Oppose AB440 Same Day Voter Registration
HEARING: Thurs. April 4, 2:30pm, Assembly Elections Committee, Rm. 3142
Videoconferenced to Room 4406 of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building 555 E. Washington Ave. , Las Vegas
MESSAGE: Vote NO on AB440 which allows a person to register and vote on election-day. This opens our elections to voter fraud and jeopardizes honest elections. (You may want to write your own message.)
CONTACT: Assembly Legislative Operations & Elections Committee: Assemblymen:
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ,
By Phone: Toll Free: 800-978-2878, 800-995-9080, 800-992-0973, Northern
You may also share your opinion with Legislators at: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Opinions/77th2013/A/
AB440: Authorizes voter registration on election-day for primary and general elections. It also allows voters to register to vote throughout early voting. It removes the requirement that people must register by the third Tuesday before the election. It requires the designation of one or more locations for people to register to vote on election day.
Copy of Bill: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Bills/AB/AB440.pdf
Paul Gessing, President of the Rio Grande Foundation expressed his opinion well:
“I am opposed to same day voter registration. Voting is extremely important and should not be taken lightly. Having to register ahead of time is simply not an undue burden to place on prospective voters. Even if it were indeed possible to insure that same-day registrants are not fraudulent — a proposition that seems dubious at best at present — I think it is unwise for our republican form of government to allow citizens who didn’t have the slightest interest in voting prior to the election.”
The article below from Emerging Corruption highlights the problem in
Excerpt from “The Problem with Same Day Registration” Emerging Corruption:
“
“Same-day Voter Registration requires the voter to complete the application and provide “proof of residence” documentation. Ballots for same-day registrants are counted in that election but the actual registration is not verified until AFTER Election Day…
“For example, in the 2008 election, 62,000 voters registered on Election Day ALONE in the City of
‘Does any one find it odd that 62,000 had forgone any other option for registering and decided to wait until Election Day? One author explains the coming danger and points out that the GOP are unprepared for the coming battle.”
http://emergingcorruption.com/2010/10/the-problem-with-same-day-voter-registration/ Emerging Corruption.com
The Problem with Same Day Voter Registration
October 21, 2010 By Anita MonCrief
Every few years it seems the Democrats find a new way to “improve” the voting system without allowing any changes to actually protect the system. These ideas usually center around “fairness” and minorities. As noted previously, Democrats will stop at nothing to protect their base, leaving quite a few states to become “testing grounds” for their social experiments.
This election year all eyes should be on
“According to the criminal complaint, Clancy served as a Special Registration Deputy (“SRD”) for the City of
Clancy was accused of submitting multiple voter registration applications for the same individuals, and also was part of a scheme in which he and other SRDs registered each other to vote multiple times in order to meet voter registration quotas imposed by ACORN.”
“Same-day Voter Registration requires the voter to complete the application and provide “proof of residence” documentation. Ballots for same-day registrants are counted in that election but the actual registration is not verified until AFTER Election Day…
For example, in the 2008 election, 62,000 voters registered on Election Day ALONE in the City of
Does any one find it odd that 62,000 had forgone any other option for registering and decided to wait until Election Day? One author explains the coming danger and points out that the GOP are unprepared for the coming battle.
“Same-day voter registration. Give it to me! I’m entitled to it! I pay taxes (probably not income taxes though)!
Easy registration and voting does not improve voter turnout. Substantial research by the London School of Economics and
Right now registration rates exceed 80%. We will spend hundreds of millions of dollars to make registration easier for 20% of the population.
Besides the cost, what is wrong with letting the Federal government take over our election systems? I like to point out how elections work in
A dirty little secret – most of those ten or fifteen academics in cahoots with activists who convinced everyone to junk millions of dollars worth of voting machines were disgruntled Gore supporters from 2000. As a so called voting integrity activist, an election administration coup by the Federal government should scare you more than the Supreme Court deciding an election.”
While states have the right to enact laws without federal influence, what happens when a group of corrupt elitist with unlimited funds highjack that state and use the voting process for partisan political gain? Nothing. Leftists groups have the mainstream media to provide cover for them and since groups like ACORN partner with their “friends” in academia they have a ready supply of “expert reports.”
“Election Day registration — eliminating the 30-day, pre-election deadline so people can register and vote the same day — has emerged as the most contentious issue, with some fearful of the potential for fraud. But the experience of the nine states that allow same-day registration shows no compromise to the integrity of the voting process but a boost in voter participation. Indeed, a studyby the public policy group Demos found that voter turnout in the 2008 election was 7 percentage points higher in states that allowed Election Day registration than in states that prohibited the practice.”
Unfortunately, Americans cannot wait for our leaders to wake up and realize that these systems are flawed and often times lead to fraud. Election of your Secretary of State matters, and citizens must be aware of the they stand for in regards to voter ID, same day registration and even universal voter registration. Citizens also must stay current on pending legislation regarding changes to election laws. Lastly, Americans must organize for freedom to stop this all out power grab. END
AB230: Explicit Sex Ed
Promotes Homosexuality, Abortion & Takes Away Parental Rights.
We desperately need people to attend the hearing and oppose this bill.
Please arrive early so you can get a seat.
HEARING: Monday, April 1, 3:15pm, Assembly Education Committees Rm 3143
Videoconferenced to Room 4406 of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building 555 E. Washington Ave. , Las Vegas
MESSAGE: Vote NO on AB230 Explicit Sex Education.
Assembly Education Committee:
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ,
Please also send an email to Speaker of the Assembly This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
And Republican: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
By Phone: Toll Free: 800-978-2878, 800-995-9080, 800-992-0973, Northern
You may also share your opinion with Legislators at: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Opinions/77th2013/A/
Sponsors of AB230 Bobzien, Eisen, Sprinkle, Elliot Anderson, Hambrick, Aizley, Benitez-Thompson, Horne, Kirkpatrick, Spearman, Parks, Segerblom, Manendo
AB230 Explicit Sex Ed
By Janine Hansen
AB230 is an Explicit Sex Education bill being promoted by Planned Parenthood. Nevada Schools already have sex education programs which have been designed in each county under the local school district, by an Advisory Committee, including parents and individuals from medicine or nursing, counseling, religion and education. These programs have been designed to meet local needs and local concerns. This bill mandates an explicit sex education program from the state, significantly reducing the local districts control over the program and instead places the curriculum development in the State Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools. This will nearly eliminate local school board and parental participation.
The bill requires that instruction must include “comprehensive” (interpreted as explicit, including advocacy for abortion, contraception and homosexuality)with abstinence as a poor step child. (Abstinence programs have proven effective in lower teen sexual activity, pregnancy and STD’s.)
In Section 1 Subsection 1:
- It greatly expands the subjects mandated including: “body image,” “gender stereotypes,” “psychosocial and emotional changes,” “domestic violence,” “sexual abuse,” “sexual assault,” “exploitation and human trafficking”.
- It provides for “Access to counseling, medical and legal assistance” which will mean referrals to Planned Parenthood and other contraceptive and abortion advocates and providers without parental consent.
- It provides for “development of skills to promote sexual responsibility” including: methods of contraception, proper use, effectiveness, safety, health benefits and side affects.
- “The identification and explanation of reproductive health services” which would mean Planned Parenthood, “including effective and safe methods of contraception and contraceptive devices, screening and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases…”
- As an aside it does mention the “importance of abstinence as the most effective method of preventing” pregnancy and STD’s, but you can imagine that it will be given little time or credence.
Subsection 2
- Utilize methods of teaching and materials which promote the inclusion and acceptance of pupils regardless of “…gender, gender identity or expression, religion,sexual orientation, ethnic or cultural background or disability.”
- “Appropriately prepare pupils who have or are currently engaged in sexual activity and pupils who may engage in sexual activity in the future.” (more clients for Planned Parenthood)
Subsection 3
This bill has stripped the County Advisory Committee of its responsibilities to develop a curriculum for their county. It’s adds to the Advisory Committee 2 pupils in the district and changes the profession of “religion” to include “spiritual or community life”. I’m not sure what that means but you can rest assured that they won’t come from the traditional religious community.
Subsection 4
Mandates “instructors who have demonstrated an appropriate level of competency to teach a ‘comprehensive” (pro abortion, contraceptive, homosexual), age-appropriate (Planned Parenthood advocates starting in Kindergarten), medically accurate course of instruction in sex education.”
Subsection 5
Previously the law limited the sex ed instructor to a teacher or nurse. This bill opens that up to outside possibilities including Planned Parenthood advocates by adding “a professional educator” and a “provider of health care”. In the past it was purposely limited to keep Planned Parenthood out of the classroom.
Subsection 6
Currently parents must “opt in” their children by signing a consent form. This bill changes that to an “opt out” process that parents must sign to have their child out of the class. Currently, 95% of children participate in the county sex ed programs, so most parents opt their child into the programs. This changes the presumption that parents have the right to decide.
Subsection 7
The bill retains the requirement that parents have access to the course of instruction to be available at reasonable times and location before the course is taught.
Subsection 8
Defines terms: “’Age-appropriate’ means designed to teach concepts, information and skills based on the social, cognitive, emotional and experience level of most pupils of a particular age.” Obama told Planned Parenthood that “sex education for Kindergarteners…is the right thing to do.” Do you trust your kindergartener to Planned Parenthood and their explicit agenda?
“’Gender identity or expression’ means gender-related identity, appearance, expression or behavior of a person, regardless of the person’s assigned sex at birth.” “’Sexual orientation’ means having or being perceived as having an orientation of heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality.” In other words, we will be indoctrinating our children that homosexuality and associated behaviors such as bisexuality and transgenders are acceptable and perfectly normal.
“Provider of health care” means a person who is licensed, certified or otherwise authorized by the law of this State to administer health care in the ordinary course of business or practice of a profession.
Information for programs must be “Medically accurate” which means information recognized as accurate and objective by such organizations such as Center for Disease Control, Dept. of Health and Human Services, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Public Health Association, and the American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecologists all which share liberal views on homosexuality, abortion, etc.
This bill is a very dangerous attempt by Planned Parenthood to take control of Nevada
Copy of Bill: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Bills/AB/AB230.pdf
Support SB378
Protects Nevadans from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
This bill has not been scheduled for a hearing. The deadline for bills to be passed out of committee in the first house is April 12th. Time is running out.
CONTACT: Senator Tick Segerblom, (
It is best to contact him by phone 775-684-1422 or 775-684-1400 or Fax 775-684-6522 Be Polite!
If you are in
If phone or fax is not possible send an email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
MESSAGE: Ask him to please schedule a hearing on SB378 the
Special thanks to
SB378, the Nevada Liberty Preservation Act enacts the legislative finding that sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 are invalid and illegal in this State because they violate the U.S. Constitution, the Nevada Constitution and various provisions of federal law. In particular, these are: (1) indefinite detention, without charge or trial, of persons apprehended with the
Section 4 makes it unlawful for federal officers, agents, contractors or employees and state officers and employees to implement or attempt to implement sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA and imposes criminal penalties for doing so. Section 6 requires the Director of the Dept of Public Safety or other agency of this State to provide prompt notice to the Governor and Legislature of any attempt or request by a federal officer or agent, etc. to implement these sections of NDAA.
Sponsors: Gustavson, Cegavske, Goicoechea, Settelmeyer, Ellison, Wheeler, Fiore,
Copy of Bill: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Bills/SB/SB378.pdf
AB230: Explicit Sex Ed
Promotes Homosexuality, Abortion & Takes Away Parental Rights.
We desperately need people to attend the hearing and oppose this bill.
Please arrive early so you can get a seat.
HEARING: Monday, April 1, 3:15pm, Assembly Education Committees Rm 3143
Videoconferenced to Room 4406 of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building 555 E. Washington Ave. , Las Vegas
MESSAGE: Vote NO on AB230 Explicit Sex Education.
Assembly Education Committee:
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ,
Please also send an email to Speaker of the Assembly This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
And Republican: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
By Phone: Toll Free: 800-978-2878, 800-995-9080, 800-992-0973, Northern
You may also share your opinion with Legislators at: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Opinions/77th2013/A/
Sponsors of AB230 Bobzien, Eisen, Sprinkle, Elliot Anderson, Hambrick, Aizley, Benitez-Thompson, Horne, Kirkpatrick, Spearman, Parks, Segerblom,Manendo
AB230 Explicit Sex Ed
By Janine Hansen
AB230 is an Explicit Sex Education bill being promoted by Planned Parenthood. Nevada Schools already have sex education programs which have been designed in each county under the local school district, by an Advisory Committee, including parents and individuals from medicine or nursing, counseling, religion and education. These programs have been designed to meet local needs and local concerns. This bill mandates an explicit sex education program from the state, significantly reducing the local districts control over the program and instead places the curriculum development in the State Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools. This will nearly eliminate local school board and parental participation.
The bill requires that instruction must include “comprehensive” (interpreted as explicit, including advocacy for abortion, contraception and homosexuality) with abstinence as a poor step child. (Abstinence programs have proven effective in lower teen sexual activity, pregnancy and STD’s.)
In Section 1 Subsection 1:
- It greatly expands the subjects mandated including: “body image,” “gender stereotypes,” “psychosocial and emotional changes,” “domestic violence,” “sexual abuse,” “sexual assault,” “exploitation and human trafficking”.
- It provides for “Access to counseling, medical and legal assistance” which will mean referrals to Planned Parenthood and other contraceptive and abortion advocates and providers without parental consent.
- It provides for “development of skills to promote sexual responsibility” including: methods of contraception, proper use, effectiveness, safety, health benefits and side affects.
- “The identification and explanation of reproductive health services” which would mean Planned Parenthood, “including effective and safe methods of contraception and contraceptive devices, screening and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases…”
- As an aside it does mention the “importance of abstinence as the most effective method of preventing” pregnancy and STD’s, but you can imagine that it will be given little time or credence.
Subsection 2
- Utilize methods of teaching and materials which promote the inclusion and acceptance of pupils regardless of “…gender, gender identity or expression, religion, sexual orientation, ethnic or cultural background or disability.”
- “Appropriately prepare pupils who have or are currently engaged in sexual activity and pupils who may engage in sexual activity in the future.” (more clients for Planned Parenthood)
Subsection 3
This bill has stripped the County Advisory Committee of its responsibilities to develop a curriculum for their county. It’s adds to the Advisory Committee 2 pupils in the district and changes the profession of “religion” to include “spiritual or community life”. I’m not sure what that means but you can rest assured that they won’t come from the traditional religious community.
Subsection 4
Mandates “instructors who have demonstrated an appropriate level of competency to teach a ‘comprehensive” (pro abortion, contraceptive, homosexual), age-appropriate (Planned Parenthood advocates starting in Kindergarten), medically accurate course of instruction in sex education.”
Subsection 5
Previously the law limited the sex ed instructor to a teacher or nurse. This bill opens that up to outside possibilities including Planned Parenthood advocates by adding “a professional educator” and a “provider of health care”. In the past it was purposely limited to keep Planned Parenthood out of the classroom.
Subsection 6
Currently parents must “opt in” their children by signing a consent form. This bill changes that to an “opt out” process that parents must sign to have their child out of the class. Currently, 95% of children participate in the county sex ed programs, so most parents opt their child into the programs. This changes the presumption that parents have the right to decide.
Subsection 7
The bill retains the requirement that parents have access to the course of instruction to be available at reasonable times and location before the course is taught.
Subsection 8
Defines terms: “’Age-appropriate’ means designed to teach concepts, information and skills based on the social, cognitive, emotional and experience level of most pupils of a particular age.” Obama told Planned Parenthood that “sex education for Kindergarteners…is the right thing to do.” Do you trust your kindergartener to Planned Parenthood and their explicit agenda?
“’Gender identity or expression’ means gender-related identity, appearance, expression or behavior of a person, regardless of the person’s assigned sex at birth.” “’Sexual orientation’ means having or being perceived as having an orientation of heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality.” In other words, we will be indoctrinating our children that homosexuality and associated behaviors such as bisexuality and transgenders are acceptable and perfectly normal.
“Provider of health care” means a person who is licensed, certified or otherwise authorized by the law of this State to administer health care in the ordinary course of business or practice of a profession.
Information for programs must be “Medically accurate” which means information recognized as accurate and objective by such organizations such as Center for Disease Control, Dept. of Health and Human Services, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Public Health Association, and the American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecologists all which share liberal views on homosexuality, abortion, etc.
This bill is a very dangerous attempt by Planned Parenthood to take control of Nevada
Copy of Bill: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Bills/AB/AB230.pdf
Support AB289
Prohibits Electric Utilities from Requiring Installation of SMART METERS
This bill has not been scheduled for a hearing. The deadline for bills to be heard in the first house is April 12th. Time is running out.
CONTACT: Assemblyman David Bobzien, (
MESSAGE: Ask him to please schedule a hearing on the AB289 the Smart Meter bill.
AB289 This bill prohibits electric utilities from requiring the installation of a smart meter on the residential property of a customer. It requires the electric utility to provide written notice to a customer before installing a smart meter. It authorizes the removal of the smart meter upon request of the customer at no cost to the customer. It authorizes installation of other kinds of meters, including analog. It requires the utility company to keep confidential the information obtained from the installation and use of smart meters. It prohibits an electric utility from increasing the cost of electric service to a customer if the increase in cost is based solely on the absence of a smart meter. The cost of electric service cannot be increased without the approval of the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada. Sponsors: Stewart, Hambrick, Hardy, Hogan and Livermore.
Copy of Bill: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Bills/AB/AB289.pdf
Oppose: SJR13 Repeals Marriage Amendment
HEARING: Tues. March 26, 8am, Senate Elections Committee, Room 2144
Videoconferenced to Room 4412E of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building 555 E. Washington Ave. , Las Vegas
MESSAGE: Vote NO on SJR13: Please respect the will of the people who voted overwhelmingly to support marriage between a man and a woman. (You may want to write your own message.)
CONTACT: Senate Legislative Operations & Elections Committee: Senators:
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ,
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ,
By Phone: Toll Free: 800-978-2878, 800-995-9080, 800-992-0973, Northern
You may also share your opinion with Legislators at: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Opinions/77th2013/A/
The Devastating Consequences of Same-Sex Marriage
By Janine Hansen, State President Nevada Eagle Forum
Published in
It’s hard to deny that choices have consequences, even though as humans we would prefer not to acknowledge them.
When we choose to abandon the societal standard of traditional marriage, tested over thousands of years, across all cultures, there will be consequences immediate and far reaching which we might prefer to avoid.
In 2000 and 2002,
In 2009, the Nevada Legislature circumvented the vote of the people and passed a Domestic Partnership law which gave same-sex relationships every legal benefit of marriage. But, equal protections are never enough for same-sex advocates--they demand special rights. Now in 2013, at the Nevada Legislature SJR13 Repeals the Marriage Amendment passed overwhelmingly by the people of
The Nevada Protection of Marriage Amendment was challenged in Federal Court in Cevik vs. Sandoval. On November 28, 2012, Judge Clive Jones upheld
However, while
These are both critical cases and the Defense of Marriage Foundation is seeking to intervene and to have
The Federal Defense of Marriage Act protects states from being forced to recognize same-sex marriages from other states and defines marriage for the purposes of federal law as between a man and a woman.
Congress may prefer to leave this issue in the hands of the Courts with plausible deniability, but Article III Section 2 clearly gives Congress the power to remove jurisdiction from the courts. This has been used recently in cases as divergent as protecting the Pledge of Allegiance, the Fence along the Border and in giving gun manufacturers immunity. This means that no matter what the Supreme Court may say, Congress still has the ultimate power and responsibility and can protect marriage and the family.
Same-sex marriage and its advocates are a direct threat to the institution of the family and diminish the societal recognition of the importance of the traditional family. Certainly, we can all see that although the ideal is a family with a mom and dad that is not always a reality. However, if society does not uphold this as the ideal, future children will be deprived of the understanding of what is best. We will be picking up the pieces for generations.
The consequences of abandoning traditional marriage are devastating. We can see that the family is under attack and failing in many instances. The current answer to this cultural disaster is to ask government to pick up the slack. Government is at best incompetent, inefficient, and costly. Their myriad of programs, instead of supporting the institution of the family that is responsible for rearing the next generation, is to place additional financial burdens on the family through exorbitant taxation. Many families could survive and thrive if it were not for the excessive tax burden that families face. Every new costly program “for the children” places one more nail in the coffin of family financial survival, threatening the most important incubator of happy successful children…the traditional family.
Same-sex marriage is also a dangerous threat to our religious liberty. Those of us who uphold traditional marriage are now not only “politically incorrect” but are characterized as haters and homophobes without constitutionally protected rights. This is the most perilous and immediate reality.
Catholic Bishop Thomas
If same-sex marriage is legalized in
This brings the most dangerous issue to light, that through the enthronement of same-sex marriage and the wholesale rejection of morality, we stand on the brink of losing the entire foundation of our liberty—not the Constitution but a moral people.
The consequences of accepting same-sex marriage are horrendous. The consequences are even worse for our children. They cannot be avoided unless we are willing to change course and recognize that our future depends upon returning to traditional morality and marriage. Too many are willing to jeopardize the future of our nation for their immediate self-gratification. We do indeed stand on the brink.
Copy of Bill: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/77th2013/Bills/SJR/SJR13.pdf
- Prev
- Next >>
