Rob Power, you need to make up your mind: are we DPI supporters "pandering to the religious right" and their attempts to monopolize marriage, or are we antagonizing them by realizing their worst fears about the alleged assault on marriage? Pick one lie and stick to it.
Brian Miller, do you know who made the motion to have the LPCA put the No-on-8 logo on its front page and use its email contact list to mobilize our troops? Me.
Becky has it exactly right -- Rob et al. don't want the government-marriage club renamed just when they're finally about to get inside and spike the football. Fear-mongering over imaginary tax burdens -- that are a risk to me and my wife, not to Rob and his husband -- are just a red herring. If federal rules already recognized domestic partnership as marriage, would Rob then support this step on the road taking marriage from sacrament to contract?
Allan Wallace, the LP supports lots of things that have "no chance in hell" of being on a ballot this year, let alone passing. If you think that makes the LP "stupid", then you're in the wrong party.
It's simply inane to say that supporting DPI "tells gays and lesbians that their equal rights under the law means NOTHING to the LP". Rob, I dare you to include this quote from Allan in your handout in Visalia.
Please explain how "DPI greatly extends the role of government into Domestic Partnerships". Section 297 of the California Family Code already says: "Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses."