• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Organizations supporting traditional marriage are rallying their members for hearings scheduled tomorrow in Olympia, Wash., on proposals that would create look-alike “marriage” for homosexuals in the state, where the institution until now has been protected by a Defense of Marriage Act.

The Family Policy Institute of Washington said hearings on legislative proposals SB5688 and HB1727 will be held tomorrow.

“If these bills pass, Washington state will no doubt have gay marriage in the following year. We just not let that happen,” the organization said in its alert.

The group said its members must show up “and let the committee know that you are standing for traditional marriage.”

“You don’t have to testify if you don’t want to. … Even if you’re not comfortable testifying, you will make an impact with your presence,” it said.

The organization’s spokesman, Russell Johnson, told WND the legislative plans “essentially would be a gay marriage equivalent, and afford all of the rights of traditional marriage to domestic partners without technically giving them the name marriage.”

He said the state’s definition of marriage now is one man and one woman, and its protections for the traditional institution have been upheld by the state Supreme Court.

However, recent legislatures have “chipped away” at the protections for marriage, and this year the full agenda to give same-sex duos the same status as married man-and-wife couples is being attempted.

Johnson said that’s at a time when his organization’s surveys reveal that public support for same-sex “marriage” is declining.

He also cited the vote just a few months ago in California where residents rejected a provision to allow “marriage” for same-sex duos.

“We are hoping for many of our supporters to turn out … to be not only a visual representation of the values that we hold dear, but we are hoping many will choose to testify,” he said.

Johnson cited the most recent votes by residents in Florida and Arizona in 2008, as well as California’s decision. In all three cases voters rejected “marriage” for homosexuals. Several dozen states now have reached the same result.

The organization’s news alert warned of where a move toward recognizing same-sex “marriages” could lead:

“Canada became the fourth nation to legalize same-sex marriage in 2005 when they enforced the Civil Marriage Act. Last month, the Tri-City Herald reported that two leaders of rival polygamous groups in Vancouver, B.C., made their first court appearance to file lawsuits demanding equal recognition and protection under the law,” the alert said.

“Same-sex marriage activists routinely say that they want to ‘end discrimination’ as it pertains to marriage equality. However, state law currently discriminates against polygamy, incest and under-age marriages. Do same-sex proponents also want to end the discrimination against groups that promote these kinds of relationships?”

That’s in addition to the impact same-sex “marriage” would have on churches, ministries and other organizations, the family group said.


  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.