Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

Washington state marriage equality round-up:

Washington marriage

By Scottie ThomastonGoal Thermometer

– Rick Santorum is scheduled to host fundraisers to raise money against R74, the Washington State referendum on marriage equality in November. Washington United for Marriage is asking opponents of marriage equality to rescind the invitation, given Santorum’s virulently anti-gay rhetoric. Via press release:

Noting that Rick Santorum has built his profile largely by degrading and insulting gay and lesbian Americans, Washington United for Marriage (WUM) called on Preserve Marriage Washington (PMW) and the Family Policy Institute of WA (FPI) to withdraw their invitation to him. The former senator and presidential candidate is scheduled to headline two fund raising events on Oct. 9 and 10 to boost the treasury of the organizations’ efforts to reject Referendum 74 and the state’s bipartisan marriage law.

At the same time, Zach Silk, WUM campaign manager, released a four-page memorandum to the media and other interested parties, outlining the extreme statements and actions Santorum has taken through the years in attacking gay and lesbian Americans and their families. The memorandum is attached as a PDF and included below.

“There isn’t a living politician who has built his bona fides more on the backs of gay and lesbian Americans than Rick Santorum,” said Silk. “This is someone who has likened same-sex marriage to the tragedies of 9/11, calling it the ‘ultimate homeland security’ issue. If they are committed to the rhetoric on their website and spouted endlessly across the state, they should cancel these events and tell Rick Santorum he is not welcome in Washington.”

– The campaign released two ads recently on the referendum’s protection of religion:




– Washington United for Marriage has also detailed how college students are gearing up for the vote, via press release:

More than 24 universities and colleges now have student-led leadership teams which are driving a new level of campus involvement in defending the bipartisan marriage law and Referendum 74 through chapters of Students United for Marriage (SUM). These SUM teams, which are expanding daily, will focus on voter registration, volunteer recruitment, broad outreach and GOTV activities.

Washington United for Marriage (WUM) reports that SUM teams are established on a variety of campuses, from smaller community colleges such as Green River Community College and Spokane Falls Community College, to Jesuit and Catholic institutions such as Seattle University and Gonzaga University, to large state schools such as the University of Washington and Washington State University, and even on nearby out-of-state campuses, including the University of Idaho. All told, the campuses represent more than 200,000 students.

Campus leadership teams and supporters represent a wide variety of students and student groups including Democrats, Republicans, LGBT groups, environmentalists, athletes, fraternities and sororities, and student leaders.

“Seventy-five percent of young people, between the age of 18 and 26, support the freedom to marry,” said WUM campaign manager Zach Silk. “Young people just fundamentally get it. In fact, many of them can’t believe that our law would face this kind of challenge. They want to marry the person they love one day, and they want the same for their friends and family. To them, it’s just that simple. We are so grateful for this outpouring of student support.”

Activities around college campuses this week include more than 20 student phone banks across the state, and canvassing on or near all of the campuses with Students for Marriage chapters.

13 Comments

  • 1. davep  |  October 5, 2012 at 11:22 am

    ….Sorry to make a slightly 'off topic' comment as the first comment, but I wanted to let everyone in the SF Bay Area know that Theodore Olson, one of the lead attorneys fighting for us in the Prop 8 trial, will be speaking at the Commonwealth Club in downtown San Francisco on Thursday October 18th at 6 PM. The Commonwealth Club is located a few steps from the Montgomery Street BART station. This will probably sell out so get your tickets early. Info is here:
    http://www.commonwealthclub.org/events/2012-10-18

    I had some trouble ordering a ticket from the web site this morning. If you do too, you can order by phone at (415) 597-6700.

  • 2. Reformed  |  October 5, 2012 at 11:29 am

    NOMs latest blog posts is about statistics related to children born out-of-wedlock. Glad they are are not calling them illegitimate (at least not in the body of the post).

    The headline says: Statistics on Illegitimate Births Still Show Rate Over 40%

  • 3. Straight Ally #3008  |  October 5, 2012 at 1:44 pm

    Having Rick Santorum as their pitchman could backfire, too, much as the extreme statements of NOM's allies caused a Maryland legislator to change sides. Might be a blessing in disguise.

  • 4. davep  |  October 5, 2012 at 3:51 pm

    It can backfire big time – IF – the campaign for marriage equality in Washington takes advantage of this. Ads with a short, clear message:

    "The REAL agenda of the group opposing R74 – their fundraising efforts are run by Rick Santorum, an out-of-state politician with extreme views who publicly compares the gay and lesbian citizens of our state to the 9/11 terrorists, and who compares loving, committed Washington families to pedophiles and having sex with animals. Do we really want our states laws defined by people with these extremist views? Say NO to hateful extremists and vote YES on R74 to assure equality and respect for ALL Washington families".

  • 5. MightyAcorn  |  October 5, 2012 at 7:57 pm

    And he said he'd kill Big Bird, and that sometimes you kill things you love.

    Guess he won't have to worry about being killed anytime soon, then.

  • 6. Mike in Baltimore  |  October 5, 2012 at 10:42 pm

    The message that works for one person does NOT work for another.

    My mother and her sister grew up together in NE Indiana, and are still quite close. They've never lived more than 20 miles apart, and many times much closer.

    My aunt lived near my (half-)sister for a while. One day (before she developed macular degeneration and thus couldn't drive), my mother drove to her sister's house, and finding her not home, went to my sister's house. Turns out my sister had to tell my mom that our aunt was in Fort Wayne at an anti-abortion rally. My mother responded with a "What the 'h' 'e' 'double tooth picks' gave her the idea that abortions should never happen?" (my mother never swears, and the " 'h' 'e' 'double tooth picks' " comment is about as close as she will get to swearing).

    The NOM 'arguments' 'pump up' some people (who usually already support them), but are so out of it that they turn others off. In politics, the blunt message usually is more harmful than the less blunt message.

    In other words, trying to out-NOM NOM in the messaging could REALLY backfire, and boost NOM. And that is probably what NOM is counting on.

  • 7. Straight Supporter  |  October 6, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    How about where each of these things he says is shown, then a split screen showing just how ridiculous the comparison is. For example, split the screen on the left showing loving committed couples, and on the right side a terrorist blowing up a bus. Kinda crazy if you see the two side by side and then say that the loving gay couple is comparable to the terrorist incident.

  • 8. Straight Supporter  |  October 6, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    Perhaps even show something like: "If he thinks this is equivalent to terrorism, what else does he think is equivalent to terrorism. How much of our freedom do we want to risk because he might think it is the same as terrorism? 'If you speak something that goes against my religion, that is akin to terrorism', 'If you don't think our country is the best, that is akin to terrorism', 'If you don't support everything your government does, that is akin to terrorism', etc. Do we really want this man as our leader?" (not checked for spelling,grammar)

  • 9. Deeelaaach  |  October 7, 2012 at 8:56 pm

    You want to be careful in what you show and say in a commercial. The failed Joe Isuzu commercials of the 80's backfired because while they printed the truth on screen as opposed to Joe's onscreen lies, the public began to associate Isuzu with sleazy car salesmen via Joe's character.

    Showing terrorists blowing things up could backfire similarly – we could end up being associated with the very terrorists we are saying we are not (and truly are not). But you don't want guilt by association. Joe Isuzu can speak for that.

  • 10. Straight Supporter  |  October 10, 2012 at 5:45 am

    How sad that human psychology can be so easily manipulated that even showing the truth like that could backfire and cause such a reaction. It is almost as if people are mentally/psychologically blind. People don't think enough. If our brains are a divine creation of a god, then he/she/it needs to go back to the drawing board.

  • 11. Mackenzie  |  October 6, 2012 at 7:57 am

    I thought the second ad was brilliantly put together!

  • 12. Seth from Maryland  |  October 6, 2012 at 1:31 pm

    Plenty of Spokane’s faithful supporting Referendum 74 http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/oct/06/plen

  • 13. Seth from Maryland  |  October 6, 2012 at 1:34 pm

    this article was wonderful , totally worth reading

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!