First TV ad against Amendment 2 airs

Florida Red and Blue, the group campaigning against the gay marriage ban in the Constitution, has a new ad that will start on cable TV today and later this week go on broadcast TV in Tampa, Orlando, West Palm, Miami and Fort Lauderdale, said deputy campaign manager Michael Kenny. The group has spent about $1-million on TV buys so far.

Check it out.

Comments

GREAT Ad!!!! This discriminatory amendment will fail!!!

[surfdog]

ANYONE

let me ask you this

would it be o.k. if a MARRIED GAY person lived next door
if we had $1.40 GALLON OF GAS back??

think about it......

why have these people worried SOOOO much about what folks are doing in their own bedroom and not how this country was run into the ground by a bunch of oil men war profiteers

No, I don't care what people do in their bedrooms, heck, whatever floats your boat! BUT, marriage is defined as a man and a woman, period.
The only thing this Amendment does is make CURRENT law part of the Constitution to protect it from liberal activists judges. Think it won't happen? Try asking the residents of California how that worked out.

[Young American]

Gov. Crist and Republicans -- Do you think Barack Obama has "terrorist bloodlines?"

This is the Republican base, people. Don't forget it.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Bloodlines.html?showall

[surfdog]

marriage is defined as a man and a woman, period.

says who?
where is that defined? period

Who exactly defines marriage as between a man and a woman? The bible? Nope. Nowhere in the bible is it explicitly stated. Even if it did, we have this thing called separation of Church and State. In Europe couples go to the courthouse and get their civil marriage performed. Then, if they so choose, they may have a religious service. Why can't we have the same thing here? If that were the way it was here, there would be no issue. Civil and religious aspects of marriage need to be kept separate! Period.

Amazing how those who support same sex marriage spend so much time and money, yes more money than the Pro #2 supporters to tell others not to care.

No, they don't just tell others not to care instead they only tell supporters of #2 to not care. Everyone else should treat #2 like a building on fire and rush the exits.

As far as the "we" have other issues that need more attention and resources argument. Really, so why isn't the anti-#2 crowd ending its campaign and reallocating their resources to these issues of greater concern?

#2 is the ONLY issue to the anti-#2 crowd and therefore supporters of #2 recognized there is a need to increase their efforts and have successfully made plans to do so.

The good thing about this situation is we will only have to go through this once and then with a sense of unity we can all move forward to address other important issues.

I look forward to the day that both marriage is defined in the State Constitution and gas prices are lower. It takes longer to drill so we can obtain the new supply to drive down prices. In the meantime let us get the question placed before us in #2 decided and off the table.

Unity, that is what it is all about. Everyone please vote regardless of how so we all get a fair shake and can move forward from wherever the results leave us.

Surfdog,
Florida statues define marriage as between one man and one woman. This amendment does nothing but places the current law into the constitution so some liberal judge with an agenda can't disregard the will of the majority of the people.

You make some good points 12:43.

First of all I don't think a lot of Americans really want to pattern themselves after what Europe does. That entire continent is becoming a skeleton of its former self.

Not everyone wants to remove all traditional social customs from American life. Amendment 2 is a way to determine exactly what the overwhelming majority want to do. In a Constitutional Republic that recognizes the right of States to decide questions not provided for under the Constitution this is the process.

This is a good way to end the back and forth between those who want to retain traditional social customs and those who don't, particularly the ones who seem to be anti-religious bigots.

[Omega83]

The Founders envisioned a social contract bewteen government and the people that would not be subject to the whim of the electorate at any one time in history...thus, they were extremely careful in how it was first crafterd, and in limiting its ability to be too often amended or changed, thus threatening the existence of the republic itself.

Other than the 27 instances where change was absolutely necessary, we govern ourselves according to the framework set forth over 220 years ago.

It is no wonder, then, that the 50 states followed very much the same model when drafting their own compacts with the people.

It is a shame, that in Florida, in any one time as there is a slight majority, a documnet so important as the Constitution can be so easily altered.

[surfdog]

Florida statues are made up by Floridians
and Floridians have a record of appearing on the Jerry Springer show more than any other state,, so what does that tell you?

so why even bother with this amendment?
'waste of money and time'

which could be used for better things like a failing economy

BTW anytime anyone here uses terms like "liberal judges" they are a faux news watcher kool-aid drinker with no credibility

[surfdog]

12:52 more and more younger people do not care if someone is gay or latino or black
just taking longer to get to FLA cause we are so a55 backwards

hopefully in the not too distant future there will be less homophobia bigotry

Why can't the state recognize "civil unions", be they hetero, homo, or otherwise...and the church recognize "marraige"

That way, gay couples and straight couples can equally enter civil unions...

and churches can recognize marraige any way they please.

Gay people can go about saying they're married and irritiate church people, but legally speaking who cares - both sides have the 1st amendment right to speak about the matter as they please...as far as government is concerned, it's simply a "civil union."

It preserves church and state separation, it gives both sides what they want, and it seems a relatively simple legislative procedure or rule change.

[steprazor]

Let's say this passes...so the constitution then states that 'marraige is defined..yadda yadda"

what's to prevent the state from recognizing civil union between 2 persons? just don't call it marraige...you homophobes need some better lawyers

Omega -

At least now a 60% supermajority is required to pass an amendment in Florida. It used to be a simple majority.

I wish we had the 60% rule when the hideous Class Size Amendment was on the ballot...

What a dishonest presenation by those apossed to 2. Where are the gay wedding scenes, handholding and kisses? Where are the statements about civil rights and seeking benefit sharing? How shameful to hid behind the seniors instead of just coming out with the real agenda.

Yes for 2 and it passes with 63%. Nice to see the firefighters union and league of womens voters in on this. True colors are shining. Have to remember that next time the FF union wants more money. They need to be reminded then that they should not have spent what they had on ads for a non-fire fighter related issue.

1:24

do those things bother you?

Happily a Homophobe.

64%

12:43,

I really hope you are joking because your arguments are those of a third grader.

Becasuse it is quite likely you are getting your information from a democratic white paper and not the Word, check out Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:3, Luke 16:15, Mark 10:11, or 1 Corinthians 7:2. Please read these passages, they will clear up any questions you may have regarding the Bible and marriage.

And your Europe reference is laughable. You do realize that for a marriage to be recognized, you need a marriage license don't you? Even in america, we get these marriage licenses from the county clerk's office. Whether you get married in a church, on a boat, in a courthouse, whatever, you still need a marriage license issued by the government.

So civil and religous aspects of marriage are kept seperate.

And please open your eyes. This is not about homosexuals wanting their unions to be recognized by society. It, like everything else is about money. Period.

State recognition of gay marriage or civil union or whatever has far reaching implications with respect to all sorts of employment, tax, benefit, and estate issues.

[surfdog]

2:53

you believe EVERYTHING you read in the bible

BTW

you have factual evedence of who wrote it??

"State recognition of gay marriage or civil union or whatever has far reaching implications with respect to all sorts of employment, tax, benefit, and estate issues. "

what would the negatives of that be?

most employers require extra payments to include dependents on coverage...

a joint income household would still pay higher taxes than a single...

If Marge Schott could leave her estate to her dog, why can't any of us leave our assets to whomever we choose?...

3:18,

I never said there were any negatives. Just don't kid yourself, this is about money and money only.

2:59,

I believe that Scripture is the written word of God and its contents are Divinely guaranteed truths.

And no, I do not have factual evidence as to who wrote the Bible but I do have faith.

Hey surfdog, I'm looking for some factual evidence of what happens when you place a loaded gun in you mouth and pull the trigger. Can you try that and get back to me?

Pleeeeeeeese!

"So civil and religous aspects of marriage are kept seperate."

They clearly are not. If the argument against gay marriage has it's roots in religion - and no has ever been able to provide another argument that I have seen (waiting patiently) - then it is clearly not separated.

Simply put, we're talking about legal marriage. Religion is the only reason to define it as man and woman. Therefore religion is not separate from the legality of civil marriage.

[ALW]

3:46 - one should then ask "Who was the scribe?"

During a recent conclave, 100 theologians were studying the original scrolls when a priest let out a loud sob and collapsed on his desk sobbing. The other theologians gathered around him and asked what caused his obvious dismay. "The word is celebrate." the priest said and returned to his sobbing.

12:46 so your logic is that those opposed to #2 only care about #2 because they spend lots of money opposing it in response to those who have spent lots of money bringing the entire thing up legally?

Why should this not be of "great concern" to those it would affect?

Why is it of such concern to those it would NOT affect? Meaning it's supporters of #2. Can you tell me how it would affect them?

Seriously? Can you clear that up for me?

[ALW]

4:16 - I wouldn't hold my breath, if I were you.

4:21 ALW I am cautiously optimistic, but not suicidal.

3:46

what language did God relay the Bible in?

3:51

http://www.suicidemethods.net/pix/mgun1.htm

[Jack]

For those of you who rant and rave about those liberal activist judges, the California Supreme court voted 6 to 5 to allow same-sex marriage. Those "activist, liberal" judges were all Republicans.

12:46 obviously isn't going to respond. The only way this amendment actually benefits it's supporters is to feed their narrow minded bigotted psyche's. It does however, do much to hurt many people. The Constitution is in place (both Federal and State), in part to protect the few from the masses. This amendment does just the opposite, it allows the masses to force their will on the few. My guess is most of the people voting for this are really closeted self-loathing gays who think if they can push the issue further and further away, they won't have those "funny feelings" anymore.

Looks like this thing is going to have to pass. Otherwise Florida will be subject to the same radical homosexual agenda that is being carried out elsewhere. In California they pushed the state legislature to eliminate references to Mom and Dad. In suburban D.C. the gay lobby pushed a local county commission to allow for gender neutral public facilities to acommodate those who refer to themselves as transgender. No way is it rational to allow a grown male gender person to use a restroom facility with young girls accessing the same facilities.

Absent #2 and the silent majority speaking loud and clear against the radical homosexual agenda this is what the rest of us will face in the future.

Why don't homosexuals who disagree with the radical agenda speak up and protest against it?

"Radical homesexual adgenda" aside - this would hurt all homosexuals and more.

This has nothing to do with radical homosexual agendas. This is homophobia.

I bet the civil rights movement was considered radical.

As well as women's rights.

Remember ladies, this is the type of mentality that was used to not allow us to vote. To make us property.

5:39, there is NO RADICAL HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA. The only agenda that we, as homosexuals, pursue is that of living our lives in realtive calm and being able to enjoy the same rights and priveleges as straight people. Can you tell me what is so "radical" about that?

Is there a major social difference between homosexuals in Florida and those elsewhere such as California and the Northeast? If not then stop playing stupid about what the radical homosexual agenda is and prove yourselves to not be radical by speaking out against it. You can't have it both ways.

Radical homosexual agenda.

And that would be..?

Eliminating references to Mom and Dad? Considering that most kids do not live in a traditional household anymore what is the issue there? You think kids are going to be discouraged from a traditional house because of legalese?

Perhaps if there was not such much obvious homophobia a transgender person would feel comfortable using a bathroom for men or women.

So share the radical homosexual agenda that you know so much about. And share what it has to do with marriage and the denial of that to someone because of their sexuality and how that is not discrimination.

The Advocate Magazine (a homosexual publication in San Fran.) published a study(in 1994) showing that homosexual couples are more likely to engage in sexual violence towards their partners.The Canadian government did a follow-up study in 2004 showing the same results.
Children shouldn't be exposed to those types of homes. Amendment 2 will pass the 60% mark.

[Joe Friday(just the facts)]

To 10/09(11:46am)
Liberal Activist Judges?
Are You Kidding Me?
My Answer:
Justice Canaday and Justice Polsten
with at least 2 more Charlie Crist
appointments to come(establishing the majority)in the next year.
At least find an argument that's credible, and don't attempt to Mislead
Voters with such Shallow Pontifications
You are Not a Serious Individual, but
rather a Regurgitating Parrot of Mindless Disingenuous Cookie Cutter Talking Points.

"Children shouldn't be exposed to those types of homes. "

So then you're for letting the state take your kids because some straight couples fight?

I guess no one should be a parent if we are to be judged based upon what others do.

Thank you for defining the discrimination that this amendment is about.

The Connecticut State Supreme Court handed down a decision today on Same Sex Marriage that will provide enough of a final push to pass Amendment 2 with 64%. Thanks Connecticut. It is amazing this decision could not have been held at the bench for another month.

I didn't know firefighters are gay. Ooops

This isnt't about what people do in the privacy of their bedroooms. The perverts wanyt to throw it out there in everybody face and force them to condone their immoral sexually perverted and disgusting lifestyle. VOTE - YES!!!!!!!!!!!

Typical liberal BS in the ad it full of lies.

Scary that the education association is out on this too. Gay teachers around children is not a good combination. They prey on kids. That National Man Boy "Love" Association is the most active group of homosexual pedophiles on the planet.

[john]

Conservative: 1) One who wants the government out of areas where everyone is affected (Wall Street, Corporations, the Environment) but wants the government involved where it doesn't belong (Womens choice, marriage & the bedroom).
2) Someone who is against abortion until their 15 year-old daughter needs one.

[kate]

Let me ask ONE question - how would my marriage to my partner of 15 years EVER affect YOUR marriage?
Unless your marriage is so shakey that you NEED to divert attention to another issue. ANd if your marriage is that shakey, you don't need an ammendment - you need a counselor.

john - you should have been aborted

The Florida Supreme Court will throw this out by a 4/3 vote claiming the voters were confused or the ballot summary didn't say something.

homos for HUSSEIN

"The perverts wanyt to throw it out there in everybody face and force them to condone their immoral sexually perverted and disgusting lifestyle."

Who are you to decide what is perverted and immoral? This bill is not to protect the public from flamboyant PDAs, it is to prevent rights to some based upon their orientation. It's about discrimination.

"Scary that the education association is out on this too. Gay teachers around children is not a good combination. They prey on kids. That National Man Boy "Love" Association is the most active group of homosexual pedophiles on the planet."

This is the post of a tool. An uneducated, ignorant, homophobic tool.

[john]

Hey 8:29....you mean you would really have given my mother a CHOICE!??! AMEN TO CHOICE.

Why don't homosexuals respect others or exhibit concern for society as a whole. Why must it always be about them? Amendment 2 says enough and this isn't going to go any further. After studying how the homosexual community has acted towards others and the different views they may hold I think it is best for Floridians to pass #2 and be done with it. There are too many other challenges that affect all of us to continue spending so much time and effort batting this deal back and forth.

[thomas]

"...that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL...."
What part of that don't you Bible thumpers get? If you can't support the most basic of our AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE you must support the terrorists...

"Why don't homosexuals respect others or exhibit concern for society as a whole."

Are you freakin serious? What, should they SUPPORT this amendment that makes them second class citizens, denying them rights afforded to others? Because YOU think they are wrong?

The Constitution is to protect the few from the many, from tyranny.

I sincerly hope there is not a woman for this as not too long ago YOU were on the other side, pieces of property, not allowed to vote...

Liberal:

1) ONe who has no morals and doesn't want anyone else to have any either
2) Someone who enjoys seeing pregnant women slaughter their unborn babies and treat the "choice" on the par as deciding whether to have choclate or vanilla icce cream.
3) Who who has no grasp the rigth of parents to raise their children free of the undue influence of sexual perverts
4) Someone who doesn't mind providing foster kids and sex toys to gay perverts to promote a liberal pervert agenda
5) One who, while encouraging the murder of innocent life in the womb, defends the life of serial murderers and brutal killers.
6) People whose notion of generosity is to tax people for their earnings, call it "unfair" and give to people who refuse to work because they want a government handout instead
7) People who want to vote for a "change" without even knowing nor caring what the "change" is.
8) People that are useful idiots life john on this blog.

Liberal:

1) ONe who has no morals and doesn't want anyone else to have any either
2) Someone who enjoys seeing pregnant women slaughter their unborn babies and treat the "choice" on the par as deciding whether to have choclate or vanilla ice cream.
3) Who who has no grasp the right of parents to raise their children free of the undue influence of sexual perverts
4) Someone who doesn't mind providing foster kids as sex toys to gay perverts to promote a liberal pervert agenda
5) One who, while encouraging the murder of innocent life in the womb, defends the life of serial murderers and brutal killers.
6) People whose notion of generosity is to tax people for their earnings, call it "unfair" and give to people who refuse to work because they want a government handout instead
7) People who want to vote for a "change" without even knowing nor caring what the "change" is.
8) People that are useful idiots like john on this blog.

[john]

10:29...10:29
One more definition:
Liberal: 1)One who realizes that there will always be coservative, hateful, ignorant bigots still slobbering along dragging their knuckles.
The word Liberal has the same root as the word LIBERTY (something our founding fathers once held so dearly)
(by the way, since No conservative Bible thumper has called God on this blog yet...I "call" God - he's on our side now - no give backs no touch backs nyanyanya....)

5:19: LIBERTY has nothing to to due with liberal. Libery does not mean freedom to murder innocent life while defending the lives of cold blood killers. That's NOT liberty and no liberal EVER gets that.

Thanks for making my point john about being a useful idiot. people like you just hate the Bible or any representation of what is good and descent. Isn't john another word for toilet?

[john]

11:14pm - In fact "John" is another word for toilet...by the way, what is Mr. McCain's first name?

[john]

11:14pm - "John" is another word for one who lowers their morals and hires a prostitue...again, I keep forgetting Mr. McCain's first name - remind me please.

[11:14/11:09]

9:02- Yes, john is another word for one who lowers their morals. My point in 11:14 was that you opposed morals and that you were a useful idiot. And low and behold your next post provided proof positive that in fact you are both. HAAAAAA, HA, HA, HA! See what I mean about being a useful idiot? Thanks again - john