Gainesville Voters Set to Reverse Radical Homosexual Ordinance Enacted by their City Council

Ignoring enormous community opposition, the Gainesville, Florida City Council earlier this year enacted an ordinance that granted special privileges to men who perceive themselves as women to use women’s bathrooms in any school, business or public facility.As a result, a coalition of citizens and businesses, in Gainesville, formed “Citizens for Good Public Policy,” for the purpose of enacting a Charter Amendment that would prevent the addition of such bizarre special categories to the City’s civil rights ordinance.   

The group gathered 8,800 signatures, several thousand more than the 5,581 needed to place the Charter Amendment proposal on the March 2009 ballot.  The supervisor of elections for Gainesville has until September 14, 2008 to certify the signatures.  If passed by the voters, the Charter Amendment will invalidate the City Council’s recently enacted “gender identity” category, which most citizens agree creates awkward and potentially harmful situations. 

The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan has been acting as legal counsel for Citizens for Good Public Policy.  It has also been assisting leaders of other Florida Christian groups in their efforts to reverse the tide of the radical homosexual agenda, including David Caton of the “Florida Family Association” and Dennis Baxley of the “Christian Coalition of Florida.”

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center stated, “The concept of ‘gender identity’ was fashioned by radical homosexual groups and advocates to protect the bizarre sexual behavior of a few people.  In practical effect, these types of ordinances end up being used to intimidate and prosecute Christians and anyone else who raises objections to this form of deviant behavior.” 

The Charter Amendment would provide uniformity with established state and federal discrimination laws and eliminate the undue burden that special categories place on the activities and financial resources of citizens, businesses and taxpayers in Gainesville, Florida.

Cain Davis, the head of “Citizens For Good Public Policy” commented about gathering well over the requisite number of signatures, “The high number of petitions signed by the citizens of Gainesville serves as an indicator of the power held by citizens over elected officials who choose to push a far-left national agenda.” (Watch their video here.) 

Community leaders also plan to run a slate of candidates during this election to have the city council reflect their values more than the current regime.

Dennis Baxley, Executive Director of the Christian Coalition of Florida commented, “The ‘Citizens for Good Public Policy’ have lead an outstanding effort and have shown that extremists with special rights agendas can be stopped, even in a liberal university town. Their successful petition drive demonstrates that government still belongs to the people who want liberty and justice for all, not special rights for special groups.”

The Thomas More Law Center will continue to act as legal council for “Citizens For Good Public Policy” throughout the signature verification process, the election, and after to help ensure the will of the people is not subverted by legal maneuvering of the current biased city council, or other radical groups bent on undermining the good people of Gainesville, Florida.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • Deo gratia, democracy can’t always be used to subvert the will of the people.

  • Warren Jewell

    Hmmm – how is it that we so often read about political leaders, especially local politicians – ELECTED leaders – who have little or no common moral and/or ethical ground with the constituents who have ELECTED them? Has this been a problem with our democratic republic all along?

    I think we have come close to this issue in politics forum questions, but we seem to have no answer. After all, for one prominent example, the likes of Barack Obama has come out of his being elected here in Illinois, when I see (have seen since his first ballot appearance) that he likely should never have been. And, ‘race’ has been a mainstay (‘mania’-stay?) of his campaigns all along – when he ran for federal Senator, one Chicago columnist ‘of color’ called on people ‘of color’ to vote for him quite precisely just because of his race he shared with them. Of course, the columnist also shared his socialistic so-called ‘liberal’ so-called ‘progressive’ views – from right out of the 1920s, 30s and 40s. So when Alan Keyes, a conservative just as ‘of color’, became his opponent, Mr. Keyes got no such racialist ‘recommendation’.

    And, now, widespread national groups are as enamored of him as Illinois folks have been – for no apparent ‘good’ reason.