Anti-Prop 8 List
A misleading advertisement in the October 30, 2008 issue of Quaker Campus, beginning In Support of Civil Rights for All Americans, that is, against California Proposition 8, was paid for by the following signatory Whittier College administrators, faculty and staff members:
Adams, Charles
Augugliaro, Mary
Bak, John
Barnstone, Tony
Barraza, AnaLilia
Bessler, Cynthia
Browning, Judy
Cagigas, Juliette
Camparo, Lorinda
Carbine, Rosemary
Carlton, Amy
Collins-Dogrul, Julie
Da Roza, George
Dorrington, Claudia
Eastman, Charles
Filatreau, Kathy
Fradinger, Erica
Furman-Adams, Wendy
Galbreath, Luz
Garabedian, Mike
Gil, Katherine
Gonzalez, Gilberto
Gotsch, Susan
Gottschall, Marilyn
Herrick, Jenny
Herzberger, Sharon
Hill, Charles
Hoffman, Joy
Holmes, Jennifer
Hong, Paul
Howard, Les
Hunter, Katherine
Iimoto, Devin
Isovitsch, Ralph
Iyam, David
Johnston, Sal
Kakaliouras, Ann
Kaufman, Joyce
Kjellberg, Paul
Kozek, Mark
Lindgren, Eric
Marks, Robert
McAnaney, Laura
McBride, Michael
McGonable, Teresa
McGonagle, Mary
Metzger, Christine
Miller, Jeffrey
Moskun, Amy
Musser, Steven
Neu, John
Nibble, Linda Sue
Norden, Deborah
O'Connor-Gomez, Doreen
O'Foghludha, Ria
Orozco, Jose
Ortega, Jose
Overmyer-Velasquez, Rebecca
Paddy, David
Perez, Joanna
Piner, Glenn
Price, Joseph
Rajaram, Geetha
Reed, Brian
Rehn, Andrea
Rhodes, Karen
Robinson, Elizabeth Power
Sage, Elizabeth
Sanchez, Jennie
Shaikh, Ayesha
Sheridan, Paula
Sloan, David
Smith, Fritz
Swift, Cheryl
Switzer, Michelle
Torres, Aracely
Valenzuela, Hector
Van Ellis, Wayne
Vockmann, David
Wagner, Judith
Wallis, Andrew
Wiberg, Kristin
These Whittier College administrators, faculty and staff members falsely equate sexual preference or self-identification (imprinted sexuality, which one can act out or not) with race and gender (genetic facts, which can't be changed, unless you're Michael Jackson or Rogelio Chavez AKA Roger Lodge, or you want to pretend you're a pregnant man); fail to disclose that a clear majority of the People of California voted to declare, and then after the California Supreme Court tried to overturn that declaration, forwarded a Proposition to insert into the California Constitution a definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman; falsely suggest that rights have been taken from gays, and further suggest that voting Prop 8 down would "move us toward more equality."
The California Supreme Court, a handful of justices, decided they knew better than the People of California (and the People of Florida who passed a proposal similar to California's on the same day Prop 8 was passed in California, and the people of tens of other states who've adopted similar measures), and the California Supreme Court now has to review Proposition 8 - perhaps with Justice Rose Bird in the back of their minds, certainly with the repeatedly clearly expressed will of the People in mind. And what rights were taken by Prop 8, as alleged by these signatories? BGLAD self-identified individuals (BGLAD used here in the generic, not organizational, sense) have all the civil rights heterosexual or any other individuals have. No rights have been taken from gays by the passage of Proposition 8.
The African-American communities of California voted overwhelming for Proposition 8, and although part of the cause of that outcome is the damage done to struggling Black families and so communities by BGLAD sexual imprints acted out, Blacks are also offended by the false comparison of race with sexual identity. When you get up in the morning, and you're Black, you're Black and there's no choice involved. When you get up in the morning and you feel like acting out your homosexual imprint, you have a choice - you can, more or less, engage in same gender sex, or engage in opposite gender sex, or abstain. We all demand that a rapist or child molestor look in the mirror and convince themselves to have consensual sex with an adult or abstain, period, or go to prison. The civil rights argument is clearly false and exposes the lack of substance in arguments against Proposition 8.
While Steven Spielberg and Brad Pitt and many other wealthy people, especially those in the entertainment industry with its relatively high proportion of gays, generously contributed money and talents to pushing this false comparison, this fake civil rights campaign, Mormons among many others contributed to the pro-Prop 8 side. The Mormon Church of Latter-Day Saints, which not only doesn't throw BGLAD self-identified members out of the Church, but explains that's their challenge, and we all have challenges, and offers to help however the Church can, has not only been vilified and harassed, but also terrorized, since the election.
The Mormons know quite a lot about being vilified, harassed, and terrorized. Their first leader was killed and followers, including women and children, were at best burned out, turned out into the elements. No Mormons, nor any other Prop 8 supporters, would've been outside Spielberg's or Pitt's homes or places of business acting like losers. You wouldn't know it from media reports, but Brad Pitt and Steven Spielberg alone contributed more to the anti-Prop 8 campaign than thousands of Mormons gave to the pro-Prop 8 campaign.
Imprints are difficult to overcome, are a challenge if you don't want to act out the hand fate has dealt you. And if you want to take the easier way and act an imprint out, you're free in America to do that (remember, Iran's President Ahmadinejad claimed during a recent campus speech that there are no gays in Iran, where they're hung by the neck until dead), so long as the acts aren't criminal - just, like anyone expressing their sexuality, do so with some modesty, some awareness of others, especially pre-sexual children.
All adults have sexual imprints, commonly called our sexual 'fantasies'. The sexual imprint occurs naturally in our adolescence, when breasts and pubic hair grow, signaling the onset of our sexuality. Sexual molestation before puberty prematurely activates the sexual imprint, and trauma can likewise later fragment our sexuality. Each of us knows in all honesty what our sexual fantasies are, and by simply meditating upon them can remember their origins, our formative sexual experiences, our sexual imprints.
Each of us knows, barring some hormonal imbalance or other unusual individual physical issue, that we are not born with our sexual imprints or fantasies. Imprints are formidable, they need no reinforcing conditioning, and when an individual chooses to yield to acting out an imprint, rather than accept the challenge of rising above it, that's understood and accepted, although there are exceptions that all decent people, people who care about children, families, society, must agree aren't acceptable, or face anarchy, which isn't a state in which any decent human being wants to see children. And from the kind, including Mormons, help will still be offered if the imprint's challenge is taken up later.
Unacceptable exceptions are acting out imprints that do harm to others, like a pedophile's or rapist's imprints, or acting out any sexual imprint when pre-sexual children are present. There are various groups who promote their unfortunate imprints as a right, for example the notorious NAMBLA, an organization that promotes men having sex with young boys. (It strikes close to home when you remember that Whittier College ex-President Dr. James Lee Ash, Jr. was restrained by a Nevada court from being in the company of any male under 21 years of age - because President Ash had been engaging in illegal drug use and sex with young males.) The news brings us not only stories about imprints acted out harmfully, but also embarrassingly, like a businessmen caught with an unaware lady's shoes or panties. No one is a born pedophile or rapist or fetishist or transvestite or gay or straight. Naturally occurring sexual imprints, again, occur at adolescence, and any sexual input, no matter its orientation, is just plain inappropriate prior to adolescence.
The sexual imprint is the one imprint that an individual, properly educated, could try to determine for him- or herself. To argue the relative merits and demerits of accidental imprints that happen to one, rather than be honest and enable adolescents to have more influence over their own sexual imprint, is not a position the inevitably more enlightened future will look back upon kindly.
What gays refuse to see is that what they claim is the indignity of not being able to marry, even though gays have full civil rights, is perceived by the majority of the People, including some BGLAD self-identified individuals, as clear evidence of BGLAD self-identification as fundamentally dishonest, as arrested development. When gays express wonder that Barack Hussein Obama was elected president and Prop 8 passed, their arrested development is made clear, just as it was when they not only protested the election results, but went beyond the Pale - white powder (an 'Is this anthrax?!' act of terror) was sent to Mormon temples in Los Angeles and Salt Lake City.
The evidently gay activist agenda promoter Disney ABC avoided any questioning of anti-Prop 8 reasoning in coverage of the anti-Prop 8 campaign, despite it's patented apples and oranges faux civil rights pitch, and embarrassments like California Superintendent of Education Jack O'Connell's anti-Prop 8 ad - denying the fact that a definition of marriage including gays would be taught in public elementary schools if Prop 8 passed, when indeed that would happen, and, more, students couldn't opt out of that class - having to be pulled because what O'Connell asserted just wasn't true, was a lie.
ABC declined to comment on O'Connell's dishonest ad having to be pulled, and then covered every step of every anti-Prop 8 election protest - until the white powder was mailed to the temples and the FBI was called in to investigate. There hasn't been a single report since that day concerned with the gay backlash, including nothing about the FBI investigation, except for the silly Day Without A Gay promotion. There was, finally, however, coverage of a press conference at which a parade of spokespersons for the full-spectrum of religious faiths stood up for the Mormon's and everyone else's rights.
To protest this election outcome, when the media and celebrities - and P C academics - were so biased against the proposition that they pushed the faux civil rights story, shows that what wisdom we may yet retain resides in the People. To single out Mormon supporters of Prop 8, let alone to harass, intimidate, and even terrorize them, is stupid and despicable, a tantrum thrown by narcissistic overgrown bad children. The majority of the People of the State of California have voted repeatedly on this issue, and gays have no doubt set themselves back rather than forwarded their agenda by disrespecting the will of the People and the electoral process. This is a democracy. The manner in which the gay backlash against Proposition 8's passage was acted out went over the line to become anti-democratic, terroristic, in the manner of a child whose parents were only concerned that their child be 'happy', no matter the consequences to the child and society, and so that child continues acting out in adulthood.
Can you imagine, if Proposition 8 had failed, those who had supported Prop 8 demonstrating in the streets and at Steven Spielberg's and Brad Pitt's homes and business places, threatening, intimidating, anti-Prop 8 supporters, and then proceeding to terrorize them? Being gay doesn't make you right anymore than being straight or anything else makes you right. Adolph Hitler had the gay Brown Shirts, who terrorized and murdered Jews and other Nazi targets throughout Germany at their Fuehrer's behest, assassinated when those gay thugs later became inconvenient to their master. Democracy is our best bet.
"We should choose the right path, not just the easy path." - Barack Obama
Take a look at the Obama family. The Obama family is the result of generations of personal sacrifice, of overcoming personal challenges, including race and gender, which can't be hidden or just not mentioned. Now, imagine the coolest gay couple you know, and then compare that gay couple to the Obama family in the White House. There is no mystery at all as to how the California and United States electorates could vote for Obama and for Proposition 8. The only mystery is how gay activists, and supporters like the signatories to the anti-Prop 8 Quaker Campus ad, expect the People to believe their pseudo-scientific BS about sexuality, their denials of impacts on developing children of what they demand, their degradation of civil rights to the level of merely wanting to be happy without personal effort or sacrifice. As the Obama family is trying to tell you, happiness is great, but there are more important things in life.
Sex is just sex and that's it. Sex is not one's life, unless one's suffering from a really really bad case of arrested development; anyone who makes a big deal out of their sexuality is exampling arrested development. No one wants to hear, Oh, I'm straight, yeah! Go straight, go straight, go straight! And no one wants to hear some narcissistic twit ranting Oh, I'm gay, yeah! Go gay, go gay, go gay! If you're walking down a sidewalk and everyone you pass knows your sexual preference without a word, you are not being cool enough.
The last point to be made here is that, nearly without exception, the signatories to the anti-Prop 8 advertisement are in positions to influence young college students, whose brains and mental abilities are still forming, who depend upon their mentors at, in this case, Whittier College for sanity, honesty, for ethical role modeling and rigorous thought, and every single one of these signatories to the Q C advertisement have shown themselves by the act of signing and paying for the ad to be severely lacking in those necessary mentoring requirements. And some of the signatories have exposed themselves as hypocrites in signing this ad, while having otherwise acted more discreetly against the objectives of the activist gay agenda.
Those who signed this advertisement published in Quaker Campus either believe the BS the ad contains, or they believe it's in their personal interest to say they do. Notice the ad wasn't run in the Whittier Daily News, let alone in the L. A. Times. And it can't be run in Quaker Campus online - because Q C hasn't been online since an editor's opinion questioned the installation of health and safety and environmental hazard artificial turf on campus. The signatories were pretty sure no one beyond campus would see their signatures affixed to this travesty of common sense let alone scholarship. Either way, do student parents really want their children exposed to this kind of influence?
Already Whittier College promotes safe sex, that is, the College promotes sexual activity, giving out condoms, making themselves seem cool by talking about sex as cool - in a recreational sense, pity for what is lost - and now promotes the alleged belief that homosexuality is cool, too. Safe sex that does no harm is cool enough. Don't ask, don't tell - because we don't really want to know your personal business, gay, straight, or otherwise.
The BGLAD agenda activists really need to grow up, stop trying to push the rest of the People around, trying to get the People, against common sense and simple honesty, to agree that redefining traditional marriage between a man and a woman is in any way desirable, or without individual and social costs. Clearly, to the People, redefining traditional marriage to make room for gays who want to play at traditional marriage is the indignity. Doing whatever one wants, being 'happy' without regard for others, for society, these should be children's, not adult, issues, if they must be issues at all. Whittier College administrators, faculty, and staff encouraging dishonesty, a lack of scholarship, delusions, inevitable harm, raises a red flag for every student family considering Whittier College.
This ignoring science and trying to define, rather than solve, problems out of existence, is evident over and over at Whittier College. This is just what Whittier College President Sharon Herzberger, not surprisingly a signatory to this BS ad, did when she signed the Amethyst Initiative, seeking to lower the drinking age to 18 - against the science, without exception, supporting maintaining the drinking age at 21 - rather than try to effectively educate students about alcohol consumption and carry out the school's promise to provide a safe, healthy, wholesome environment for students, who are the ones who suffer for Whittier College's failure to keep its promises. Do you want the individuals who signed and paid for this advertisement to instruct and guide your child? Does any thoughtful student really want these signatories to mentor him or her?
(Editor's note: Any signatory to the anti-Prop 8 advertisement in Quaker Campus who provides good cause for their name being removed from the signatory list on this page is welcome to do so. Please note that threatening communications will have no effect other than putting whittiergate into a much more deeply investigative frame of mind.)
The question of gay marriage has been voted on over 30 times in recent years, from Maine to California, and every single time the people have voted to defend traditional marriage, in some cases, like California's, more than once - not one state's voters have approved gay marriage.
Recently Virginia's Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli II, sent a letter to Virginia schools reminding school administrators that only Virginia's General Assembly can create legal protections. "...the law and policy of the Commonwealth of Virginia prohibits a college or university from including 'sexual orientation'...or like classifications as a protected class within its non-discrimination policy...absent specific authorization from the General Assembly."
Former Virginia Attorney General Jerry Kilgore commented that colleges and universities "are required to follow the law...and (the current Virginia Attorney General is) telling them what the law is."
The Whittier College President's residence, Wardman House, was once a place where a gay Whittier College president, Jim Ash, seduced boys, whittiergate's told including Whittier College students. Jim Ash ended up in a Nevada state prison after being convicted of drug (meth) trafficking charges, and was the subject of a court order restraining him from being alone with any young person under 21 years of age.
Now, Sharon Herzberger has proven to be a really, really big disappointment - Whittier College is going nowhere but downhill under Herzberger - Sharon really has to go, and she can take her P C crap with her - because we don't know anyone who wants Jim Ash back in Wardman House. Nevertheless, Whittier College promotes events on campus seeking to convert its students into allies of the gay agenda, but will never invite anyone to campus who defends traditional marriage.
To defend traditional marriage is not to hate gays or lesbians. That is just another of many lies employed by those promoting the gay agenda. The truth is that many of those who defend traditional marriage have more compassion for gays than many gays have for themselves. Those who say they want gay marriage, like Whittier College, need, first and last, to be honest. Until they can do that, they have nothing to offer us.