Prop. 8 proponent says he argued that gay marriage could lead to legalizing pedophilia

An official proponent of Proposition 8 testified today that he was involved in disseminating claims that same-sex marriage could cause children to become gay and spark legalization of sex with children, incest and polygamy.

William Tam, one of five official proponents for the 2008 ballot initiative, also testified about his personal views toward same-sex marriage.

"It is very important that our children won't grow up to fantasize or think about, 'Should I marry Jane or John?' " testified Tam, a chemical engineer and evangelical Christian.

He also was asked about a statement that the gay agenda included legalizing sex with children.

"And that is what you told people to try to convince them to vote yes on Proposition 8, correct?" asked David Boies, a lawyer for the challengers.

"Yes,"Tam replied.

Tam said he participated in weekly campaign conference calls for grass-roots organizers run by the official campaign and sought advice from the campaign. He said he also played a major role in the petition campaign to get the measure qualified for the ballot.

Tam testified that he was secretary of an anti-gay marriage website that carried statements saying homosexuals were 12 times more likely than heterosexuals to molest children.

Tam said he agreed with the statement "based on different literature I have read. " He was unable to recall where he read it.

He also testified that a flier for Proposition 8 predicted dire results if gays were given civil rights.

"If sexual orientation is characterized as a civil right, so would pedophilia, polygamy and incest," the flier read.

"That is what you were telling people to convince them to vote for Proposition 8, correct?" Boies asked.

"Yes," Tam replied.

Boies noted that another statement said the gay agenda includes legalizing sex with children.

"And that is what you told people to try to convince them to vote yes on Proposition 8, correct? " Boies asked.

"Yes," Tam replied.

A lawyer defending Proposition 8 tried to distance Tam from the campaign.

Under cross-examination, Tam testified that he did not submit his materials and statements to the official Proposition 8 campaign for approval, nor were some of the fliers mentioned approved by the campaign manager.

--Maura Dolan at the San Francisco federal courthouse

Comments

[MJ]

What a moron!!! That level of stupidity should be illegal.

[Jane]

This guy is a complete moron.

[Jet Black]

The fact that a college Dean and his homosexual male "partner" adopted two African American male toddlers, then advertised them on the internet for sex with other pedophiles lead me to believe that this argument from the defense isn't far off course. The toddlers case is the most extreme case of molestation entrusted in the cares of adults I have ever heard of. A person doing something like this is dead inside without a soul. I know homosexual rebuttal argument will be that straights have a higher rate of molesting children. It's a bold face lie. Statistics shows homosexuals are 4 times as likely to molest a child than straights. But please, don't just take my word for it. Do your own research from an unbias source you know and trust and check the facts for yourself. Do not click on their rebuttal links for bias statitics.

[AV]

Wow. These people are so far removed from reality. Its actually sad in some ways.

[josh]

Nice, ignorance falling apart...

[107street]

i agree it will lead to madness if were not already there

[Ken]

It doesn't matter if someone voted for Prop 8 because they though it would make everyone rich or have perfect teeth. What matters is: what the law says. The law (a constitutional amendment, actually - like it or not) does not mention sexual orientation or gays or lesbians. It doesn't matte if you don't WANT to get marriage licenses under these conditions. Marriage is optional. I don't want to get a gun license under certain conditions, and we have the Second Amendment. Certain limitations on state licensing is Constitutional.

[Verballistic]

Has nobody ever heard of a group called NAMBLA? That stands for North American Man/Boy Love Association and I'm not making this stuff up...anyone who doubts this needs only to visit their website at nambla.org!!

Feel free to provide a link or source with evidence that the gay rights movement has ever disavowed the 1972 Gay Rights Platform that calls for eliminating a minimum age limit for having sexual relationships with adults...

Given the fact that polygamy, child marriages and threesome marriage are ALREADY outlawed, does it not logically follow that MARRIAGE IS A PRIVILEGE AND NOT A "RIGHT"?

[wilson0004]

Is this guy for real? I guess he, like his peers, do not believe in civil rights. He sounds like he is very bigoted by his beliefs. This man needs to get a life.

[Zach]

Some people really need to study up on legal precedent instead of just drawing their own conclusions about law. Marriage was declared a right in Loving v. Virginia in 1967. The 14th amendment prevents states from restricting the rights of certain groups of people. Prop 8 has been likened here to laws regulating gun licensing, but it's pretty obvious that laws to keep criminals from getting guns are based in the prevention of real harm to society, unlike gay marriage. The harm of that only exists in certain wild speculation.

Some brings up NAMBLA to prove that gays are still a danger, but the KKK has 5-10 times more members than NAMBLA. Obviously we don't say they represent white people stimply because they exist. "The Gay Rights Platform?" A decades-old missive little known (let alone denounced) outside the conspiracy theories of social conservatives. Age of consent reform is openly debated across the US, so obviously if gays really wanted that, they wouldn't have to go through the marriage debate to raise the issue.

Arguments like these, like Tam's, comes from having an emotional reaction to something and latching onto whatever information, factual or otherwise, that supports it. It's fine to disapprove of gay marriage. It's fine to be disgusted by homosexuality. But it's not OK to lie about people or to change our laws so they're treated differently.

[Gil]

To Jane who purports homosexuals are 4 times more likely to molest children: read http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/facts_molestation.html
You are totally wrong. And citing a single example is rather off base. Luckily, I did not take your word for it.

[Gil]

I apologize to Jane. My comment was directed to Jet Black.

[David]

I doubt if Rev. Tam sees the irony in all this. But, not too long ago, Chinese were not allowed to own property in California. They were victims of the same sort of distortion, lies and fear-mongering he now trades in. Ditto to some of the comments posted here. Why rely on facts, when you can lie?

[dogrob1]

BE CAREFUL NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ITS SAID THAT HIV STARTED IN YOUR BATH-HOUSES WERE HOMOSEXUAL MEN FREQUENT, YOUR ONCE GAY MAYOR,THE DRUG USE IN THE 60S AND 70S IN THE STREET OF SAN FRANCISCO (HEROIN),(WEED)(SPEED)NOW THIS SAME SEX MARRIAGE,YOU CAN'T SERVE TO MASTERS!AND YOU WILL LOSE YOUR FUTURE GENERATION TO THOUGHTS OF (BLASPHEMY),SEXUAL ABUSE AND MISCONDUCT TOWARD THEMSELVES AND THEIR CHILDREN,AND WHO WANTS A GUY MENTOR AS A CHILD. THE NEXT GENERATION WILL HAVE DOUBT WITH SPIRITUAL AND RELIGIOUS CONTEXT A BIG PROBLEM==READ THE BIBLE AND THINK WHO INVENTED SEX?NOT MAN!

[Verballistic]

Response to"David":

Nobody is suggesting that gays not be allowed to own property, have segregated drinking fountains or any of the other injustices and brutalities that have been historically visited upon RACIAL minorities in this country. The majority of "homophobes" are against gay marriage and the attempts of the gay rights movement with the historical struggles of Blacks or other racial minorities just doesnt RESONATE with a majority of African-American voters (for example) in the state of California...

The fact that 70% of Black voters in California voted FOR Proposition 8 in the 2008 election illustrates that a clear majority of African-Americans in this state don't buy into the attempt of those in the gay rights movement to equate their struggle with the struggle Black folks in America have been fighting since the days of slavery. Last time I checked, gay people were NOT brought here in ships and forced into slavery for several centuries, forced to drink from separate fountains or lynched by the thousands (Matthew Shepard being the rare exception). For homosexuals to be denied the "right" to marry each other PALES in comparison to the FAR greater brutalities which Blacks and other RACIAL minorities have been forced to endure in the U.S.

[tedson]

Something like marriage is a personal choice that should be up to the people involved. Why make it into something its not? One only has to look at the 50% divorce rate to realize it basically is a contract between two people that can be ended when one of the individuals wishes. At least children won't be involved.

[x-wizard]

Ken wrote: "Marriage is optional. I don't want to get a gun license under certain conditions, and we have the Second Amendment. Certain limitations on state licensing is Constitutional."

I reply: Ken, gun licensing regulations apply equally to everyone. Prop 8 singles out a distinct, identifiable group of people and denies them equal treatment under the law.

dogrob wrote: "BE CAREFUL NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ITS SAID THAT HIV STARTED IN YOUR BATH-HOUSES WERE HOMOSEXUAL MEN FREQUENT"

I reply: All reputable epidemiologists agree that HIV started in Africa. And it's origins had nothing to do with sexual orientation - it had to do with eating the meat of infected monkeys. Does that mean that we should deny equal rights to people of African descent? Of course not.

Verbalistic wrote: The fact that 70% of Black voters in California voted FOR Proposition 8 in the 2008 election illustrates that a clear majority of African-Americans in this state don't buy into the attempt of those in the gay rights movement to equate their struggle with the struggle Black folks in America have been fighting since the days of slavery."

I reply: Just because a group of people is unpopular, even with other minority groups, does not mean it's OK for the majority to deny them equal protection under the law. Just because they have not suffered quite as much, in your eyes, as another group, that doesn't make it OK to deny them equal rights.

The only reason people want to deny homosexuals equal rights is discrimination, usually based on religious beliefs about homosexuality and marriage.

(1) Everyone is supposed to be guaranteed equal rights and equal protection under the law in the USA. Everyone. No matter how unpopular.

(2) Religious beliefs have no place as the basis of secular law in the USA. Religious groups are free to refuse to perform gay marriage ceremonies, but the laws of this land should be based on any religion's beliefs, even the majority's.