

Solution

Vote for this initiative amendment.

You say it isn't your business? It doesn't matter?

It does. Why? Because truth is the scale upon which justice is based. Truth must prevail.

(This information furnished by Ann Lackey.)