Gould trumps Prop 102
Says traditional marriage needs to be preserved When Arizonans go to the polls Nov. 4, they will have the chance to legally define marriage in the state with Proposition 102, a piece of legislation that Arizona Republican State Senator Ron Gould has brought forward.
Prop 102 legally defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Arizona currently does not have any legislation on the books that would allow same-sex marriages. Gould saw what has happened in other states, including California, and believed now was the time to act in order to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. Gould pointed toward Sweden where 75 percent of children are born out of wedlock. He said one major reason for this is Sweden’s lax definition of marriage. “It has devalued marriage to the extent where the youth don’t believe in it,” Gould said. The proposition would make it harder to find a hidden right written within the current legislation for gays to be married. He also noted with the current statute in California, gays could go to the state, get married and possibly come back and sue in Arizona for their right to be legally declared as married. Gould is a conservative, a family man, and businessman and has been in the legislature since 2004. The focus of the bill is family. Gould said he is not trying to police the bedroom. People should be free to live how they would like. Legal protection for gays is already in place. Gould is focusing on keeping the societal traditions of marriage in place. Gould is running for his third term as a state senator for Legislature District 3. His experience in the legislature allowed him to bring the proposition forward, something he noted would likely not be possible if he is not re-elected, as new senators often have trouble bring a piece of legislation forward. Gould is a staunch conservative who comes from the private sector, where he still owns and operates a business as a heat and air conditioning contractor. Gould came to the legislature after being a member of the Lake Havasu City Council because he saw poor decisions being made on the local and state level. If re-elected, Gould said it is time for the legislature to take a sharp look at the state budget. He said too much debt has been accrued on state and local levels, and it is now time to go through the budget line-by-line to see how spending can be cut and what projects can be eliminated or placed on hold. “It seems like what the country has been about the past 15 years is going into debt, using your house as a bank account and living beyond their means,” Gould said. What is the solution? Gould said the government is setting a bad example, in terms of being in debt. In 2004, when Gould first came to the legislature, there was a half-a-billion shortfall. Gould said raising taxes is not the solution. He says he has stood by his original promise to not raise taxes in order to pay off debt. “The tough thing to do is to stand firm against a tax increase and start cutting things out that are non-essential,” he said. For the past four years, Gould has earned a positive score on the “Friend to the Taxpayer” Legislative Scorecard, sponsored by the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP). The scorecard rates those legislators who vote against or for budget bills. Gould has been consistent with his stance against raising taxes, signing a pledge never to do so, which has helped earn him a top spot as a “Hero to the Taxpayer.” Gould joined fellow District 3 Republican Representative Trish Groe and others to make Legislature District 3 the highest scoring district in the state, in terms of standing against increased taxes. Gould attacked Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano’s $9.9 billion budget, stating instead of going line by line through it, the Democrats voted for an unbalanced budget, which includes a possible $300 million increase in property taxes and is more than a billion dollars over budget. Gould’s stance on the economy goes hand-in-hand with his stance against taxes. According to Gould, reducing taxes helps stimulate the economy, because it encourages people to invest. He attributes the current decline of the government to allowing credit card companies and banks to give loans to those who could not afford to pay them off. As the government considers another rebate, Gould says this could only cause further inflation, which will devalue the buying power of the dollar. Raising wages is possible, Gould says. To bring wages up, the government would need to stop manipulating the free market, he said. Creating incentives could help to bring people back to investing. Gould says he will continue to run for Legislative District 3 office, even after this election. He said the voters know his record, and they know his conservative beliefs. “The people know what I am going to do, because I have been doing the same thing my whole political career, standing up to try and reform the system and standing against tax increases,” Gould said. “I know the rules, and I know how to slow things down and speed things up.” You may contact the reporter at twaggoner@havasunews.com. Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of havasunews.com.
Reader CommentsWhaz Up wrote on Nov 3, 2008 9:50 AM: " my younger brother is a homosexual..and he is anything but happy..he's HIV positive...has to take a mixture of drugs, constantly arguing with his homosexual partners...my 40 years of watching him suffer under this lifestyle, leaves me to believe that homosexuality is evil...there is nothing good about it.. " Reply to mother of 3 wrote on Nov 3, 2008 1:23 AM: " You really need to get your facts straight. God gave you your freedom of speech? I beg to differ our military men and women gave you your freedom of speech. God needs to give you a dictionary!! So what the gays want to get married. I have some gay friends they are absolutely wonderful people they should be able to marry the ones they love and have it acknowledged by others. This is one of the reasons I don't go to church. Some not all of them are way to judgemental. I don't discrimanate against anyone except for MEAN people and let me tell you there are quite a few on here. You all need to put your pitchforks down and think. " Vote no on 102 and Ron Gould wrote on Nov 2, 2008 7:29 PM: " If churches don't want to perform gay marriages and they don't want to be held accountable by anyone, then don't take federal money. Organized religions and their "churches" are nothing but money tax shelters. If you want to believe in God and pray to Him, do it quietly and in private like it says in the book of Matthew. Tithing is a tax write off and "churches" are a welfare state. Get rid of all of them and their rabid little dogs. " Yes on 102a wrote on Nov 2, 2008 3:17 PM: " I am not the "original" Yes on 102, who posted under that name before I did. My mistake for not paying attention to the names. I was NOT comparing ADA rights and gay marriage. I just used that as an example of greedy lawyers suing just for profit, with no desire to assist the disabled. Rest assured that when gay marriage is legal, lawyers will be lining up to sue churches. It's already happening, as the "no name" poster pointed out below. " Chris wrote on Nov 2, 2008 12:10 PM: " A very wise man once said to me, "If something someone does today has no effect on you personally one year from today, why should it cause you such great concern?". Please just think about that for a moment........ " Arliss wrote on Nov 2, 2008 10:52 AM: " To Yes on 102: I have to conclude now, after you tried to compare Gay Marriage to Disabled Rights, that you are beyond rational argument. Just come out and say it, your hatred for gays is very apparent, and you cannot rationalize your hatred through faulty arguments. To Deny ANY American their Constitutional Rights is just plain Un-American and you should be ashamed of yourself! " Yes on 102 wrote on Nov 1, 2008 5:25 PM: " This is the original yes on 102. I did not post the past few comments. Someone is using the same name as I did. I agree with what he or she is saying, but it is a different person. " wrote on Nov 1, 2008 3:42 PM: " http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91486340&ft=1&f=1070...http://media.npr.org/documents/2008/jun/pavilion.pdf...Checkout the story and you will see churches are being forced to allow gays to get married in their facilities. Loopholes are being used to declassify church properties and their status. " Dubld wrote on Nov 1, 2008 3:02 PM: " I just gotta throw in my two cents here... To start, what's up with the article headline turning into a pro-Gould commentary! Next, say NO to prop 102 if you tolerate other people's beliefs! To all you religious zealots out there(quite a few in this town), if you want people to respect your view-point then make it a two-way street. Gay couples should have every right available to them that a hetero couple would have...most people agree with this. The major problem people have with this(they say, although I have a suspicion they're hate mongers too pathetic to admit to it) is that it goes against the 'sacred' MARRIAGE of man & woman by changing the definition as it appears in the bible or how it is teached by religions. I'm not gay but if I was, I would'nt be too proud(unfortunately some are) to have it called something else as long as I get those same basic rights...Union or Partnered or whatever. Would that help this argument if the term 'marriage' wasn't used & some other term was? To some, it would. To others, that's not what the real issue is. They're afraid of letting people live life the way they want to, afraid of 'what's next?', afraid of the 'unknown'(un-proven religion). This is the same fear that causes wars, death & ultimately the decline of society. To put it bluntly, you can't simply take a word & say no one else can use it...that's just dumb. My transmission is married to another part in my car but I don't get harassed for it nor do I find it offensive when a mechanic terms it that way. " Yes on 102 wrote on Nov 1, 2008 2:52 PM: " To Arliss: Just wait. Militant gays and money hungry lawyers will attempt to subvert churches that refuse to conduct gay marriages. Just as was done in California, by suing small businesses after ADA accessibility laws were enacted and allowed the "disabled" to sue establishments. They weren't interested in making them provide access. They just wanted them to pay damages $$$$$$$ All you have to do is look at the mockery against the church in every gay parade ever held. You really think that they won't use this to get back at churches and religion? At a minimum they will try and get the tax exempt status revoked, due to "discrimination". I will agree that most won't want to be married in a church that doesn't "accept" them. But there's also those that will use this to attempt to destroy traditional religion, while cashing in on lawsuit proceeds. " bote no to gould wrote on Nov 1, 2008 12:21 PM: " lakehavasulynn, thank goodness a voice of reason. Gould has not been an asset for lhc. " Arliss wrote on Nov 1, 2008 7:26 AM: " To Yes on 102: Your rational for opposing gay marriage is faulty. Gay people will NOT want to get married in a church where they do not feel welcome. No one is going to force a church to perform any Gay marriages that it does not WANT to perform. There are plenty of churches that accept and welcome gay members. You seem to forget that a church has a Constitutional Right to refuse service to whoever they don't want. That is what this whole discussion is about: Constitutional Rights. " YES ON 102 wrote on Oct 31, 2008 6:04 PM: " What will happen with legal "gay" marriage, is that churches and synagogues will be sued by those who the particular church refuses to marry. While I have no problem with people standing up for their "right" to marry, their supposed "rights" will infringe on the church's right to freely practice their religion without Government intervention. When the courts impose their will upon churches, THAT is exactly the intervention that our founding fathers wished to exclude when writing the Constitution/Bill of Rights. I would support gay marriage ONLY if there was a provision that the churches would be exempt from being sued, strictly for practicing their beliefs. " lakehavasulynn wrote on Oct 31, 2008 1:48 PM: " Change the Constitution to intentionally discriminate against a select group of our citizens? how un-American. Wonder why gould touts this prop?, maybe it is because he's done nothing in 4 years he can trump for his consituents. Nothing on jobs, education or the meth problem, nothing on water or for our veterans. How many of the mayors in our district endorse gould? none that I know of. Think about it. You are the "decider" on who represents your best interest. Don't let the government get into the business of legislating people's morals. Your's could be next. Vote NO on 102. Vote NO on Gould " Good Post wrote on Oct 31, 2008 11:19 AM: " To "On and On", I applaud your post and I admire your beautiful grammar and your intelligent, non-judgmental post. Thank you for being a calm voice in an article full of heated posts. " What Is Gould Hiding wrote on Oct 30, 2008 9:34 PM: " This is the first paragraph from the national AP story on Proposition 102... "PHOENIX - Arizona has been a disappointment to anti-gay marriage activists since 2006, when the state became the first in the nation to reject a ballot measure banning same-sex marriage." Ok, Ron... you need to come clean... who are the anti-gay marriage activists you are representing? How much money did they give you? Where are they from? Are they even from Lake Havasu City, the area you are supposed to be representing? " mouse wrote on Oct 30, 2008 7:36 PM: " I am not for higher taxes but being a logical person I realize that some day I may have to call the police or fire dept;children have to be educated or some other public service.There is a lot of waste in goverement 2 stories in the Herald in the last week show this 1] 100k bomb robot 2] city hired a firm to figure out if local people are happy with parks and rec. Now those are tax wasters if i've ever seen any.Bin Laden is sitting in his cave laughing right now at the stupidity of the American public right now ,trying to figure out how to sneak a pipe bomb into LHC. Also having lived here for almost 7 years I have only one time met and elected offical of this town where do these people hide. I lived in a city of 125,000 in Ct. and would meet the mayor or other elected officials walking around town 2 or 3 times a week here in LHC it's easier to hire a consultant instead of getting out and meeting the people you govern.As for Mr Gould getting the high rating from the Goldwater Institute this is a 15 person think tank it is in reality not Conservative but Libertarian it believes in almost no rules or regulations on anything.Also remember who the 2nd highest rated person on their list was. Politics no matter how distasteful it may be is about what is best for most and compromise and Mr Gould's closing quote in the article should show how unfit he is to represent anyone"I know the rules,and I know how to slow things down and speed things up". Again I say why would anyone vote for a person who thinks like that. Yep he might save you a $ today but your going to pay the piper sooner or later. " Watch what you write wrote on Oct 30, 2008 5:31 PM: " Interesting, there were a few posts here that were based on logic without rhetoric and personal attacks. You people better get your act together or go to a different blog. Those types of posts will never fly here. This blog is for glassy eyed bible beating alien abductees. " Arliss wrote on Oct 30, 2008 2:57 PM: " To Yes on 102, The Bible is not the Constitution of this country. It is wrong to deny Constitutional Rights to ANYONE based on your personal religious views. You can be against a lifestyle personally WITHOUT making laws against it based on religion. If we start legislating in this country based on Biblical beliefs we would be no better than the Terrorists we are fighting against. We as a nation are abhorred when we hear about Sharia Law in Muslim countries, if we legislate from the Bible we would be no different. The problem with the current political atmosphere in this country is because one side sees the other side as an enemy instead of seeing them as another American with a different point of view. We are NOT enemies we are all Americans and we all live by, and defend, the Constitution. " To Vicky wrote on Oct 30, 2008 1:29 PM: " Maybe the youth of today aren't rushing into marriage but they are rushing into sleeping with one another. I know of at least 5 girls, all under the age of 17, that have had or will be having, a baby. I know of one 15 year old that just had an abortion. No, the youth of today aren't rushing into marriage...but they are rushing into having sex. Please be one of the few that at least waits until you have a strong relationship and know which direction you want your life to go in. Because once you get pregnant and make the choice to keep the child...it's a life long change. All I can say is that I wouldn't want to be a teenager in today's day and age. Good luck to all our youth. " pondscum wrote on Oct 30, 2008 1:16 PM: " Prop 102 makes a legal definition, not a religious one. Perhaps the best bet would be to redefine all unions sanctioned by the state as civil unions. I am afraid that the current bill will bring the weight of the federal courts down on us due to its obvious descrimination. If the state were to adopt the civil union status then the religious could avail themselves of a religious "marriage" at their own discretion. Doing the latter would save the state a lot of paperwork in future; and that would definitely be very beneficial, considdering how inept governments are at doing anything. " on-and-on wrote on Oct 30, 2008 12:14 PM: " I've been reading this thread for a while now and it's been very interesting to read others opinions about this proposition. But most of it is just opinion or "belief" with an occasional reference to God. Neither side will convince the other as long as this is seen a a religion/non-religion issue. But I was interested by the person who said; "... do the math". Well, I like math. So I thought I'd throw around some ideas. Although some studies have shown that as many a 40% of people have had homosexual leanings at some time in there lives, far few have acted on them. A better estimate of the population that actually considers themselves to be homosexual is probably in the neighborhood of 5-7%. But only a small fraction of those have any interest in "gay marriage". Many of them are already married (to members of the opposite sex) whom they may or may not actually love and on whom they may or may not cheat. (Just like heterosexuals). But one writer was correct to say that as a group, homosexuals are more highly educated and have higher incomes than heterosexuals. So here's where the math comes in. If both homosexual partners are making more money than the average worker, aren't they already paying more than their fare share for income tax? Social security? Health insurance? Property tax? Sales tax? School tax? Part of the single person's health insurance helps to pay for pre and post-natal care even though they (straight or gay) don't have children. Insurance statistics show that those most likely to see a doctor are women and children, followed by married men (because his wife harps at him to see a doctor). Unless they are very sick, single men tend to just suffer through it when they are sick. But the point is that homosexual men and women are already footing the bill for many of the benefits that heterosexual couples are receiving and often take for granted. Since homosexuals are already paying into these programs, they are already entitled to receive the benefits of those programs in their own right. They are just restricted in their ability to pass on survivor benefits to their partners. The only homosexuals who would receive financial benefit if the state recognized gay marriage would be those rare couples where one person stays home and the other works. Now there's not a big move in Arizona for homosexuals to run out and get married. But even if they were, the financial cost to the state would pale compared to the financial contribution that homosexuals are already making to the state and the economy. But they don't receive their fare share even though they pay more than their share. Ron Gould has not cited a problem in the state. He says he's trying to head one off before it starts. So this would be much to do about nothing were in not the fact that people are trying to enact laws that would reinforce already existing discriminatory practices against citizens of our state. That's why I am going to vote for Ron Gould but I'm going to vote against his nasty little proposition. By the way, I'm way up in years and I've never seen anyone making out in the grocery line unless they were teenagers. I guess if it were two boys, I would go running out of the store shrieking in terror! :-) " yes on 102 wrote on Oct 30, 2008 9:26 AM: " to LHC Mom- There sure seems to be a lot of anger in your words. I think with all of the time and studying of the Bible that I have done, I have a little more credibility than most to speak on it. Your statement seems a little unfair to say "that I don't know what I am talking about". But I am glad to see you are actually reading the Bible. There is a lot of wisdom in those pages. You should continue reading more. There is also a lot more than the one verse you keep refering to. And actually the passage you refer to more literally means "Don't criticize and then you won't be criticized. For others will treat you as you treat them." This is gentle advice from God, not a commandment saying don't judge or you will go to hell! I am not judging anyone and for the record I know several gay people. I played golf with one of my female gay friends the other day. I do not treat her any differently. She is engaged to be married, (to another woman) and I still love her just as Christ does because it is not my place to judge. You see God does not hate sinners of any kind, he hates sin. And HE defines what is right and wrong. There are several places in the Bible where he speaks about homosexuality. He also speaks of alcohol, stealing, adultry, I could go on all day, but the point is, does God hate gays? No. Does he hate the alcoholic or the thief or the adulterer? No he hates their actions and warns them against these actions because of the consequences. He knows how the alcoholic life ends up. You can be an alcoholic and go to heaven, but you may die before your time because of liver failure. You will hurt many in the process. Consequences. Defining marriage or not defining marriage will have consequeces either way. I have to vote yes on 102 because I do not want to pay the consequences of the alternative. As a citizen of the U.S. and of AZ, I have to vote and I will vote in the best interests of my beliefs, my family and my country. It has nothing to do with judging others. And if you think allowing gay marriage will not affect your pocketbook in the long run you are so wrong. That will be one of the many consequences all Americans will eventually pay. " Bassmaster wrote on Oct 30, 2008 9:15 AM: " Oldone- YES ON 102 You didn't read the article.in Sweden 75% of childen are born out of wedlock! As for you Ron haters, he was chosen man of the year for 2 years that i know of and you get this from saving tax payers money. He has saved the tax payers more money than anyone. This Prop won't pass in this state, But if you'd like to see gays and illegals you can always go to San Francisco to live. while your at it take the illegals with you. ok " Me wrote on Oct 30, 2008 8:52 AM: " Wow! I have long heard of the ignorance of Lake Havasu, but it is quite a different thing to see it actually written in black and white. To think, that some one actually thinks they have the right to tell two people how to love and live together. Maybe we could come up with a law that would prevent you all from breeding... " Vicky wrote on Oct 30, 2008 5:56 AM: " The definition of marriage has not been devalued for the youth. As youth, I think I can speak for a majority. We believe in marriage and love and all that hokey pokey what not... however, we don't believe in rushing into it. What has devalued marriage is the old marrying everyone willy nilly and divorcing like it's nothing. " oldone wrote on Oct 29, 2008 11:16 PM: " For you intolerant ones out there.Some of you obviously don't know any gay people as if you did you would know,they are as religious as straights, they also stay together as long or longer then straights. And for those who don't want to pay into a program that may give them money,why should gay folks pay into a program they won't recieve money but you do because you are as they say straight? Religion has been used for centturies to hide bigotery and hatetred against any one who doese not beleive their way and it is a sickness that will go on as long as man. Grow up and see a person for what they are and what they do for mankind. " Stright wrote on Oct 29, 2008 9:49 PM: " GOOD GRIEF---considering the majority of posts I've read, I am living in a town full of gays & lesbians; is a cable car next for this place ???? You guessed it---I have no tolerance for something so TOTALLY unnatural. " surfinghavasu wrote on Oct 29, 2008 9:28 PM: " I do not know why someone ends their marriage. There are many reasons for divorce. Selfishness, lack of coomunication, different goals,and too many people see divorce as an easy out if your spouse for the moment does not make you happy. Most excuses for divorce that are not biblical are also not an honor to God. I am not perfect a spouse , my spouse is not perfect. We do our best to work through our arguments. There have been many times that I have wanted to ran away. I have not. I will do my best to honor the vows I made to my spouse and to God. I made a vow to God who I believe. I believe that I am saved by grace through the blood sacrifice of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I also do not believe that I am perfect. Why do OTHER people make a vow to God that they do not keep? I can not answer for those people. You need to ask them. My question still stands. You have all said Not to judge others. You say that they have no choice about who they love? That is insane!!! I make a choice everyday to love my spouse. I didn't mention abortion. Which is also a choice that a person has to deal with on their own. Except that the child that is being killed does not have a choice. Some choice. The child is innocent. Oh and do not forget to mention to the side effects of abortion that no one ever cares to mention. The depression, the lifetime of regret, the possiblities of cancer. I will admit one thing to you. I do not believe that most gays want to get married. I guess I believe that most gays are in some way mad at God. What better way to get back at God then to erode one of the foundations that most people believe that He created. I guess I was looking for someone to clear that one up for me. I try to make my own judgements based on what I learn. Matthew chp7: vers 5 says: You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and Then you will be able see clearly to take the (teeny tiny) speck out of you brother's eye. I am not trying to stop someone from beign Gay. Or whatever. I think everyone has freedom of choice. That being said I just think that "marriage" should be reserved for one man and one woman. Just like they are created man and woman. I do not force my views on gays nor do I tell them that I am straight. I just do not think that people should have to go around with labels. Or he is gay or she is straight or she is confused. We are men and women. That is it. " mexlplex wrote on Oct 29, 2008 9:20 PM: " Folks, you are missing the point here... this is not about whether or not gays and lesbians can marry... this could be any trivial issue... this is about Ron Gould getting his pure emotional appeals out there to whip you up and vote on issues the are meaningless but add to a pointless conservative resume. How many times will he try this? How many times will he be allowed by the electorate to do this when we have real problems facing us. This is exactly what the conservatives do when they have run out of ideas... change the subject to an emotional issue. NO on 102... NO on Gould... NO to conservative ideologues who want to dodge the real issues... " Sean James wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:45 PM: " My goodness, separation of Church and State? The Bible and Religion have little to do with this proposition. Yes, we should all understand that those with deep beliefs in God and Christianity will speak in favor of this, and those with little regard for religion will vote against this measure. The fact is that this Country was and still is founded on Christian principals...like it or not. Americans have always pretty much let gays do as they please, so long as they did not try to affect the mainstream America. In the last 20 years or so, gays have become more and more vocal, demanding, and tried to be part of mainstream society. At maybe 5-6% of society, they are hardly mainstream and have no right to push their agenda on others. Just as Christians have no right to push their agenda on gays. By definition, marriage IS between a Man and a Woman. Just because they want free government stuff, insurance benefits, and legal protection, is no reason to try to change 2000 years worth of Christian values. Gays as a rule make more money than typical American couples, they tend to be more educated and live better than the average American. This being the case, should the benefits of marriage be applied to them? I don't know. There should be other ways to do this besides Constitutional Amendments. This measure should not even have to be voted on, but because of the radicals, the ultra-left universities, and those that would destroy our Country by nit-picking and bending the Constitution and the Christian values this country was founded on, Americans will stand for no more. Traditional families must now resort to protecting their History, their Heritage, and the future for their children. I'm sorry, but most American Families still believe that being gay is wrong, as do most all religions. But at the same time, most Americans will respect their right to do what they want with their life if it does not affect them. " LHC MOM wrote on Oct 29, 2008 7:10 PM: " To "bassmaster" I don't want to see anyone making out...and if people are going to make out, they will, no matter if they are married or not, gay or straight. To "yes on 102" just because gays get recognized as being married does not mean that companies will have to start offering benefits that they didn't have in the past. If the companies have benefits, then married gays will have the same rights to them as straight married couples. If the companies don't offer benefits, then no-one will have them, gay or straight. As for social security, they will only get what their spouse had coming to them...not your portion or mine. Besides, let's face, social security is a joke anyways. " Whaz Up wrote on Oct 29, 2008 6:50 PM: " ...homosexuality is nothing more than a sexual perversion...it's morally wrong...was, is and will always be wrong... " Bassmaster wrote on Oct 29, 2008 5:53 PM: " LHC mom says she doesn't care if gays are married.BUT she doesn't want to see them making out! Well you will see them making out, because there MARRIED. get it. They'll possibly be making out in front of you and your child in the grocery line at the store.whether you like it or not. Because there is no respect for others these days. THINK AHEAD! these are the people that are going out and voting without thinking it through " yes on 102 wrote on Oct 29, 2008 4:59 PM: " Mouse I disagree with anyone that hates. I disagree with anyone that straps a bomb to themselves in the name of God. I do not presume to preach to you, nor was I trying to insult you. But I do know the scriptures and I know that even the scriptures say that many will use the name of God but few will really know him. It saddens me how many people drive others away from God by the way the live and talk and call themselves Christians when they are not. I am not perfect and am thankful for God's forgiveness for my sins, they are many. Please don't bunch us all together as Bible thumping hypocrites. We are not all that way. I don't like that type of people any more than you do. LHC Mom, you are right I am not your judge. And you are right God WILL judge you and me someday. I believe that. To answer your question, the difference is most companies and social security etc... do not currently pay those benefits. When they are forced to start paying those benefits all people's prices will go up to cover the cost. And as a person that feels marriage is for men and women, I don't want to pay those costs. Am I not entitled to my opinion too? My opinion can probably be summed up in the book of Romans in the Bible Chapters 1 & 2. It can be read in about 5 minutes, check it out. " LHC MOM wrote on Oct 29, 2008 4:52 PM: " To "yes on 102" - so I don't know what is in the Bible? Then why is it that I found this in Matthew 7:1-2 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged." For someone who has read the Bible COVER TO COVER 5 TIMES, you don't know what you are talking about. You may want to go and read it cover to cover again, and this time, pay attention to what you are reading. " pondscum wrote on Oct 29, 2008 3:11 PM: " Just what has religion to do with this matter? We are talking about the Arizona government. When you see the issue that way there is only one way to vote: NO. If you deny governmental sanctions to any group that you give to others you are enforcing discrimination. Yes, enforcing. I say that because my basic definition of government is "legalized force". I am personally an atheist and it is my seriously considered opinion that being gay or lesbian is immoral. Nevertheless, I cannot vote for any bill that will impede impartial access to any individual to the functions of government. I am also serious supporter of Ron Gould because, while I deplore his foray into this regulation, I applaud his attempts to keep down government spending and taxation. " LHC MOM wrote on Oct 29, 2008 11:57 AM: " To "yes on 102" I never said that something was or was not in the bible...again, I posed a question? I wish you all would stop twisting the words of others. And who are you to tell me whether or not I know God? Just because my beliefs are not yours does not mean I do not know Him. God is the ONLY ONE who can judge me or anyone else when that day comes. Until then, I can only live MY life the best way possible. It is all the religious people out there that try to cram THEIR beliefs down everyones throat that has so many against ANY type of religion. And just for your information, I am straight, married and have 2 kids. And please explain how it is any different whether a large company has to pay for a gays partner or for a straight persons partner? Benefits for a married couple would be the same regardless of the sex of the married couple. Same goes with social security. They don't want more or less than anyone else would get...they just want to be able to be on the same level as everyone else. " mouse wrote on Oct 29, 2008 11:11 AM: " yes on 102 if the bible is a book of love and forgiveness why do the people who use it to beat us to death with their beliefs hate so much. I can have a 1000 people read the bible and each of them will interpet what they read differently;that is why there have been so many differnt religious sects down through history. It is nice that you have read the bible 5 times but your interpetation of its meaning has nothing to with my rights or beliefs . So please don't insult me by preaching to me my opinion is my opinion and your beliefs are your beliefs which dosen't make either of us right or wrong. " bombinmama wrote on Oct 29, 2008 10:09 AM: " surfing..who says that gays do not believe in god..some may not and some may? Just because in your eyes the bible may read to you..that being being gay is a sin..I know that judgeing is a sin as well..so should people who judge believe in god..because if you think about it..if only people who were without sin believed in god..we would have absolutley no people who beleived in him..and personally in my eyes..you can not help who you fall in love with..you can not help how you were born..so to answer your questions there are plenty of gay people who would love to take marriage vows in front of god because their faith lies deeper than judgement..and they have their own pesonal faith with the lord " Yes on 102 wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:57 AM: " To Mouse and LHC Mom. You do not know the scriptures and you do not know God. Every issue is addressed in the Bible including abortion and homosexual activities. Most of you have never taken the time to read the scriptures, it might suprise you to find that Jesus came not to condemn the world but to save it. The Bible is a story of love, hope and forgiveness. And yes you all have free will to do whatever you please, but just because you can do whatever you want, it is not always good for you and does not mean you should just because you can. You can drink 30 beers per day, but should you? Is it good for you? Will it benefit you or those around you? Read up and then comment. Please stop saying things that are in the Bible or not in it until you read it. I have read it cover to cover over 5 times, and study it daily. I can speak on it with some credibility. Finally, I do not agree with anyone wanting to marry for money, straight or gay, and AZ is not the second worst economy in the nation by state. Get educated on the economy and the scriptures and then we can really talk about the issues. Just stop the uneducated irresponsible comments. Are any of you even gay or do you just have to argue about something? Do you realize that you are fighting for something that will hurt your finances even more? When every large co. has to start paying benefits to a man's "partner" you will see your prices go up to cover that cost. When the government has to pay social security for "partners" it will drag the system etc... Do the math. " to surfinghavasu wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:56 AM: " This one is for you, "surfinghavasu". Can you answer *my* question? How come 50% of straight marriages end in divorce? How is that honoring a vow to God? And homosexuals don't care if they get "married". They want the legal benefits of marriage - the tax breaks, the hospital visitation rights, the insurance benefits, etc. And FYI - people entered into monomagous relationships and devoted themselves to their partners long before YOUR god "created" marriage. " LHC MOM wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:53 AM: " To "mouse" my thoughts and feelings exactly. Only GOD can judge me by the way I lived my life and no one else. That is why I say WHO ARE WE TO JUDGE OTHERS. I am not a big bible thumper but have attended church now and then, but isn't there a saying that goes something like "don't judge lest ye be judged"? To "set it to music" I didn't ever say anything about the separation of church and state being in the constitution...I was just throwing out the question...so stop twisting what others say. To "2wifes" grow up and stop exaggerating things. Nothing was ever said about polygamy. And if you are worried about your 2 wives and your husband...move to Utah...I hear they are big on multiple marriages. " Arliss wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:35 AM: " Mouse: AMEN! I say if gay people want to go through with the misery of marriage then more power to them. Plenty of us know that marriage is not all it is cracked up to be and once they realize that too they will not bother with marriage either. I should NOT be able to deny constitutional rights to anyone for any reason, and if their pursuit of happiness is getting married then so be it. As a man I should NOT be able to make the Choices of a pregnant woman either. Until science is able to remove a fetus from a womans womb and implant it in the abdomen of a man I have no right to tell her she must carry a baby, even if I was the father. Until men can carry a baby full term we have no right to say a woman MUST. " Lea wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:20 AM: " Surfinghavasu, what on earth gives you the idea that gays don't believe in god? Clearly many of them do, as they are regulars at churches all over town. Some of those congregations even welcome them. Many, mine included, teach tolerance and acceptance, not hate. " mouse wrote on Oct 29, 2008 7:34 AM: " No set it to music that is my opinion. I donot believe 100's of thousands of people are losing their jobs and a million or so people are losing their homes because 5 year olds can't pray in school.I am not much of a Bible person but somewhere in there God gave Moses his laws[The Ten Commandments]which most people live their lives by.No where in there is gay marriage or abortion[Millions of women naturally abort fetus every year so I don't know how God feels about abortion]or some cracker judge have the right to place the Ten Commandments on the court house steps mentioned. When I die hopefully God will judge my life on the way I lived according to his laws not some man made interpetation.And if you don't beleive the religious fanatics are dragging us to 3rd world status just look at the people you fear most the Islamic Fundamentalists these are people living in the stone age which is where we are headed if we follow our christian Fundamentalists. " oldone wrote on Oct 28, 2008 11:07 PM: " Mr Gould you just lost my vote! How dumb do you think we are. " surfinghavasu wrote on Oct 28, 2008 10:18 PM: " Did soneone answer my question? I still do not understand. Why do homosexuals want to make a Vow to a God that they do not believe ? " mexlplex wrote on Oct 28, 2008 10:16 PM: " Interesting... while the economy of the nation, state and city are tanking, while the jobs situation is the worst in decades, while the credit markets are still locked up both across the nation and in Arizona, Mr. Gould is interested in... Gay Marriage. It certainly speaks to Mr. Gould's true interests... not ours but his interests... first, last and always. Not too long ago, when introduced as a sitting Arizona Legislator, Mr Gould gave a not-too-well disguised address on the 10 Commandments. He is more than ready to pull his pat, conservative, religious rationalizing out anytime he is asked for his take on any current situation. He pulls this well-rehearsed line out because he has no ideas. Maybe, after he is defeated in his reelection bid, he could go join Pat Robertson... or better yet Jesse Jackson... NO on 102 and NO on Gould. " set it to music wrote on Oct 28, 2008 7:55 PM: " No, mouse...you got that backwards. The downward spiral began not "when the electorate allowed religon to escape the Sunday pulpit and enter the Mon thru Fri political arena"(your words) but it began when people tried to remove God from everywhere other than church. LHC mom...you are one of the many who mistakenly think that the words "separation of church and state" appear in the Constitution. Don't believe me? Ask any social studies teacher. It is people like you who shoot from the hip armed with misinformaion that are so dangerous. Here we go again...Liberals are not the reason we have the RIGHT to WRITE and express our views. What arrogance! The Constitution provides that right, and I am pretty sure that there have been more than a few Conservatives who have fought for this country over the years. Were were the Liberals in the 60's? Oh yea...protesting in college, or running to Canada. " 2 wifes wrote on Oct 28, 2008 5:58 PM: " I'm Ok with 102, but I would like to extend it to 2 (two) wifes) and 1 (one) husband. This is my religion and I don't want to keep my second wife without any protection and rights. " dallhc wrote on Oct 28, 2008 3:51 PM: " Mr G...............if you've lived here any length of time you'd know the Herald is FAR from liberal. And to the rest of us. Keep your voices loud and clear. Lest they be shouted down by those who would make this a Church-State. " LHC MOM wrote on Oct 28, 2008 2:49 PM: " To "yes on 102"...are you trying to say that gays are the only ones who marry for money? If so, you may want to get off your high-horse and computer and step out into the real world. There are alot of straight people that marry for money. Or how about that guy that just married the little china lady to help her stay in a land that gives us the freedom we have today? Again...WHO ARE WE TO JUDGE????? " Nothing Better wrote on Oct 28, 2008 12:22 PM: " To "Yes on 102", first of all, Arizona's economy is the 2nd worst in the country behind California. Second, why shouldn't two partners, be they man and woman, man and man, or woman and woman, if they are living together and paying taxes such as property tax and income tax (and social security) be allowed to claim their partners? What makes a man and man partnership trying to get medical benefits any worse than a woman and man partnership trying to get medical benefits? And yes, I have nothing better to do than sit on here and write comments since I don't have a full time job thanks to the economy of ARIZONA and no amount of voting on Prop 102 is going to fix that. How about focusing on the real issues facing our state, like the budget shortfall that will reduce the police force and teachers, or the foreclosure issues, or the high unemployment rate. " Here we go again wrote on Oct 28, 2008 11:18 AM: " Liberals my friends are the reason you have the write to write and express your views. Liberals have fought for our freedoms and have fought for justice. People are more concerned about gay marriage and abortion than the fall of our economy, jobs, healthcare, loss of houses, retirements. HAIL TO THE REPUBLICANS!!! With that we have religion and politics, we have self righteous people that reinforce their views and who want to judge others. The real issues Obama will address. " loveithere wrote on Oct 28, 2008 10:40 AM: " I agree who cares if two people of the same sex get married. I have nothing agianst gays and who is anyone to tell them who they can or can't love? Grow up people our country is falling apart due to stupid politicians that can't do the right thing not due to same sex marriages. " MR G wrote on Oct 28, 2008 9:00 AM: " The Herald is only placing what they feel like on this site.according to there liberal views. i'm going to look into it. " Yes on 102 wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:34 AM: " The gays don't want to get married out of love it's all about the money. They will start to get all of the benefits of their spouse. Retirement, Social Security, Life Ins. Medical Benefits etc...When that drag becomes part of the economy you will see the AZ economy look just like CA. Begging for help from the government because it is overburdened. " LHC MOM wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:27 AM: " Isn't there supposed to be a separation between church and state? I mean our kids don't have a moment of silence for prayer/meditation anymore because some idiot say it wasn't fair to their child. That put aside, who are WE to judge what someone else does. If two guys or gals want to get married that is between THEM & GOD...let GOD be the one to judge them when/if the time comes. In the meantime, let them be. I don't want to see ANYONE making out in public be it two straight people or to gay people...that belongs in the bedroom. When are you all going to wake up and realize that people of the same sex are together? Why not let them enjoy the same benefits a straight couples does? Why does, what someone else does, irritate you so much? I say let them be and let the "powers that be" be the one to judge. " mouse wrote on Oct 28, 2008 6:31 AM: " Why anyone would vote for Mr Gould is beyond me he is obviously completely bankrupt of any ideas. When the conservative religous fanatics get backed into a corner over there failed policies they always fall back on the 2 issues that they know the brain dead amongst us will grasp at ABORTION and GAY MARRIAGE.America began it's downward spiral to 3rd world status when the electorate allowed religon to escape the Sunday pulpit and enter the Mon thru Fri political arena.As far as Mr Gould creating jobs get a life. If he created a job for someone they would earn a living but they would have to pay taxes ;they might buy something but they would have to pay sales tax;they might buy a house but they would have to pay property taxes. And we all know where The Goldwater Institutes favorite son stands on that issue. " dallhc wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:43 PM: " So when is the Herald going to print the opposing argument? And when are these people going to stop cramming their religious beliefs down our throats? And when are we going to realize that God created marriage. Not the State. When you get "married" in front of a justice of the peace it is a "civil union" NOT a marriage. A marriage occurs in a church where a civil union is blessed as a "marriage " in the eyes of God. And when are our paid officials going to do their jobs in this poor excuse for a state where people are out of work and all they can do is worry about who gets "married" or not? " bombinmama wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:32 PM: " I am still perplexed by the idea of how ones marriage to someone could affect the sancity of another persons marriage..I mean if you are secure in your marriage..and within your own life..why should it matter what anyone else's does in theirs? Why should the idea of one man and one woman have an affect on your marriage if say two men get married..or two woman..if you were comfortable enough with your vows..then it should not matter..i will definatly not be supporting this..a big No for me on this one..i only hope that someday I will actually live to see it possible for it to be legal for gays and lesbians to get married in this state..think about how much economic money that would bring to our state..as it did to california... " mother of 3 wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:20 PM: " Vote no on 102! For thoose of you using god as an excuse... God gave me the freedom to choose. You have no right to deny it! " Jelly beans wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:56 PM: " 5th SF Straight Man, I have done plenty for my country, mainly my county and locality, but I donate approximately 10-20 hours a week by volunteering locally, how about you? Besides Viet Nam, which I thank you for, what have done recently to make the place you live better? PS I don't think I am right, I know I am right! Read the bible and you will see for yourself. Why can't the homosexuals just create a "union" between themselves? Wouldn't that solve all the concerns out there. It would not be called a "marriage", it would be a "union" that is acknowledged by the courts and affords the rights a marriage does, but not called a marriage. It's like calling an apple a banana, no matter what, an apple will always be an apple. I just don't understand what all the hulabalu is about here. Yes on 102. Save the sanctity and definition of marriage! " purpose of marriage wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:35 PM: " Gould is "focusing on keeping the societal traditions of marriage in place." Conservatives and Christians argue that the purpose of marriage between a man and a woman is to create a family by producing and raising children. So what about men and women who get married and then do not have children? Aren't they violating and not honoring the basic function of marriage? What about married couples that give their children up for adoption? Before straight people start making laws about marriage they should start following the "societal traditions of marriage." " Confused wrote on Oct 27, 2008 5:25 PM: " No one has explained to me how homosexual marriage negatively impacts heterosexual marriage. Do heteros lose some rights if gays gain rights? What exactly are we "protecting" if we vote for this initiative? How is gays rights to marry diffrent than women having the right to vote?Did men lose something when that happened? Or blacks the right to sit in the front of the bus? What rights were taken away from whites? " to Bassmaster wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:52 PM: " Not all animals are smart enough to "have sex with there (sic) own kind." Giant pandas are an endangered species partly because of their reluctance to breed. So your point doesn't work there. People should be allowed to choose who they want to marry. We constantly state that America is the bastion of freedom, yet we deny people's rights based on what they do in their bedroom. " divorce rate wrote on Oct 27, 2008 3:27 PM: " The DIVORCE rate for STRAIGHT couples is 50%. 1 out of every 2 STRAIGHT marriages ends in DIVORCE. Half of STRAIGHT marriages ends in DIVORCE. How many ways do Conservatives and Christians need to see this information? How is a divorce rate of 50% honoring "God's vow to love and respect their spouse"? " Post wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:44 PM: " Ron Gould pushes his own agenda no matter what, always has always will " Education wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:28 PM: " "The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian Religion." 1797 the treaty of Tripoli, signed by President Washington, and approved by the Senate of the United States " surfinghavasu wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:08 PM: " Could someone explain to me why people who do not believe in God, would want to VOW to God to get married? According to the Holy Bible God says that having same sex relations is Unnatural. So, I do not understand why people who do not believe in God would want to vow to God that they are going to honor and love and respect their spouse. Of course I do not understand why Anyone makes that vow with the clause that one can easily break that vow. As, far as leaving marriage in the hands of the politicians instead of radical judges who apparently do not care what We The People have to say, can someone tell me one state where the people of that state actually Voted to allow gay marriage???? No, all three states were decided by activist judges. Not by We The People. So, Please vote YES on 102. It in no way infringes on anyones rights!!!!! All it says is that marriage is between one man and one woman. !! Marriage between a man a woman and God. " Luke wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:05 PM: " I wish G0ould would do something for the economy in Lake Havasu. We need jobs. " Refreshing wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:46 PM: " VOTE NO on 102!!!! Our government should not be spreading religious agendas. By the way, Bassmaster, it is well documented that many species have homosexual individuals, educate yourself, "my friend." " 5th SF Straight Man wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:15 PM: " Jelly bean; I apologize when I was shot in Viet Nam I was always thinking I was fighting for the RIGHTS of all the American people not just a group of people who think they are right. What have you done for your country? I would really like to know. " lakehavasulynn wrote on Oct 27, 2008 11:57 AM: " It is already against Arizona law for homosexuals to marry. Is this what we are paying our representation for? How about jobs? , supporting our veterans...another no vote from gould. protecting our water....doesn't seem to want to do that either, autistic children....not interested, head of the transportation committee -seen any adot funds for rural arizona? - I believe the went to Tucson, blames somebody else for the budget which was negotiated by Tim Bee and the Republican held senate and house.........don't be fooled by ron gould, he doesn't represent you. " jelly beans wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:51 AM: " Marriage is deemed by God as between a man and a woman. If however you feel a union of two same sex individuals should need court review for rights and privileges, then so be it, but leave the word marriage out of it! Dave, it is not a problem to know where my representation stands. It is an assurance. Straight Male you are not speaking you are spouting. I guess you would prefer the entire state pray 3 times a day all together on little rugs? The rest of the world is leading that direction. I believe if you do not stand for what our country was built on you are not a true American. If you agree with the constitution you would have to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Good for Senator Gould, we applaud his persistence. " MAN UP wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:36 AM: " What! We got a bunch of Liberal Democrats on here today? Get outa here. Be a Real Man, You buncha woman. forget a bout it!!! GO RON " Rat wrote on Oct 27, 2008 10:30 AM: " I'm tired of getting gays cramed down my throat. Every program you watch on TV. anymore they have to have two males or two females kissing.so its NOT just in the bedroom.Just like the liberal democrats,they have to go out and run there mouths and try to convert everyone to be freaks. what about my rights. GO RON (maybe president some day) " Straight Male Speaking wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:50 AM: " I may be mistaken but wasn’t it the republicans who said Obama was a socialist, and what is it when the religious right dictates who you can partner with. It’s called the Christian Right Socialist you know the ones praying for more money. It is no one business who marries who. More controls on people. Religious mythology has done enough damage to our world. Guilt, haltered and divides the world over myths. " Bassmaster wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:28 AM: " The animals are smart enough not to have sex with there own kind.whats that say for us? My grandfather said years ago,that we are becoming a society of morons. not long after that they started puting up street signs with pictures on them. " Dave L. wrote on Oct 27, 2008 9:08 AM: " The problem with Ron Gould is that his position on every issue follows the standard Republican rhetoric. With all the serious issues we are facing in this country, to continue beating the drum over gay marriage seems so trite in comparison. He offers nothing new, just a small town politician repeating the mantra of failed policies. In fact, that is only thing that has successfully trickled down from the top. He should get out of politics and just sit at home beating his bible with one hand and polishing his gun with the other. His rhetoric is tired! " Shon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:13 AM: " Vote no on prop 102!! Americans should have a choice to marry who they want to marry. Who are we to tell them they can't reap the benefits of a married couple because they have a different preference? Most of the time they don't have a choice to be straight, its just how they are. They're not going to try to convert you. Everyone should have a choice if it does not bring any negative outcome. " I agree wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:43 AM: " when I read HB2041 safe staffing laws in AZ like they have in Calif. And dont even go there with shortage of nursing there is no shortage never was, shortage of nurses who want to work the bedside!!! who would be dumb enough to risk their license for corporate greed!! " anne wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:40 AM: " Once we get rid of joker ar pia "o" and andrew thomas (the one who gave trish groe a "special " prosecutor,) we'll save alot of money!!! why is the gov favouring Dan Saban and Tim Nelson??? they are conservatives and will not abuse the money situation. " bill wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:38 AM: " I think in these economic times the last thing we need to worry about is defining marriage. Do we need really need to have another law on the books that dictate peoples feelings What if the "norm" was for every man to be with each other and woman with woman? and you had feelings for woman? you go thru the leg to make it a law? keep this out of courts. With so many having sex change operations , they can make themselves one man and one woman. so you agree with this? i do if someone feels strongly enough to go thru that it is not soemthing they are doign for attn, why should they live trapped in another body?? You would do better to back the HB2041 which makes it law for safe staffing in hosptials especially since you are from Havasu area , this si a needed proposition have you signed the petition? " bob in havasu wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:13 AM: " It sounds like Mr Gould is going to ram his religious beliefs down the throats of all citizens of Arizona with this bill. No one has ever explained why, if not for religion, this issue is important on any level. If he doesn't want to police the bedrooms, then why does he care who sleeps in them? If he doesn't get re-elected, this issue might not be brought forward????That says that this is personal only to him, and not important enough for others to waste their time deciding " john j dixon wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:42 AM: " with out any doubt evil wins when good men do nothing.who you lay with has nothing to do with your rights.there are already pedophilia activists setting up for the next move on the bill of rights.God will burn this place and tear it down as before. lets keep 50 good men as a deturant.God bless this troubled little struggling town and america and the McCain family.Say no to 102...say no to hollywood. thanx for your time. "
|
Stocks
|
Don wrote on Nov 3, 2008 12:06 PM: