Marriage group grapples with state campaign rules
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - The group seeking to overturn Washington state's gay marriage law has changed its website instructions to churches that want to raise money for the effort, but state campaign finance officials said Tuesday that the language is still not in compliance with state law.
Preserve Marriage Washington pushed to get Referendum 74 on the November ballot. R-74 asks voters to either approve or reject the law passed earlier this year that allows same-sex marriage in the state. That law is on hold pending a November vote.
The fact that churches can call for or allow special collections on behalf of a campaign is not in question. The means in which the donations from these collections can be forwarded on to the campaign is where state election laws kick in.
Because of so-called anti-bundling restrictions that stem from a voter-approved initiative that regulates political contributions and campaign spending, churches can hand out envelopes at Mass but they can't collect them and send them in to the campaign. Either a member of Preserve Washington has to be on hand to collect them, or parishioners must send them in individually, said Lori Anderson, a spokeswoman for the state Public Disclosure Commission.
Preserve Marriage Washington's website has a special "church tools" section that has specific "Instructions for Churches," and as of the end of last week, it directed churches to 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 U.S. mail" to the campaign.
As of Tuesday, the wording on Preserve Marriage's website had been changed, and instead of the churches being told to forward the envelopes, they are now asked to "designate a volunteer to collect all envelopes from donors, put the envelopes in a larger mailing envelope, provide their personal address as the return address, and mail them via regular U.S. mail" to the campaign.
Anderson said that the new wording is still not fully in compliance with state law.
"The campaign needs to designate a volunteer, not the church," Anderson said. Anderson said that the PDC would contact the campaign again to clarify that point.
A message left with Preserve Marriage officials was not returned Tuesday.
The question on church collections was raised last week after other media reported Yakima Bishop Joseph Tyson sent a letter to pastors in more than 40 parishes asking that they announce a special collection at upcoming services that would go to Preserve Marriage.
Anderson said that the PDC has since spoken to the legal counsel for Preserve Marriage and the Washington state Catholic Conference and told them both the same thing.
"Our advice to all of them was not to collect the contributions in Mass and send them on, in other words, not to bundle the contributions," Anderson said Tuesday.
She said that churches have three options: they can hand out envelopes and advise parishioners to individually send them in, the campaign can have a designated person on site to collect the donations from parishioners, or the church can form a political action committee in order to collect donations on behalf of the campaign.
Preserve Marriage Washington has raised about $471,000 so far in its campaign, compared with the nearly $6.1 million raised by Washington United for Marriage, which supports the same-sex marriage law.
Preserve Marriage Washington pushed to get Referendum 74 on the November ballot. R-74 asks voters to either approve or reject the law passed earlier this year that allows same-sex marriage in the state. That law is on hold pending a November vote.
The fact that churches can call for or allow special collections on behalf of a campaign is not in question. The means in which the donations from these collections can be forwarded on to the campaign is where state election laws kick in.
Because of so-called anti-bundling restrictions that stem from a voter-approved initiative that regulates political contributions and campaign spending, churches can hand out envelopes at Mass but they can't collect them and send them in to the campaign. Either a member of Preserve Washington has to be on hand to collect them, or parishioners must send them in individually, said Lori Anderson, a spokeswoman for the state Public Disclosure Commission.
Preserve Marriage Washington's website has a special "church tools" section that has specific "Instructions for Churches," and as of the end of last week, it directed churches to 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 U.S. mail" to the campaign.
As of Tuesday, the wording on Preserve Marriage's website had been changed, and instead of the churches being told to forward the envelopes, they are now asked to "designate a volunteer to collect all envelopes from donors, put the envelopes in a larger mailing envelope, provide their personal address as the return address, and mail them via regular U.S. mail" to the campaign.
Anderson said that the new wording is still not fully in compliance with state law.
"The campaign needs to designate a volunteer, not the church," Anderson said. Anderson said that the PDC would contact the campaign again to clarify that point.
A message left with Preserve Marriage officials was not returned Tuesday.
The question on church collections was raised last week after other media reported Yakima Bishop Joseph Tyson sent a letter to pastors in more than 40 parishes asking that they announce a special collection at upcoming services that would go to Preserve Marriage.
Anderson said that the PDC has since spoken to the legal counsel for Preserve Marriage and the Washington state Catholic Conference and told them both the same thing.
"Our advice to all of them was not to collect the contributions in Mass and send them on, in other words, not to bundle the contributions," Anderson said Tuesday.
She said that churches have three options: they can hand out envelopes and advise parishioners to individually send them in, the campaign can have a designated person on site to collect the donations from parishioners, or the church can form a political action committee in order to collect donations on behalf of the campaign.
Preserve Marriage Washington has raised about $471,000 so far in its campaign, compared with the nearly $6.1 million raised by Washington United for Marriage, which supports the same-sex marriage law.
Why don't they use that money to actually help others (i.e. homeless, working poor, etc.)? Isn't that what what being a Christian and churchgoer is supposed to be about?
 @The WA Mama contributions like these are above and beyond what the average church goer already gives. It's no different than you spending/donating money that is above and beyond your normal budget. FYI - conservative out give liberals - see the ABC 20/20 article below.any
Â
And it's amazing how concerned and forthright they are in wanting to obey the law not just sneak in donations illegally!!
Â
ABC 20/20 article
Â
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1#.UEdiBbprXuM
It turns out that this idea that liberals give moreâ¦is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above average percent of their income, 24 were red states in the last presidential election.
Â
How many of you making these coment have read the Bill of Rights??? This seperation of church and state has nothing to do with keeping the church out of the government it is to keep the government out of the church!! That bing said the state needs to stay out of marage and only have common law unions. Including those that wish to marry in a church. If the state is goung to apply these rules to churchs they need ti be applied to ALL tax exempt entity's. By only making churchs follow these guid lines the state has violated the First Amendment and needs to have this issue nul and voided and be sued. You can not make one group follow on set of rules then let a similar group follow differant rules. The Bill of Rights and the Constitution was set up to assablish one set of rules to be applied to ALL, including groups and orginazations.
 @bustedupredneck "You can not make one group follow a set of rules, and then let another group follow different rules"
This is exactly how I feel about allowing heterosexual citizens marry and not allowing homosexual citizens to marry.
I disagree with your interpretation of the separation of church and state. I think that it works both ways - churches should never be allowed to dictate governmental policy, and governments should never be allowed to dictate church policy. Preachers can preach all the anti homosexual stuff they want to, and citizens who attend churches can vote any way they want to. Those who do not go to church can vote and exercise their right to free speech too. When church members violate the law, they face the consequences like anyone else. That's how it is supposed to work.
This is why I don't go to church. It's not about God, or spirituality, it's just another socio-political organization with a political agenda. That, and God hates gays. So much for the love of Christ...
The church has a long long history of bullying others and people are sick of it. Notice the churches are playing the victim while working so hard to TAKE marriage AWAY with LIES and FEAR tactics.
Â
It is disgusting and I am glad the majority are seeing the church for what it really is.
Â
Gone are the days when the church influenced our military to lock up gay people.
Â
Gone are the days when the church could have gays dishonorably discharged and humiliated while escorted off base by MPs.
Â
Gone are the days when these impotent old men can rule over women.
Â
Gone are the days when the church fought to block interracial marriage.
Â
Gone are the days when church leaders fought to keep schools and even drinking fountains segregated.
Â
Gone are the days when the church convinced people that it was okay to have slaves and that they were less human.
Â
The only thing the church has succeeded at in recent history is being the largest organization of child molesters and child rapists in the world. 50% of the collection plate goes to defense lawyers and plane tickets.
Â
Over a MILLION children worldwide raped of their innocence by Priests and bishops......and counting.Â
 @Andrew Bush Unfortunately there are still plenty of child molesters still in the church.
Screw the poor, the sick and the elderly. They would rather fight to take away gay marriage and force everyone to live by their fictional fairy books.
Â
Screw American law and civil rights. The old man in the golden palace wants the people of Washington to live by his rules.
Â
Its Amazing, the pope was a former Nazi youth who listened to Hitler make speeches proclaiming gays to be a threat to all society. Today the pope goes from country to country and says the exact same thing.
Â
What kind of a disgusting human being does something like that? To instigate witch hunts in other countries. The Catholic church is becoming a terrorist organization....once again.
That Yakima bishop should be ashamed he is directing parishioners hard-earned $$'s toward his own political agenda. Some brainwashed commenter wrote that this is just the church reminding people of God's moral laws. That's horse crap. It's a pathetic human's supposed interpretation of morality that fits neatly into his own naivete with which he hopes to poison his flock. Put that money toward the poor, food banks, shelter, blankets in cold weather, help pay the heating bills for those who can't afford it. That's a calling, not supporting a political agenda.
How about option 4? CHURCHES SHOULD STAY OUT OF POLITICAL AFFAIRS.
 @Tattooed_Angel after all politics is supposed to stay out of church affairs....
Personally I believe government should get out of this "marriage" business all together, and simply conduct civil unions. Leave "marriages" to churches or social organizations that want to perform them. Then people can grind their ax to their heart's content against private institutions that they can choose whether they want to belong to or not. .
Dear People who are against this on religious grounds. Â
Â
This has nothing to do with you or your religion. Â This matter is one of rights and equal protection under the law. Â If you are truly American's and truly believe in the founding principals of our nation then you must separate your religion from government.
Â
Thank you.
DeadRabitz
It seems to me that the "everything but marriage law" grants rights and equal protection under the law. This is just a campaign to redefine the meaning of marriage. Marriage is not a right, it is a priveledge, granted by the state after paying their fee.
 @GOOD1 Marriage is a right.  Per the US. Supreme court.  Loving V. Virginia.
Â
You also forget about the equal protection clause.
If I don't belong to your church, why should I have to live by your beliefs? Keep your religion out of my government.
Exactly. It makes as much sense as telling others they aren't allowed to eat cupcakes because I am on a diet....Â
And keep atheism out of government too. It's a religion unto itself. The belief that man is his own god/creator.
 @Magic 8 Ball While I will agree with he sentiment that government should remain free of the influence of either side of this, I must point out to you that Atheism is not a religion. It is merely the absence of a belief in any gods or devils. Atheists do not have any special set of dogmas or rules. We tend to only agree on one thing- there is no god nor any devil - and from there we are as divergent as the rest of the populace in our political and other beliefs. That said, I personally believe in scientific integrity, and want to see that implemented throughout all governmental entities. There should never be any false science allowed: i.e. the Akin idiot and his assertion that a woman's body can prevent a pregnancy during a "legitimate" rape. He spread this lie, and thankfully reasonable minds on all sides stood up against it. Facts are things which simply are and cannot be disputed. Facts should be given priority when determining any policy.
 @Magic 8 Ball Atheism is non-belief, how can non-belief be a religion?
Funny as an atheist I don't see myself as a god/creator and I don't know too many atheist's that do. I simply see reality, we're born, we live, we die, Nothing more.
Â
Funny that most atheist's like myself also grew up in highly religious households, my father was a minister for many many years, I simply realized it was all a bunch of hogwash and that life is much more enjoyable without religion. If you need the belief of a "god" to make you sleep better at night then you're free to have that. But you're not free to dictate to others like myself what we should or should not believe, just like I don't try to force you to believe that there isn't a "god"
 @Magic 8 Ball Flying Spaghetti Moonster
Churches need to stay out of politics in entirety, or lose their tax exempt status.
 @Rentonmark Agreed. Interesting that they don't just teach their flock whatever they want and then trust them to vote accordingly. If they don't have enough votes, then they are not the majority and should just live their lives according to their beliefs without inflicting them on the rest of us. Period. But they don't seem to trust their flock and that speaks volumes.
wouldn't be easier to just STFU about this issue, marry who we want let bygones be bygones? Oh wait, too easy.
You would think churches had better things to raise and spend money on like supporting the poor, widowed and orphaned.
@ducati Reminding people about God's moral laws are fundamental to what the church is supposed to do.
 @Magic 8 Ball  @ducati And being able to disregard and not being forced to obey what the church says is fundamental to what this NATION is all about.
It's interesting that the people who like to hide behind the laws have so much trouble understanding even the simple rule that you don't hide the sources of the money you get in your campaign.
Marriage should between any 2 people who love each other enough to commit to a long term relationship. What a waste of money for people to donate to a cause that just fosters bigotry. If the church is going to involve itself in political causes then they need to start being taxed like any other organization.
yeah and what if they were to put that money to really help people? sad
@sb in seattle What's worse is the presidential campaign. By the time it is all said and done, a trillion dollars will be spent by the democrats and republicans. Just think of what all that money could do to help this country instead of being wasted on just getting elected.
There are sooooooo many other larger issues at hand.. If one person would want to marry another person, I think it should be the persons involved in that matter that make that decision, not the general public's decision. So much energy and money is wasted on this particular issue and it needs to be spent on other things that have to do with bettering our beautiful city, state and country.Â
The term "marriage" from a legal stand point will henceforth be defined as one man and one woman and be entitled to legal protections of the State. This definition will not force Gay Church's to perform heterosexual wedding ceremonies.
Â
The term "garriage" from a legal stand point will henceforth be defined as one person and another person of the same gender and be entitled to legal protections of the State. This definition will not force Hetero Church's to perform homosexual wedding ceremonies.
Â
Can we all go home now?
 @Sid Vishess No, and you are more Jim Crow than Sid Vishess when you say this.
 @Sid Vishess what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
 @DeadRabitz "I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
Â
My nomination for best anti-Sid rebuttal line this year.
 @DeadRabitz I guess you don't want to listen to my Sham-Wow (TM) pitch then, eh?
 @DeadRabitz I know you have and I crack up every time you post it....
Â
Okay, a simple "wrong" would've done just fine.Â
 @Sid Vishess  @alaska_dreamin I have been posting that quote for years.  Still waiting for someone to give me the next part as the reply.
 @alaska_dreamin  @DeadRabitz Ah well, I can always give Dead Rabitz the Biden Award...
Â
Still a funny (but purloined without appropriate attribution) line...
 @Sid Vishess  @DeadRabitzÂ
Â
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
 @Mikeftm  @DeadRabitz It's a twofer. We can link  to another KOMO story about the diver who OD'd on cocaine.
Â
edited for grammar
 @DeadRabitz  @Sid Vishess Lol, probably. It really creeped the bejeesus out of me when, after he died, his commercials kept airing for like the next 9 months. I was all "AAAAAAAAAAH ZOMBIE BILLY MAYS IS HERE FOR MY BRAINS!"
 @Mikeftm  @Sid Vishess Paste a link to Billy Mays Yelling it.  I am sure you can find one on You tube.
 @DeadRabitz  @Sid Vishess Yeah, but I can't get html to work on this failicious comment system.
 @Mikeftm  @Sid Vishess Those letters are not nearly big enough to say that.
 @Sid Vishess Haha, I was joking about that guy earlier today.
 @Sid Vishess  @DeadRabitz HI BILLY MAYS HERE
 @Sid Vishess Separate but equal was already declared unconstitutional once. Do we really have to go through all that BS again?
 @Mikeftm OK, so for the want of one letter in the alphabet, you wanna pick up your toys and go home. And y'all call us obstructionists...
Â
It is the same rights. They are not separate. They would be EXACTLY the same (except for gender).
Â
Â
 @two loons  @Mikeftm  If I go to the license agency to license my car and then to license my boat, it's two different forms but the license is a license. Who cares?  Do it my way and when the Religious Sector sees that the world didn't come to an end it would be much easier to slip in a spelling change. But no... you equate it with Selma AL. Good luck then.
 @Sid Vishess  @Mikeftm I believe you should have a heart to heart conversation with your favorite relatives and ask them if they find your separate but equal garriage stuff offensive or hurtful.
 @snoopy84  @Sid  @Mikeftm  Nah, I am very credible. It's permissible for my corner of the Republican tent to be "OK With The Gay!"
 @Ethan Allen If you want this thing to drag on into the next century, do it your way. I am just suggesting a practical solution.
@Sid Vishess @Mikeftm "Even as a Fiscal Conservative Republican."
Â
Sid, you could have left that line out, you were almost credible up until that point.
 @Sid Vishess  @Mikeftm Actually this law has NOTHING to do with religion...AT ALL.
 @Sid Vishess  @Mikeftm If it's the same thing, why not just call it the same thing.  Marriage is marriage.  the sex of the people shouldn't enter into the issue.
 @Sid Vishess And I quote what you just said:Â
Â
"And if they want to marry their partners, I have NO problem with that."
Â
Note that you said MARRY. As in marriage. See even you call it marriage... and you are fighting against calling it that? You really make no sense.
 @Sid Vishess Hey Sid, if they are EXACTLY the same, then let's just change the legal definition of marriage and make it easier? Since LAW dictates the definition of a word and not some religious book, then just changing the definition should suffice for what you are trying to accomplish.
 @Mikeftm And frankly, I support your right to be gay. It troubles me not in the least. Many of my favorite relatives are gay and we get along just fine. And if they want to marry their partners, I have NO problem with that. I have had gay roommates and friends and they would surely attest to my gay-friendliness. Even as a Fiscal Conservative Republican.
 @Sid Vishess Acceptance of gay marriage by religious nuts is about as likely as little green fairies flying out of my left ear. Nobody's demanding acceptance by the fundies, just their constitutionally guaranteed right to equal treatment under the law.
 @Mikeftm No, they were separate water fountains, ya nit. If you are trying to mandate ACCEPTANCE of homosexual marriage  by the Religious, then that ain't gonna fly.
 @Sid Vishess Right, just like the water fountains in the south. I mean, it was all the same water, right?