Respondents, Counsel for Amicus Curiae Steven Mattos, Amor

Case Nos. S168047, S168066, S168078

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

KAREN L. STRAUSS et al., Petitioners v. MARK B. HORTON, as State Registrar of Vital Statistics, et al., Respondents; DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH et al., Interveners.

ROBIN TYLER et al., Petitioners, v. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al., Respondents, DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH et al., Interveners.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO et al., Appellants, v. MARK B. HORTON, as State Registrar of Vital Statistics, et al., Respondents, DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH et al., Interveners.

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE BY AMICUS CURIAE STEVEN MATTOS, AMOR SANTIAGO, HARRY MARTIN, AND PAUL J. DORIAN IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS AND APPELLANT STRAUSS et al., TYLER et al., CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO et al. (Application to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed concurrently)

DENNIS W. CHID (Bar No. 187993) PRODIGYLAW.COM Civic Center Plaza 675 N. First Street, Suite 790A San Jose, California 95112 (408) 414-5007 (telephone) (408) 414-5001 (facsimile) Counsel for Amicus Curiae Steven Mattos, Amor Santiago, Harry Mar- tin, and Paul J. Dorian. RECEIVED

JAN 15 2009

CLERK SUPREME COL • 40 •••••••••••••••••••••••40 40 ••• Case Nos. S168047, S168066, S168078

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

KAREN L. STRAUSS et al., Petitioners v. MARK B. HORTON, as State Registrar of Vital Statistics, et al., Respondents; DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH et al., Interveners.

ROBIN TYLER et al., Petitioners, v. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al., Respondents, DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH et al., Interveners.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO et al., Appellants, v. MARK B. HORTON, as State Registrar of Vital Statistics, et al., Respondents, DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH et al., Interveners.

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to Rule 8.252(a) of the California Rules of Court, and California Evidence Code §§ 452 and 459, Amicus Curiae Mattos et al. request that this Court take judicial notice of the following documents:

Exhibit 1: Released Statement of Archbishop George H. Niederauer, "Marriage and the decision of the California State Supreme Court," CATHOLIC SAN FRANCISCO, July 13, 2008.

Exhibit 2: An Open Letter from Archbishop Niederauer, "With God's grace and much prayer; we can all move forward together," CATHOLIC SAN FRAN- CISCO, December 5, 2008.

Exhibit 3: The First Presidency Letter to General Authori- ties, Area Seventies, and the following in Califor- nia: Stake and Mission Presidents; Bishops and Branch Presidents, Re: Preserving Traditional Marriage and Strengthening Families, dated June 20, 2008.

Exhibit 4: News Release, Article by Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson, A Catholic Difference: The task of the laity is to renew culture through distinctive and authentic Christian witness. KNIGHTS OF COLUM- BUS, dated December 23, 2008.

Exhibit 5: Printout of Yes on 8 campaign - Resources Page ProtectMarriage.com located at www.protectmarriage.comlresources

Exhibit 6: Instructions To Pastors: Conducting an Offering for ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8

Exhibit 7: Bulletin - "Restoring and Protecting Marriage:

Yes on Proposition 8" Paid for by Yes on 8 campaign - Protect Marriage.com

Exhibit 8: "Questions & Answers About Proposition 8" Paid for by Yes on 8 - ProtectMarriage.com

This request is made on the grounds that (1) the Evidence Code authorizes this Court to take judicial notice of Exhibits 1 through 8; and (2) these materials are directly relevant to matters at issue in this extraordinary writ proceeding. This request is based on this Notice, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the supporting Declaration of Dennis W. Chiu, and such other matters as may properly come before the Court.

Dated: January 14, 2009 Respectfully submitted, PRODIGY LAW

By: Dennis W. Chiu Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Steven Mattos, Amor Santiago, Harry Martin and Paul Dorian MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE BY AMICUS CURIAE MATTOS ET AL.

ALL EXHIBITS ARE PUBLICLY RELEASED DOCUMENTS ES- POUSING THE PUBLIC VIEWS OF THE CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC CHURCH, THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS, THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, AND PROTECTMAR- RIAGE.COM THAT ARE NOT REASONABLY SUBJECT To DIS- PUTE, WHERE THE ACCURACY OF WHICH ARE EASILY AS- CERTAINABLE.

Although it is rare for Amicus Curiae to request Judicial Notice, we ask the Court to use its powers under original jurisdiction in the above-captioned matter to permit our request. All Ex- hibits requested for judicial notice are admissible under Evidence Code §452(h), which states that "facts and propositions that are not reasonably subject to dispute and are capable of iiianediate and accurate determination by resort to sources of reasonably indisputable accuracy." All of the Exhibits that Amici requests judicial notice of are documents printed from the authors own website and are offered, not for the truth of the matters contained in the document, but as documentary evidence of the authors' state of mind and understanding of the definition of marriage in Proposition 8. Since each of the Exhibits are publicly posted espousals of each author's views, they are not reasonably subject to dispute and are easily verifiable. For example, Exhibit 1 is a statement for release to the public, written by Archbishop Niederauer, through the official journal of the Archdiocese of San Francisco, "Catholic San Francisco." Archbishop Niederauer's desired to present the Catholic point of view in response to this Court's de-

1 cision in the In Re Marriage Cases (2008)43 Cal.4th 757. The fact that Archbishop wrote and released Exhibit 1 cannot be disputed and it can still be viewed and verified on the Archdiocese's website. Exhibit 2 is another writing by Archbishop Niederauer that was published as an "Open Letter" to all in "Catholic San Francisco." The fact that Archbishop Niederauer wrote the open letter cannot be in dispute and the content can still be viewed on the Archdiocese's website to verify its accuracy. Exhibit 3 is a similar type of letter, but this time written by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS church) released for public desimination at Mormon Temple meetings. The letter is signed by LDS church leaders from Utah, and cannot be reasonably disputed as a letter meant for public reading, since on its face the letter states that it is to be read at public meetings on June 29, 2008. The letter is easily verifiable through the signatures and is written on the official letterhead of the LDS church. Exhibit 4 is another public statement made by the Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus offered on the Knights of Columbus' official website for public consumption to all visitors. The statement bears the picture of the Supreme Knight, Carl A. Anderson, and cannot reasonably be disputed that it is a statement from the Supreme Knight. It is easily verifiable on the Knights of Columbus website for accuracy. Exhibits 5 through 8 are documentary resources provided by the official campaign in favor of Proposition 8, led by

2 ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8 campaign. Each of the documents were listed on an open portion of the website for supporters and organizations to use in order to pass Proposition 8. Again, Amici is not asking for judicial notice as to the truth of the content, but simply to demonstrate the Yes on 8 campaign position on Proposition 8 and the connection to religion. One document demonstrates how the campaign would like churches to collect political donations. All of the documents, presented as Exhibits 5 through 8 were downloaded off of ProtectMarriage. com's official website and cannot reasonably be disputed. A simple visit to the resources page of the their website can verify the accuracy of the documents.

II. EXHIBITS I THROUGH 8 ARE RELEVANT TO THE ABOVE- CAPTIONED MATTER, BECAUSE THEY ASSIST THIS COURT IN DETERMINING THE INFLUENCE OF RELIGION ON MARRIAGE WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF AMICUS CURIAE 'S BRIEF.

Each of the Exhibits demonstrate how important it was to maintain marriage's connection to The Holy Bible by religious leaders and the Yes on 8 campaign. These Exhibits reinforce the fact that modern perceptions of the definition of marriage are conclusively religious and that the definition of marriage is solely based on religious dogma. As such, these documents are highly relevant to Amici's argument that Proposition 8's definition of marriage would constitute an establishment of religion and an unlawful revision of the Establishment Clause in the California Constitution under this Court's first question presented.

Judicial notice may be taken by this Court, since (1) the Court is exercising original jurisdiction in the above-captioned matter, (2) these documents are admissible under Evidence Code §452(h) and (3) are relevant to assisting this Court in deciding the constitutionality of Proposition 8. We respectfully request that this honorable Court approved Amicus Curiae's Request for Judicial Notice.

Dated: January 14, 2009 Respectfully submitted, PRODIGY LAW

By: Dennis W. Chiu Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Steven Mattos, Amor Santiago, Harry Martin and Paul Dorian

DECLARATION OF DENNIS W. CHIU

I, Dennis W. Chiu, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney licensed to practice before this Court. I am an attorney of record for the Interveners in the above captioned action. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, and if called as a witness I would testify competently thereto.

2. I make this declaration in support of the foregoing Re- quest for Judicial Notice in Support of the Brief of Amicus Curiae Steven Mattos, Amor Santiago, Harry Martin and Paul J. Dorian.

3. Attached hereto as Exhibits 1-8 are true and con'ect copies of the following documents, with sources indicated:

Exhibit 1: Released Statement of Archbishop George H. Niederauer, "Marriage and the decision of the California State Supreme Court," CATHOLIC SAN FRANCISCO, July 13, 2008.

Exhibit 2: An Open Letter from Archbishop Niederauer, "With God's grace and much prayer; we can all move forward together," CATHOLIC SAN FRAN- CISCO, December 5, 2008.

Exhibit 5: Printout of Yes on 8 campaign - Resources Page ProtectMarriage.com located at www.protectmarriage.com/resources

Exhibit 6: Instructions To Pastors: Conducting an Offering for ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8

Exhibit 7: Bulletin - "Restoring and Protecting Marriage: Yes on Proposition 8" Paid for by Yes on 8 campaign - Protect Marriage.com

Exhibit 8: "Questions & Answers About Proposition 8" Paid for by Yes on 8 - ProtectMarriage.com

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed in San Jose, California on January 14, 2008.

By: Dennis W. Chiu, Esq.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, this Court GRANTS Amicus Cu- riae Mattos et al. Request for Judicial Notice of the following documents:

Exhibit 1: Released Statement of Archbishop George H. Niederauer, "Marriage and the decision of the California State Supreme Court," CATHOLIC SAN FRANCISCO, July 13, 2008.

Exhibit 2: An Open Letter from Archbishop Niederauer, "With God's grace and much prayer; we can all move forward together, " CATHOLIC SAN FRAN- CISCO, December 5, 2008.

Exhibit 5: Printout of Yes on 8 campaign - Resources Page ProtectMarriage.com located at www.protectmarriage.com/resources

Exhibit 6: Instructions To Pastors: Conducting an Offering for ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8

Exhibit 7: Bulletin - "Restoring and Protecting Marriage: Yes on Proposition 8" Paid for by Yes on 8 campaign - Protect Marriage.com

1 • • • • Exhibit 8: "Questions & Answers About Proposition 8" Paid • for by Yes on 8 - ProtectMarriage.com • • • Dated: • Justice of the Supreme Court • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 • • PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Dennis W. Chiu, declare:

I am a resident of the State of California, am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action; my business address is 675 N. First Street, Suite 790A, San Jose, CA 95112.

On January 14, 2009, I served the following document(s):

1. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF;

2. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUP- PORT OF REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE;

3. DECLARATION OF DENNIS W. CHIU; and

4. PROPOSED ORDER on the interested parties in the above-captioned matter, by placing a true copy thereof in sealed envelope(s) addressed as follows:

PLEASE SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST and served the document(s) by First Class U.S. Mail by placing the documents listed above in a sealed envelope, affixing the proper post- age and addressed as set forth in the Service List, and causing the envelope to be delivered to a U.S. Post Office for mailing.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct.

Executed on January 14, 2008 in San Jose, California.

By: Dennis W. Chiu

1 SERVICE LIST

For Supreme Court Case Nos. S168047, S168066 and S168078.

SHANNON MINTER JEROME B. FALK, JR. National Center for Lesbian Rights HOWARD RICE NEMEROVSKI 870 Market Street, Suite 370 CANADY FALK & RABKIN San Francisco, CA 94102 A Professional Corporation Tel 415-392-6257 3 Embarcadero Center, 7th Floor Attorneys for Petitioners KAREN L. San Francisco, CA 94111-4024 STRAUSS et al. (S 168047) Telephone: (415) 434-1600 Facsimile: (415) 217-5910 DENNIS J. HERRERA Attorneys for Petitioners City and City Attorney County of San Francisco, Helen THERESE M. STEWART Zia, Lia Shigemura, Edward Deputy City Attorney Swanson, Paul Herman, Zoe Dun- City Hall, Room 234 ning, Pam Grey, Marian Martino, One Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place Joanna Cusenza, Bradley Akin, San Francisco, CA 94012-4682 Paul Hill, Emily Griffen, Sage An- Telephone: (415) 554-4708 dersen, Suwanna Kerdkaew and Facsimile: (415) 554-4699 Tina M Yun (S168078) Attorneys for Petitioner CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ROCKARD T. DELGADILLO (S168078) City Attorney City of Los Angeles ANN MILLER RAVEL 200 N. Main Street County Counsel City Hall East, Room 800 Office of The County Counsel Los Angeles, CA 90012 70 West Hedding Street Telephone: (213) 978-8100 East Wing, Ninth Floor Facsimile: (213) 978-8312 San Jose, CA 95110-1770 Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF Telephone: (408) 299-5900 LOS ANGELES (S168078) Facsimile: (408) 292-7240 Attorneys for Petitioner COUNTY RAYMOND G. FORTNER, JR OF SANTA CLARA (S168078) County Counsel County of Los Angeles GLORIA ALLRED 648 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Allred, Maroko & Goldberg Administration 6300 Wilshire Blvd, Ste 1500 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90048 Los Angeles, CA 90012-2713 323-653-6530 Telephone: (213) 974-1845 Attorneys for Petitioners ROBIN Facsimile: (213) 617-7182 TYLER et al. (S168066) Attorneys for Petitioner COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES (S 168078)

1 PATRICK K. FAULKNER MICHAEL P. MURPHY County Counsel County Counsel 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 275 County of San Mateo San Rafael, CA 94903 Hall of Justice and Records Telephone: (415) 499-6117 400 County Center, 6th Floor Facsimile: (415) 499-3796 Redwood City, CA 94063 Attorneys for Petitioner COUNTY Telephone: (650) 363-1965 OFMARIN (S168078) Facsimile: (650) 363-4034 Attorneys for Petitioner COUNTY DANA MCRAE OF SAN MATEO (S168078) County Counsel County of Santa Cruz HARVEY E. LEVINE 701 Ocean Street, Room 505 City Attorney Santa Cruz, CA 95060 City of Fremont Telephone: (831) 454-2040 3300 Capitol Avenue Facsimile: (831) 454-2115 Fremont, CA 94538 Attorneys for Petitioner COUNTY Telephone: (510) 284-4030 OF SANTA CRUZ (S168078) Facsimile: (510) 284-4031 Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP FREMONT (S 168078) PHILIP D. KOHN City Attorney JOHN RUSSO City of Laguna Beach City Attorney 611 Anton Boulevard, 14th Floor City of Oakland Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1931 City Hall, 6th Floor Telephone: (714) 641-5100 1 Frank Ogawa Plaza Facsimile: (714) 546-9035 Oakland, CA 94612 Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF Telephone: (510) 238-3601 LAGUNA BEACH (S168078) Facsimile: (510) 238-6500 Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF RICHARD E. WINNIE OAKLAND (S168078) County Counsel County of Alameda MICHAEL J. AGUIRRE 1221 Oak Street, Suite 450 City Attorney Oakland, CA 94612 City of San Diego Telephone: (510) 272-6700 Civil Division Attorneys for Petitioner COUNTY 1200 Third Avenue, Suite 1620 OFALAMEDA (S168078) San Diego, CA 92101-4178 Telephone: (619) 236-6220 Facsimile: (619) 236-7215 Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF SAN DIEGO (S168078)

2 MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE City Attorney KENNETH W. STARR Santa Monica City Hall 24569 Via De Casa 1685 Main Street, 3rd Floor Malibu, CA 90265-3205 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: (310) 506-4621 Telephone: (310) 458-8336 Facsimile: (310) 506-4266 Telephone: (310) 395-6727 Attorneys for Interveners DENNIS Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF HOLLINGSWORTH et al., SANTA MONICA (S168078) ANDREW P. PUGNO HON. EDMUND G. BROWN JR. LAW OFFICES OF ANDREW P. CHRISTOPHER E. KRUEGER PUGNO MARK R. BECKINGTON 101 Parkshore Dr Ste 100 Office of the Attorney General Folsom, CA 95630-4726 1300 I St Ste 125 Telephone: (916) 608-3065 Sacramento, CA 95814-2951 Facsimile: (916) 608-3066 (916) 445-7385 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Respondents MARK Attorneys for Interveners DENNIS B. HORTON et at. (S168047, HOLLINGSWORTH et at. S168078), and for Respondents STATE OF CALIFORNIA et at. (S 168066)

JOHN G. BARISONE ATCHISON, BARISONE, CON- DOTTI & KOYACEYICH City Attorney Santa Cruz City Attorney 333 Church Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Telephone: (831) 423-8383 Facsimile: (831) 423-9401 Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF SANTA CRUZ (S168078)

LAWRENCE W. MCLAUGHLIN City Attorney City of Sebastopol 7120 Bodega Avenue Sebastopol, CA 95472 Telephone: (707) 579-4523 Facsimile: (707) 577-0169 Attorneys for Petitioner CITY OF SEBASTOPOL (S168078)

3 ExH15iT i CATHOLIC SAN FRANCISCO tOxfEMTIO Archbishop

Archbishop Niederauer: Marriage and the decision of the California State Supreme Court July 13th, 2008 By Archbishop George H. Niederauer

In a recent decision the Supreme Court of the Stale of California ruled unconstitutional an initiative passed by California voters eight years ago, defining marriage as "between one man and one woman." in its opinion the Court majority dedared same-sex marriage legal in this state.

1 wish to state the belief and practice of the Catholic Church about manage, to support the nature of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and to guide Catholics in their response to this present issue and the media coverage given to it.

The Catholic Church teaches that God created the world and that marriage has a unique place in God's creation and his gift of human life. Our Savior Jesus Christ expresses this belief in the Gospel of St. Matthew: "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female' and said, For this reason a man shell leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer Iwo but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate." (59:5-6)

The purposes of marriage, then, are the mutual loving support of husband and wife, and their service of human life by bringing children into the world and raising them with cherishing love and true wisdom,

This meaning of marriage is rooted in history and culture, and it has preceded the existence of any nation or state. Marriage is not a design of two persons, with no relationship to family and society. Society and civil authority are obliged to protect and support marriage and family life, not to revise, redesign or alter them. Furthermore, it is not necessary to reinvent the institution of marriage in order to enable citizens to awn property jointly, to designate a beneficiary or to choose someone to make health decisions when one cannot do so oneself.

Nothing in the teaching of the Church about marriage is meant to be discriminatory toward any person or persons. The Church teaches that every person is a child of God and must be treated with resped and dignity. Again and again the Catholic Church has stated that persons with a homosexual orientation must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity, and that ail forms of violence, scam and hatred against women and men who are homosexual must be condemned. We believe that every person, regardless of sexual inclination, is called to holiness and should be encouraged to take an active role in the faith community and live according to its teachings.

In conclusion, I respectfully point cut to those who govern us that the overwhelming majority of our sisters and brothers in the human femily around the world define marriage as a union between one man and one woman and they value this meaning of marriage as part of the common moral heritage of humanity. More profoundly, for us as Catholic Christians, marriage between one man end one woman is the gift of a wise and loving Creator.

Most Rev. George H. Niederauer Archbishop of San Francisco EXHIBi-r 2 (f. ) December 5,2008 CatholicSanFrancisco 3 An open letter from Archbishop Niederauer

With Gods' grace and much prayer, we can all move forward together '

By Archbishop George H. Niederauer other Catholic dioceses in California. The Archdiocese Some of our opponents respond with this question: did pay, and appropriately disclose, printing and distribu. Even if these churches saw the California State Supreme Proposition 8 on Novembers ballot added 14 words anon of flyers to parishes. Corn decision in May as damaging to the institution of to the Constitution of the State of California: "Only mar- Last May the staff of the Conference office informed me marriage as they understood and valued it, shouldn't riage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized that leaders and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of they have kept quiet and stayed on the sidelines? Some in California" In the weeks since the adoption of this Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) had given would say that, in light of the separation amendment the media have carried many speculations their support to the campaign for Proposition of church and state, churches should about the role of the Catholic bishops in California, 22 in the year 2000, and were already con- remain silent about any political matter. and about my role in particular, in the passage of this sidering an involvement in connection with However. religious leaders in America proposition. It is my with to clarify here what was done Proposition 8. Accordingly, I was asked to have the constitutional right to speak and why it was done, and offer some thoughts about the contact leaders of the LDS Church whom I out on issues of public policy. Catholic way forward amid so many misunderstandings and hard had come to know during my eleven years bishops, specifically, also have a respon- feelings. as Bishop of Salt Lake City, to ask them to sibility to teach the faith, and our beliefs Five years before my appointment as Archbishop cooperate again, in this election cycle. I did about marriage and family are part of of San Francisco, in the year 2000, Proposition 22 was write to them and they urged the members of this faith placed on the California ballot. This statute, which (heir Church, especially those in California. Indeed, to insist that citizens be silent defined marriage as between a man and a woman. to benzene involved. about their religious beliefs when they passed with 6190 of the vote. On May 15th of this year, It is important to point out here that are participating in the public square the California State Supreme Court declared that stature a wide range of churches became active is to go against the constant American unconstitutional and legalized same-sex marriage in in favor of Proposition 8: in addition to political tradition. Such a gag order California. Around the same time, Proposirion 8, a con- Catholics and LDS members, evangelical Archbishop George would have silenced many abolitionists stitutional amendment qualified for the ballot. Protestant churches and churches with Niederauer in the nineteenth century and many civil The Catholic bishops of California, organized as the many African-American members joined rights advocates in the twentieth. Quite California Catholic Conference, and speaking through the effort, and, among the Orthodox churches, the Greek a number of important political issues regularly touch their office of public policy in Sacramento, endorsed Orthodox Metropolitan of San Francisco and three other upon the ethical, moral, and religious convictions of Proposition 8 and urged Catholics, and organizations Orthodox bishops signed and published a joint statement citizens: immigration policy, the death penalty, torture of lay Catholics. to work for its passage, by means of in favor of Proposition 8. of prisoners, abortion, euthanasia, and the right to health grass roots activity and That is what was done. care are some such issues. contributious from their Why was D. done'i Some Members of churches who supported Propositioa 8 resources. We bishops `..,we ... need to speak and act voices in the wider com- siucereiy believe that defining marriage as only between a also endorsed Proposition munity declare that there man and a woman is one such issue. They see marriage and 4, regarding parental noti- out of the truth that all people could be only one motive: the family as the basic building blocks of human society, fication of a minor child's hatted, prejudice and big- existing before government and not created by it. Manage intended abortion (defeat- are God's children and are otry against gays, alone is for us the ideal relationship between a man and woman, ed at the polls) and we with a determination to in which, through their unique sexual complementarity, opposed Proposition 6, a discriminate against them the spouses offer themselves to God as co-creators of new "tough on crime" initia- unconditionally loved by God.' and deny them their civil humau persons, a father and mother giving them life and tive inconsistent with the rights. That is not so- The enabling them to thrive in the family setting. principles of restorative churches that worked in Are there many instances rn which this ideal fails justice (defeated), favor of Proposition 8 did so because of their belief that to be realized? Of course there are. Single parents, The Archdiocese of San Francisco did not donate or the uaditional understanding and definition of marriage is grandpareats, foster parents and others deserve praise transfer any Archdiocesan funds to the campaign in favor in need of defense and support, and not in need of being and support for their courage, sacrifice and devotion of Proposition 8. As far as I know, that is also true of re-designed or re-configured. OPEN LETTER. page l0

For additional information, contact: Doug Berrbow - 415.567.2020 Nellie Hizon - 415.699-7927

E(H'BITZ(P.z) 10 Catholic San Francisco December 5, 2008 Papal trip to Holy Land discussed

By John Thavis making more concrete plans for a papal visit. The con- the papal visit would include a sop at the Yad Vashem tacts were first reported Nov. 27 by the Israeli newspaper Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem. The Vatican has urged VATICAN ITY (CNS) - The Vatican has confirmed Ha'nrerc and were confirmed by the Israeli Embassy to officials at the memorial to remove from a permanent dis- tentative plans for Pope Benedict XVI to visit the Holy the Holy See. play a photo caption stating that Pope Pius XII did nothing Land in 2009. Ha'vn's said the most likely time frame for the trip In condemn the Nazis and their slaughter of the leers. Israeli sources said the most likely time for the visa was the second week in May. It said the papal nuncio to Church officials have tailed the caption offensive and would be in May, with stops in Israel and the Palestiman Israel and the Palestinian territories, Archbishop Antonin have defended Pope Pius for nothing quietly during World territories. Franco, told Peres in early November that the pope had War II to help save thousands of people, including many The pope was invited to visit Israel by Israeli President decided to visit the country. Jews. In October, Father Lombardi reiterated the Vatican 's Shimon Peres in 2007. At that time, the pope made it clear The Vatican spokesman, Rauh Fattier Federico objections to the Yad Vashem display, but said it was not he hoped to make the trip, but Vatican diplomats said the Lombardi, confirmed that "diptoenatic contacts are under a decisive obstacle to a papal visit. timing would depend in large part on efforts to calm the way to study the possibility of a papal trip to the Holy Land Pope Benedict has one other scheduled foreign trip on simmering Israeli-Palestinian conflict. during the course of next year." He gave no details. his calendar for 2009, a visit to Cameroon and Angola In recent months, Israeli and Vatican officials began Father Lombardi declined to speculate on whether in March.

on any group, or as an attempt to deprive hen end offended. What is to be done? loved by God. While we argue among Open letter .. . others of their civil rights. The fact Tolerance, respect, and trust are always ourselves, the people who need our help n Conrirruedfrom page 3 remains that, under California law, after two-way streets, and tolerance respect and with hunger, unemplaymeat, homelessness the passage of Proposition 8, same sex trust often do not include agreement, or and other problems wait for us to turn in raising the children for whom they couples who register as domestic partners even approval. We need to be able to dis- together toward them. More particularly, are responsible. Still, the proponents of will cominue to have "the same rights, agree without being disagreeable. We need we Catholics in the Archdiocese of San Pmposition 8 subscribe to a definition of protections and benefits" as married cou- to stop talking as if we are experts on the Francisco need to minister to the needs of marriage that recognizes and protects its ples. Proposition 8 simply recognizes that real motives of people with whom we have all Catholics in this local Church. Whoever potential to create and nurture new human there is a difference between traditional never even spoken. We need to stop hurling they are, and whatever their eircumstancens hie, not merely a contract for the benefit marriage and a same sex partnership, names like "bigot" and "pervert" at each their spiritual and pastoral rights should be of a relationship between adults. What is the way forward for all of us other. And we need to stop it now. respected, together with their membership Whatever others may say, the propo- together? Even though we supporters of For our part, we churchgoers need to in the Church. In that spirit, with God's nents of Proposition 8 supported it as a Proposition 8 did not intend to hurt or speak and act out of the troth that all people grace and much prayer, perhaps we can defense of the traditional understanding offend our opponents, still many of them. are God's children and are unconditionally all move forward together. and definition of marriage, not as an attack especially in the gay community, feel FUNERAL SERVICES DIRECTORY 1e I-IlstoR1c Cots:.; The Leading Catholic Funeral Directors of the San Francisco Archdiocese affiral.able solutions Church I Cemetery I Cremation Service adsg) Handmade Artisan Urns I Specialty Caskets C 0 L At A 30 Years Expertise providing CREM .11Ofi Healthy GriefSupport When Loss Qrturs F U IvitPRA L 7747 Mission Street { I l l lndosnial Send Suite 5 SERVICES dolma, CA 94014 ns tsal I Belmont, CA 94002 FD 19Z5 650.757.1300 I fax 650.757.7901 I m9 free B8S757.7808 I weAttatimacrattigionanm

McAVOY O'HARA Co. SERVING WITH TRUST AND CONFIDENCE SINCE 1850

a Madeline, Bill and Dar Duggan, Dreggaal Sena Mortuary of Daly Goy, sponsored their Sixth Annual Remembrance Service on November 9, 2008 assisted by the Dagguni Serra staff The Remembrance Service was hosted at O n'Lady ofMeny Evergreen Ad/ortowry Cbr rrb in Daly City with approximately 500 people in attendance. Families of individuals who passed away over the last twelve month were invited to participate 4545 GEARY BOULEVARD at TENTH AVENUE in a prayerful manner as part of coping with the difficult and often trying times felt For information prenrrmngemenhs, and assistance. call day or nigra 0151 668-0077 during the Holiday Season. It is Duggan's Sena Martaaryi way of providing ongo- 00 523 ing support to the families they assisted daring the year. This event was created to teach out to all, regardless of their religious affiliation, because death and grief egsrr as all in the same manner, nv molter ifwe are Catholics, Baptiste Greek Ortbador or wedeln' a stmctroed re/igloo dam" as Dan Duggan atatetL The goal of this event was to provide an essential element of "helping our families in their own individual process of grieving " as Bill Duggan of Deggani Serra Mammy, remarked- In an effort to reach out to the eommuoity at large, the Degrees Serra Fentily invited families to bring canned food and new toys and added m she contributions of the families donations co Daly City File Department, Operation Santa Gam and to the Nand Prniouala Feed Panhy and Dining Center ofDuly Cry. rte i hlands Chapel i All were invited to join in fellowship for the event concluding with a lovely earned reception compliment ofDagganl Senn Mwtaary through Knight} Catering, San Francisco the was held in Out Lady of Mercy Church HaIL

Duggan's Serra Mortuary 500 Westlake Ave., Daly City FD 1098 6501756-4500 www.d,rggannerra.tom The Catholic Cemeteries r Archdiocese of San Francisco ww w. holycrosscemeteries. com Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery Mt. Olivet Catholic Camay Ines neuion of Santa Caw Avenue, 1500 Merlon Road, 270 Loss Randaitm Rood, Menlo Park, CA 94025 Colons CA 94014 San Rafael, CA 94903 650-323-6375 650-756-2060 415-479-9020 r1 r s o .w r r r a e3 r ; o r + L i n , i -t r a ".[ r r re o u co 14 o t t ct so- L. o v a-. S-

EKHI $ rT 3

T'n3E CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS OFFICE OF THE FIRST PRESIDENCY 47 EAST SOUTH TEMPLE STREET. SALT LAS CITY. UTAH 84150-1000

June 20, 2008

To: General Authorities, Area Seventies, and the following in California: Stake and Mission Presidents; Bishops and Branch Presidents (To be read in sacrament meeting on June 29, 2008) Dear Brethren and Sisters: Preserving Traditional Marriage and Strengthening Families In March 2000 California voters overwhelmingly approved a state law providing that "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The California Supreme Court recently reversed this vote of the people. On November 4, 2008, Californians will vote on a proposed amendment to the California state constitution that will now restore the March 2000 definition of marriage approved by the voters. The Church's teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and the formation of families is central to the Creator's plan for His children. Children are entitled to be born within this bond of marriage. A broad-based coalition of churches and other organizations placed the proposed amendment on the ballot. The Church will participate with this coalition in seeking its passage. Local Church leaders will provide information about how you may become involved in this important cause. We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage.

E(H;13i"T 4 (r.17

English 1 Espanol ; Frances I Polski Home I Museum I Find an Agent I Find a Council I Site Map I Contact Us J KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS I . 5 EFY!CE TO 4ME IN SERVICE TO AU.

_ _..__ s__

For Members For Officers - For Agents so .

A Catholic Difference 1. Printer-friendly version a

12/23/2008

The task of the laity is to renew culture through distinctive and authentic Christian witness.

by Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson

Editor's Note: The following is adapted from an address delivered by Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson at the Nov. 15 meeting of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, which observed the 20th anniversary of Pope John Paul 11's apostolic exhortation ChristiFrdefes Laid (On the Vocation and Mission of the Lay Faithful In the Church and in the World). Publications & it was once popular to speak of the Christian evangelization Resources ^. of culture - indeed, even of the transformation of culture. Insurance Yet, over time we have experienced a contrary development. We might say instead that a sort of truce has been reached. In some areas, a new optimism has emerged about the benefits of secularism; in others there has developed a gradual accommodation.

I am not speaking about the recognized and proper autonomy of the secular order and its institutions, but about something entirely different.

In the United States, the popularity of Harvey Cox's 1965 book, The Secular City, promoted the idea that secularization was part of a divine plan, which Christians should embrace. Cox viewed "secularization as the liberation of man from religious and metaphysical tutelage, the turning of his attention away from other worlds and towards this one."

He argued that secularization is "emancipation" and that it "is the legitimate consequence of the impact of biblical faith on history." Moreover, he maintained, "We must learn...to speak of God In a secular fashion and find a nonreligious interpretation of biblical concepts."

A Surrender to the 'Secular'

In the more than 40 years that have passed since the publication of The Secular City, we have found that regardless of any positive effects, secularization has drained meaning from Christian life. Secularizing the way Christians think affects the values by which they live. From a cultural standpoint, we have indeed learned "to speak of God in a secular fashion" and increasingly found "a nonreligious interpretation of biblical concepts." Such tendencies have increasingly diminished the distinctiveness of Christian life.

ChristlRdeles Laid puts the issue more simply and more starkly: Secularism as a cultural force "sustains a life lived as if God did not exist" (34). In the public life of society, secularism goes even further: It is not content simply to regard religion with indifference, but it increasingly regards religious faith as an obstacle to "emancipation" and "liberation."

Since the Second Vatican Council, the lay faithful have come to a greater realization of their responsibility to work for the renewal of society. The demands of social justice make an urgent appeal upon conscience. In an effort to realize the demands of justice, the Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain once observed that Christians had advanced their journey toward a more just and humane society through what he termed the "evangelization" of the secular conscience.

Yet today, the effect of a pervasive secularization may be said to have accomplished the reverse - the secularization of the Christian conscience. Or perhaps more precisely, secularism has prevented the adequate formation of the Christian conscience. E?CH161T 4 (P•Z)

Although Harvey Cox was writing as a Protestant professor at Harvard Divinity School, the fundamental disposition that he represented has also permeated the Catholic community. It has done so in three areas that critically affect the formation of the lay faithful and their ability to carry out their mission.

First, certain sacramental and homiletic practices have undermined the power of the sacraments in the formation of the Christian conscience. One might say that we have learned too well to "speak of God in a secular fashion."

Second, Catholic education has experienced the increasing influence of Enlightenment assumptions regarding the purpose of the university, posing challenges to an adequate understanding of the harmonious relationship between faith and reason, and of the essential unity of the education experience.

Third, the Catholic family, which for generations was universally recognized for its shining witness to the inherent bond between the unitive and procreative aspects of marriage, has in many ways become indistinguishable from the lifestyle of the larger secular culture.

These three developments pose considerable obstacles to the formation of laypersons, who are otherwise capable of fulfilling their mission for the renewal of society.

Christ and Culture

The solution, I believe, must be found in an approach that takes as its basis a view articulated by Father Romano Guardini. In a letter to Pope Paul VI in 1965, Father Guardini wrote: "At the time of my first theological studies something became clear to me that, since then, has determined my entire theological work: what can convince modern people is not a historical or a psychological or a continually ever modernizing Christianity but only the unrestricted and uninterrupted message of Revelation."

A year earlier, then-Father Joseph Ratzinger put forward the issue in a slightly different way. Speaking to university students at Munster Cathedral, Father Ratzinger said, "It has been asserted that our century is characterized by an entirely new phenomenon: the appearance of people incapable of relating to God." He then continued, "I believe the real temptation for someone who is a Christian...does not just consist In the theoretical question of whether God exists.... What really torments us today, what bothers us much more is the inefficacy of Christianity.... What is all this array of dogma and worship and Church, if at the end of it all we are still thrown back onto our own poor resources? That in turn brings us back again, in the end, to the question about the Gospel of the Lord: What did he actually proclaim and bring among men?"

These words, written four decades before his election to the papacy, provide one of the clearest summaries of the mission of Pope Benedict XVI's pontificate, and also of the lay faithful today. I think that is why Pope Benedict presented such beautiful meditations in his encyclicals Deus Caritas at and Spe Salvt on the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity. These virtues are the foundations of Christian moral life, which in order to be authentic, must combine a vocation to love and a vocation to truth.

Both encyclicals represent the recovery of a fundamentally Christian way of thinking as a prerequisite to a Christian way of living. The re-evangelization of what we might call a Christian consciousness must continue and include concepts such as "right reason," "natural law," and even the "common good." It is doubtful whether the laity can effectively influence culture in an enduring way without such a recovery.

The Holy Father has repeatedly reminded us that Christianity is not an ethical system - or any other system for that matter - but rather an event, an encounter with a person. Since this is an encounter that occurs in the personal history of every believer, it is at the same time ever new. It is the fundamental responsibility of the lay faithful to bring the reality of this event - this encounter with Jesus Christ - Into every aspect of history, and therefore into every aspect of culture. The reality of this event must be made present within the family, as well as within the public and governmental life of society.

We have often heard repeated the words of John Paul II: °Do not be afraid! Open wide the doors to Christ." These words are repeated in Christifideles Laid. At the very least, this means that for an authentic renewal of society to occur, Christ cannot be regarded as an abstraction separate from the concrete, lived experience that we call culture. To the contrary, Christ must be invited into our culture - to permeate it and to transform it as only he can.

pack m Tpo Catholic Identity

Thus, a primary responsibility of the lay faithful must be a new engagement in the

EKHL€ir

renewal of parish life, especially the role of parish as a eucharistic community.

It makes little sense to ask the lay faithful to work for the transformation of secular culture without, at the same time, urging them to renew the sacramental life of the parish community. In this regard, the Synod of Bishops on the Eucharist In 2005 and the recent Synod on the Word of God provide a rich blueprint for such an undertaking.

In his April address to Catholic educators at The Catholic University of America, Pope Benedict stated that an institution of Catholic education is a place to encounter God's "transforming love and truth," a place to form an authentically Christian conscience and to live a distinctively Christian way of life.

Later that same day, Pope Benedict said to the bishops of the United States, "One of the great challenges facing the Church...is that of cultivating a Catholic identity which is based not so much on externals as on a way of thinking and acting grounded in the Gospel and enriched by the Church's living tradition."

This work of renewal is fundamental to the mission of the laity in our time, and our responsibility is irreplaceable. The laity has a specific mission, one that must be accomplished always in solidarity with our priests and bishops, and always "hinged" to the heart and mind of the Church. Only in this way will the lay faithful be capable of first understanding and then accomplishing this mission.

It may well require that we put away half-measures. We cannot hope to renew society if society cannot detect a difference in the way Catholics marry, raise their families, conduct their businesses or serve in government. In other words, we can never hope to renew society unless we ourselves are committed to renewal in our own lives. And we can never hope to renew society as long as we find ways to accommodate social values that are fundamentally opposed to the values of the Gospel.

This is not just a question of getting more Catholics to accept specific aspects of the Church's social doctrine. Instead, it is a matter of the formation of a Catholic conscience that is disposed toward conforming one's life to the imitation of Christ.

Historically, this task of formation was accomplished by a combination of institutions, such as Catholic schools and universities, parishes and the family. It is obvious that these traditional institutions are no longer adequately carrying out this mission.

In the long term, considerably more will have to be done, as John Paul II said, to "remake the Christian fabric of the ecdesial community itself" through consideration of new initiatives to further the formation of the lay faithful.

Families should be encouraged to assume their responsibility as the first and primary educators of their children through the development of family prayer, catechesis and the reading of sacred Scripture. Catholic schools and universities should be asked to review their mission in light of how their activities advance the formation of the Catholic conscience of their students.

The Knights of Columbus today stands in a unique and privileged place to assist in the great effort of renewal of Church and society - especially through our witness to charity and unity. In the days ahead it is necessary that we increase this witness especially within our Catholic schools and parishes.

In all this, our task is nothing less than to realize the promise of the prayer that concludes Deus Caritas Est: 'Show us Jesus. Lead us to him. Teach us to know and love him, so that we too can become capable of true love and be fountains of living water in the midst of a thirsting world.'

Back to TO

Vivat Jesus!

Copyr.ghr knights of col ml,us 2003-1 9. All rights reserver. See Pnvary POr n and Terms of Serviee. for details.

ExH h h i T S (r. I)

Home Prop. 8 13tog News & Media Take Action Endorsements Events Contact Us En Espanol DONATE NOW

Resources

Downloadable Resources U Volunteer Now Click Here to Download Adobe Reader • Endorse Prop. 8 1. FAQ 2. Myths and Facts • Tell Friends 3. Flyer 4. Poster • Register to Vote 5. Fact Sheet 6. Yard Sign (Bright, 26 x 18" Vector PDF) 7. Yard Sign (Regular, 26 x 16" Vector PDF)

Resources for Churches

1. Churches and Politics CALIFORNIA VOICES FOR PROP a 2. Your Legal Right to Support Prop a 3. Church Bulletin (color) 4. Church Bulletin (b&w) 'We are at one of those moments. 5. Church Bulletin (2 per page color) This is THE major change point of 6. Church Bulletin (2 per page b&w) the !as! few decades..." 7. Bilingual Church Bulletin 8. instructions far Conducting an Offering 9. Donation Form for Churches

Recursos en Espanol

1. Spanish FAQ 2. Spanish Myths and Facts Prcgositior. 8 Resou rces 3. Spanish Flyer 4. Spanish Poster 5. Spanish Fact Sheet facebook. 46myspace° What Your Vote Means

3 English Flyer twi er You • Armenian Flyer it Cambodian Flyer • Chinese Flyer (Standard Mandarin) • Hmong Flyer • Korean Flyer • Portuguese Flyer • Russian Flyer • Filipino Flyer (Tagelog) • Vietnamese Flyer

Resources in Other Languages

• Chinese Flyer (Standard Mandarin) • Filipino Flyer (Tagalog) • Korean Flyer • Laotian Flyer • Polish Flyer

I T 5 (P• z-)

• Portuguese Flyer . Russian Flyer Home Prop. 8 Blog News & Media • Vietnamese Fact Sheet 41 Endorsements • Vietnamese Flyer Events Contact Us Donat ,• 20A8 . Samoan Flyer PrsWdt mflag•.com All Riphlc Reserved. Proled#fam• • # 1. 4 Project of Calimmis Renewed (I.D. 51302592) I Privacy Pol.;y • Fars' and Pashto Flyer • Punjab( Flyer

Additional Resources

• www ProteclMarnageCA com Resources for Church Leaders and Pastors • wwv'ProtectMarnage corn Resources for Youth and Young Adults

Grab a Sidebar Graphic

Proudly display your suppart for Prop. 8 with graphics for your Clog or personal website

250 pixe s wide

EXHIBIT G

INSTRUCTIONS TO PASTORS Conducting an Offering for ProtectMarriage.corn - Yes on 8

Thank you for supporting the campaign to pass Proposition 8 to restore traditional marriage in California. Your efforts are extremely important, and much appreciated. We hope these instructions will simplify the process of conducting a special offering within your congregation.

I. Purchase enough plain white envelopes to distribute to your congregation. Download the contribution form located under Resources for Churches, on the Resources page of www protectmarriage.com .

3. Make enough copies of the contribution form to distribute to your congregation. 4. Pass out envelopes and contribution forms to your congregation.

5. Each individual donation should be put into a separate white envelope by the donor. 6. Donations of $24 or under do not require the donor to complete the contribution form.

7. Donations of $25 or over DO require the contribution form to be completed. The complered form should be put into the envelope along with the donation.

8. We can accept cash ($99 or under only), checks or credit card contributions. Checks should be made payable to PmtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8.

9. Collect all envelopes from donors, put them in a larger mailing envelope, put your church name and return address on the mailing envelopes and send it via regular US mail to:

ProtectMarriage.com -- Yes on 8 PO. Box 162657 Sacramento, CA 95816-2657

I0. That's it! Thank you far your assistance.

FYI - There is no public disclosure of donor information for those who contribute $99 or less. Contributions of $100 or more will result in disclosure of the donor's name, address, amount of donation and occupation. If self-employed, the name of the donor's business will also be disclosed.

If you have any questions, please call Michael or Nicole at 916/452-7621.

Contributions to ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8 are not tax deductible. Corporate, PAC and personal checks are acceptable. There is no limit on the amount of individual contributions. Foreign nationals areprohibited by law from making contributions to these committees, unless they have permanent residency status in the United States of America (a Green Card). Contributors who give a total of $10,000 or more in a calendar year to the ProtectMarriage.com committee and to other California state or local committees will trier their own campaign disclosure obligations. ProtectMarriage.com

PAID FOR BY PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM - YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA RENEWAL. 915 L STREET, SUITE C-259, SACRAMENTO, CA 95814. 916/446-2956

ExH46IT 7 RESTORING AND PROTECTING MARRIAGE: YES ON PROPOSITION 8

"Fur this r asnn ^ r w Igrtve his father and mother and be s wifes ante sh. " SIS 2:24,x;,

Over 61% of Californians have recognized this with their votes in favor of traditional marriage. man and a wrimin. Marriage predate mte tit, Its unique place in civilization is both derived from God and inherently • Changes the California Constitution to overturn the decision natural to man, Marriage is intrinsic ro a stable, flourishing and of four judges on the California Supreme Court who wrongly loving society, It provides the ideal relationship to commit men imposed same-sex marriage on California, against the express and women to each other, to provide for the procreative desire of millions of voters. continuation of civilization and to raise children with both a mother and father. The sanctity of marriage is worth defending • Secures parental rights to teach children about relationships and protecting. according to their own values and beliefs. Unless Proposition 8 passes, California law may compel public schools to teach children there is no difference between traditional marriage and same-sex marriage. When Massachusetts legalized gay marriage, "Only marriage between a man and a woman schools began teaching second graders that boys can marry is valid or recognized in California. " othet boys. The courts ruled that parents had no right to object.

Proposition 8; Proposition 8 does not take away any rights ot benefits from • Restores the definition of marriage. God himself gay ot lesbian domestic partnets. Under California's is the author of marriage. Its meaning is written domestic partner laws (Family Code Section 297.5) in the very narure of man and woman as they they have rights and benefits identical to come from the hand of the Creator. those of spouses.

STAND UP FOR TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8 Volunteers and funds are urgently needed to reach voters with a message that affirms traditional marriage. Your help is needed now! Please go to www.ProtectMarriage.com to volunteer or to contribute. California is counting on you!

Paid For by Prorecr Marriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project Major f of California Renewal. 915 L Street, unding by Kni rs of Suite C-259, Sacramento, CA 95814. 9161446-26 Columbus, National aganization 95 . for. Menage Ca^lfolnla, FOCUS 011 £ht'Fall EXH l' 81-r z (r. l )

ProtectMarriage. can Questions & Answers About Proposition 8

What is Proposition 8? Proposition 8 is a simple and straightforward voter initiative. It contains the same 14 words that were previously approved in 2000 by over 61% of California voters: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

Because four activist judges in San Francisco wrongly overturned the people's vote, we need to pass this measure as a constitutional amendment to restore the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.

What does a YES vote on Proposition 8 mean? Voting YES on Proposition 8 does 3 simple things:

It restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters ▪ already approved and human history has understood marriage to be. n It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people. n It protects our children from being taught in public schools that "same-sex marriage" is the same as traditional marriage.

What does a NO vote on Proposition 8 mean? If Proposition 8 is defeated, the sanctity of marriage will be destroyed and its powerful influence on the betterment of society will be lost. The defeat of Prop. 8 would result in the very meaning of marriage being transformed into nothing more than a contractual relationship between adults. No longer will the interests of children and families even be a consideration. We will no longer celebrate marriage as a union of husband and wife, but rather a relationship between `Party A' and `Party B.' The marriage of a man and a woman has been at the heart of society since the beginning of time. It promotes the ideal opportunity for children to be raised by a mother and father in a family held together by the

Paid for by ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project of California Renewal. 915 L Street, Suite C-259, Sacramento, CA 95814. 916/446-2956. Major funding by National Organization for Marriage California Committee, Fieldstead & Co., and Focus on the Family.

EXHljair (.r2)

legal, communal and spiritual bonds of marriage. And while divorce and death too frequently disrupt the ideal, as a society we should put the best interests of children first, and that is traditional marriage. Voting No on Proposition 8 would destroy marriage as we know it and cause profound harm to society.

Will Proposition 8 take away any rights for gay and lesbian domestic partners? No. Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it's not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn't take away any rights or benefits from gays or lesbians in domestic partnerships. Under California law, "domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections and benefits" as married spouses. (Family Code §297.5.) There are no exceptions. Proposition 8 will not change this.

If Proposition 8 passes, what will happen to the same-sex marriages that have already taken place? Under Proposition 8, the validity and recognition of a//marriage in California would be limited to a man and a woman, including past and future marriages, as well as marriages from other states or countries. The rights and obligations of same-sex couples who obtained marriage licenses before Proposition 8 passes will be up to the Courts to decide.

If Proposition 8 does not pass, will my children be forced to learn about gay marriage at school? Yes. In health education classes, state law requires teachers to instruct children as young as kindergarteners about marriage. (Education Code §51890.) If the same-sex marriage ruling is not overturned, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.

Why is Proposition 8 needed? Didn't we already vote on this issue? In 2000, over 61% of Californians voted to reaffirm the traditional definition of marriage as only between a man and a woman (Proposition 22). However, because this language wasn't put into the California Constitution, four activist judges from San Francisco wrongly overturned the people's vote in a closely divided 4-3 decision. Proposition 8 reverses the court's decision by restoring the definition of marriage as a man and a woman in the state Constitution.

Could the California Supreme Court overturn the people's vote again and declare Proposition 8 unconstitutional? No. By amending the state Constitution directly, the court cannot declare Proposition 8 to be unconstitutional, as it did with Proposition 22. Proposition 22 added a regular statute to the California Family Code. Regular statutes are a "lower" law than the state Constitution. By adding the language of Proposition 8 to the state Constitution, which is the highest source of law in the state, the California courts would be required to uphold traditional marriage. E -i ' T 8 C P. 3)

Who supports this initiative? A wide range of national, state and local pro-family organizations, churches and individuals have formed a broad-based coalition to support Proposition 8. To date, the coalition represents over one million people in California. To view a list of supporters, visit www.ProtectMarriaae.com .

What will happen to the domestic partnership laws if Proposition 8 is enacted? Nothing. All laws on the books regarding domestic partnerships will remain intact. Gays and lesbians in domestic partnerships will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy. Proposition 8 does not affect those rights and benefits.

Where can I find more information about Proposition 8 or get involved in the campaign? You can visit the Proposition 8 Web site at www.ProtectMarriage.com or call (916) 446-2956. There are a number of ways to get involved with the campaign, including volunteering, donating and helping to spread the word about the importance of voting YES on Proposition 8. Vote Yes on Proposition 8!

www.ProtectMarriage.com

ProtectMarriage.com