Ryan wrote on Oct 17, 2008 12:01 PM:The RBV student is the voice of reason here. Amazing.

No on 8 wrote on Oct 17, 2008 12:08 PM:I went to the school board meeting last night and was disgusted with the tactics of Guffanti and Gibson. Guffanti defended his decision not to show at the candidate forum the night before. That forum was sponsored by the PTA and League of Women Voters and held at a Vista elementary school. Guffanti repeated the phrase that he didn't want to put anyone "in harm's way", referring to himself and his fellow absent candidates. This whole show last night was Gibson's idea to get publicity for his Oceanside City Council run by bashing gays. I would hate to see Gibson still on our school board but I would also hate for him to be in charge of anything in Oceanside. How Faustian. Maybe we can just vote out Guffanti and then poor lonesome Gibson can sit and stew on the VUSD board - all by himself.

Amazing wrote on Oct 17, 2008 12:34 PM:It is truly amazing that two Vista school board members, Jim Gibson and Stephen Guffanti continue to put their personal idealogues ahead of common sense goals for all children in Vista.

Now we have Stephen Guffanti publicly slamming parents and teachers and even refusing to attend the PTA candidate forums.

Does he really understand who his constituents are?

How many more groups will he choose to alienate? Oh, yeah, now the entire classified staff. Wow.

Wouldn't it be great for Vista citizens to vote for new candidates who desire to open up communication and discussion with all stakeholders in the district and put an end to divisive conflicts driven by personal agendas?

Whats with VUSD wrote on Oct 17, 2008 12:45 PM:Now that I have two daughters who will be starting school soon, I wonder about the people at the helm at VUSD. I remember the recall days and the ultra-conservative wacko's who want to teach their own agendas. What do we do to get people like Guffanti out once and for all??????

call me Johnson wrote on Oct 17, 2008 1:19 PM:Just to let everyone know Stephen Guffanti has a website disguised as an impartial comparison of the candidates. It becomes evident this website is instead a pro Guffanti/Anderson/Fernandez website created to deceive. This on top of Gibson and Guffanti’s grandstanding last night and the no-show by Guffanti, Anderson and Fernandez at the VUSD forum has changed me from undecided to a supporter of Lilly, Jaka and Chunka. Tell your friends……..

Yes on B wrote on Oct 17, 2008 1:41 PM:I went to the meeting last night and I thought it was a fairly cordial debate of two sides of Pro. 8.

What does this article have to do with the political forum?

Why would you post a comment out of line?

Yet you fail to post my comments that are educational in nature?

Worthless Stance wrote on Oct 17, 2008 2:07 PM:The school board should stick to running schools, not drag in an outside issue for the sole purpose of political grandstanding. That's not why school boards are elected. And Gibson wants to bring these sorts of shenanigans to the Oceanside City Council?

Well, he just lost my vote. We need folks that will work together and focus on the task in front of them. There's plenty to disagree about without bringing up such divisive issues, especially when in the end are worthless stances anyway.

The student said it all. Just run the school.

Big yes on 8 wrote on Oct 17, 2008 2:28 PM:...but school board shouldn't be addressing the issue. I wouldn't want the school board to tell me to vote for Tri-City Hospital tax either.

Guffanti and Gibson will still get votes from this household because we like their ideas on education.

Could it be wrote on Oct 17, 2008 2:43 PM:they know the voters for Bonds would be highly upset?

No on 8 and Gibson wrote on Oct 17, 2008 3:11 PM:Both will get a big fat NO from this household. We don't support legalizing discrimination and we won't vote for anyone who does.

I'm just glad Gibson was dumb enough to put this big stinking foot in his mouth ... he could have gotten by me otherwise.

ProudtobeDad wrote on Oct 17, 2008 3:40 PM:As a gay dad with two kids in school, I'm glad that the board decided not to take a stand. This proposition is discriminatory, and takes away my right to marry.

Vote NO on H8!!!

Yes on 8 wrote on Oct 17, 2008 4:49 PM:This would never have been an issue if the courts didn't reverse a proposition that the people voted against. What's that telling our kids. What's that telling our kids as far as your vote counts unless some officials in the high courts thinks otherwise. Those judges are no different then Gibson and Guffanti in regards to bringing their "beliefs" into politics.

to No on 8 and Gibson wrote on Oct 17, 2008 5:03 PM:Amen! Don't forget to vote no on his cohort Guffanti who is trying to keep his trustee seat on VUSD! For that matter, Guffanti's cohorts Anderson and Fernandez should get a big fat NO too, because the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.......

Wow wrote on Oct 17, 2008 5:06 PM:This just floored me. I had no idea this issue was on the table at the school board meeting and I don't think it belonged there. I am dismayed that Gibson brought this forward and I am dismayed he thinks it is a position worthy of taking! It has nothing to do with schools and nothing to do with city government. I was supporting him for council because I thought he had good growth ideas - but curtailing anyone's freedoms - whether choice or not - stunts growth. Sorry, Jim, I really thought you had it together but it is obvious you don't. I will be calling your HQ tomorrow to come retrieve your sign from my yard and I will not be voting for you in November.

TO Yes on 8 wrote on Oct 17, 2008 6:37 PM:What that tells OUR kids is that the will of the people is strong, but not strong enough to trample over and dictate the rights of the minority. It tells our kids that you're entitled to your own opinions and beliefs, but it doesn't make them right just because you think it does. It tells them that we are a diverse society with no one more deserving of public protections than another ... at least not when it comes to criteria such as color, sex, religion, orientation, etc.

What if the majority decided that God was a fraud and was banned in a America? Should they be able to do it or would you look to the judges who interpret our constitutions to identify the flaws of the scenario and override it appropriately? You can say what you want, but we all know what is true.

Personally, I'm glad Gibson brought his 'beliefs' into the public politics. I may have been persuaded to vote for him otherwise. Now I know better.

yes on 8 wrote on Oct 17, 2008 7:58 PM:I agree whole heartedly. The people did vote, and we spoke. Shame on those who choose to uphold the majority. California was bought that day. Very sad day for California. I know that if this does goes through, the Religion should be allowed at the public schools. God will remain in the pledge. What is good for one issue should be good for both.

What wrote on Oct 17, 2008 10:08 PM:TO YES ON 8 at 7:58 ... you're a typing contradiction. You agree whole heartedly that the people voted and spoke ... yet in the same breath you shame those who choose to uphold the majority. I can only imagine your post is riddled with typos because you had to have meant that you shame those who choose to overturn the majority.

Further ... religion has no place in schools any more than God has a place in the Pledge. He wasn't there from the start and he doesn't need to be there now.

What you need to do is get over your irrational fear & prejudice and learn that American is truly a melting pot that features a variety of cultures, histories, beliefs, races, orientations, etc ... AND DEAL WITH IT!!!!

To TO Yes on 8 at 637 wrote on Oct 18, 2008 7:35 AM:Thank you! I was about to start writing a similar response when I saw yours. You said it better than I could have. I am constantly amazed at the number of people who think majority should always rule. One of the guiding principles of the Constitution is that the minority are to be protected from the tyranny of the majority, but too many people think that the majority should always get what it wants.
For nearly 200 years "the majority" thought blacks should be treated as either slaves or second-class citizens (including, unfortunately, the people who wrote the Constitution and couldn't apparently see the contradiction). Most thinking people today see the error of that sort of thinking. But like our founders, they just don't see the link between blacks in the last century and gays in this one.
If Prop 8 passes, as it probably will, the courts will eventually overturn it, too, on civil rights grounds, and people will scream all over again about activist courts and how the majority should rule.

To Each Their Own wrote on Oct 18, 2008 8:01 AM:Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and to vote as they see fit. However, it is NOT the place of the Board of a public school district to take such a position. Just as there is no room for Satan in public education, there is no room for God. If you want that kind of religion being promoted in your school district, then go to one of the many schools that provide it.

To Wow an others wrote on Oct 18, 2008 8:27 AM:Wow wrote, "It has nothing to do with schools and nothing to do with city government." I completely agree with you. I also agree with the school board for voting to stay out of this. Perhaps you, or one of the others verbally blugeoning Gibson and Guffanti, can tell me why you're not doing the same to the California TEACHERS Association. Or is it okay for them to take a million dollar stance for something that has nothing to do with schools because it's the same stance as yours? That's what I call hypocrisy!

debate wrote on Oct 18, 2008 8:37 AM:I believe the school district should stay out of this issue and let the voters decide. Families of high schoolers may have interesting discussions if they choose to discuss this and vote as a family. Many of our high schoolers are well aware of this issue and don't want to be schooled in a vacuum. They are often more aware than their elders of the current of change and the new order of acceptance. Students have been taught for years to respect others differences and now we want to send the message, that in this one area they don't have to. Many of them clearly see the contradiction.

Schools.... wrote on Oct 18, 2008 9:49 AM:should stick to what they were origionally designed to do....educate our kids...it's up to myself and my wife to decide on what we believe is acceptable moral learning for our children, and I don't need the teachers in my childrens schools ramming the homosexual agenda down their throats,
keep it to the 3 "R"s and leave outside agendas off of the campuses, period.

JSten wrote on Oct 18, 2008 10:21 AM:School board stays out of gay marriage debate

Gee whiz!

I think even spending 3- seconds on this non mission related topic is out of line.

But who am I to say whether someone else should have to power over our notty bits.

NO on 8 stop the hate wrote on Oct 18, 2008 10:27 AM:NO ON 8-
Vista school board shouldn't have a position on gay marriage, they should be focusing on education. Everyone has their own beliefs, I understand that and respect that, however I find it sickening that people who advocate christ would at the same time, treat others so poorly and be so judgemental and disrespectful. What other reason could you have to deny someone the right to marry, other than hatred and ignorance? I feel sorry for those of you who don't know compassion for others. Ever heard of the women's rights movement? Ever heard of the Civil rights movement? Now is the gay rights movement. Bottom line. Get over your self-righteousness! And in case your wondering, I am not gay. I don't like seeing people degraded and supressed because of other people's ignorance.

RE To Wow an others wrote on Oct 18, 2008 10:47 AM:The Teachers Association should absolutely be spending the money on schools and not politics. However, the Teachers Association isn't running for office while spewing ignorance and bigotry. I don't know much about Guffanti, but Gibson is running for a seat on the council of my city. A position in which he would be called on to make decisions that would hopefully be for the benefit of me and other OSide residents. I fail to see how he can do that when his is already displaying this type of arrogance and stupidity. For that reason, he will get the lions share of my 'verbal bludgeoning' ... at least for the time being.

To Wow and others wrote on Oct 18, 2008 11:37 AM:RE 10:47AM response: You're right that the CTA is not running for office, but they have a lot more control over what is going on in the classrooms than one board member for one school district! It is for that very reason, they should stay out of issues that don't belong in school. To ignore that fact, while criticizing someone else for the same thing is hypocritical.

To all wrote on Oct 18, 2008 11:55 AM:The money from CTA came from their PAC money, money that is supposed to be spent on politics. The CTA represents teachers and many teachers are gay...therefore they are representing the wishes of many of their members. People in the South also voted for segregation...does that make it right? Just because we vote for it that does not make it right.

curly joe wrote on Oct 18, 2008 1:18 PM:Hey Folks
Time to wake up and see Gooffanti and Gibson for who they are.They are dividers not unifiers. All kids need a great education. VUSD leaves kids behind by denying equal access of all to a world class education. Kids are more than test scores!!!! Parents and teachers know this. Don't buy hate tactics. Elect Jakaa Chunka Lily Put the UNIFIED back in Vista Schools!!!!!!!

Yes On 8 wrote on Oct 18, 2008 2:17 PM:The CTA took an additional $20 from my check (and every other teacher's check) to pay for the No on 8 campaign. Yet we have people here in these blogs who would claim this is NOT an educational issue. Why should a School Board be prohibited from campaigning for or against this Prop while the Teachers' Union can? Why should I, a Christian Conservative Teacher, be forced to pay to preserve perversion not currently contained in the CA Constitution? As a Teacher and a student of Law I know only too well that the men in black robes had to really stretch to find the previous proposition as unconstitutional. You should note that the prior proposition passed overwhelmingly, even though the CTA spent Millions to against it. So, once again the perversion that is the CTA is taking my money to try and overthrow the will of the people. What is that teaching the students of this great state? That if the people speak one only needs to extort large sums of money from a people already underpaid and use that money to overturn the will of the people. yes, money will buy you a vote, especially if you keep the people ignorant and illiterate! All of these things are the primary goal of the CTA and its minions at the VTA.

To to all wrote on Oct 18, 2008 2:23 PM:Race is protected in the US Constitution. Sexual orientation is NOT! What you do in the privacy of your own home is your right. But, you have NO Right to push your perversion on my children. You will find that it is a crime to do such, and yet the gay Rights movement has been doing everything in it power to make such activity legal and normal. Children need a safe environment to learn and grow;free from the perversion of radical adults who would steel their childhood from them.

many teachers are gay... wrote on Oct 18, 2008 2:35 PM:This statement seems hard to believe. Even if 10% to15% of the population is homosexual, and an equal proportion is found within the educatinal community, this would still not support the calim of many teachers are gay. Unless of course there is a disporoportionate number of himosexuals entering the educational system for some reason. That said, I have two uncles who are gay. Both became teachers, both are now registered sex offenders. Both now teach at Universities instead of teh K-12 system. Now you might be able to understand my concern for the statement made above about many teachers are gay.

to NO on 8 stop the hate wrote on Oct 18, 2008 2:46 PM:I though this whole thing was about love. I've seen more hate from those opposed to prop 8 than from those in favor of it. I saw more hate from those who used judges to overturn the will of the people than I did from teh people who passed the law in the first place. Why do you want to force me to accept your beliefs when they totally contradict my Religious teaching. Remeber, Religion is protected by the US Constitution, Sexual orientation is NOT! Currently as it stands in CA, as a result of judges throwing out the will of the people and creating their own law in total violation of the CA Constitution, the state can punsih my church for refusing to perform a marriage cerimony for a homosexual couple. Therefore, since Religion is protected under teh US Constitution it would be a very interesting case if the state were to do such. Thus, it can be derived from this legal understanding that the judgement made by teh judges who overturned teh will of teh peolpe and created the law allowing gay marriage is itself unconstitutional under the US Constitution. Better to simply ammend our CA Constitution by way of Prop 8 than to have your whole way of life challenged in the US Supreme Court. I can assure you that you would lose that case and the anger fo the Peolpe of the USA would be raised for your attemtps to challenge something so critical to our way of life as the Freedom of Religion.

JOAN W wrote on Oct 18, 2008 3:26 PM:Dr Guffanti has a good education, but if there's one thing that turns me OFF about him (and Gibson) it's this: "Board President Jim Gibson asked trustees to pass a resolution in support of Prop. 8 and board member Stephen Guffanti joined him in backing the resolution. The rest of the panel said the board shouldn't take a position on any proposition." It's obvious that a school board has no business taking a position on any proposition that has NOTHING to do with the operation of the school district. I also agree with the CTA in OPPOSING Prop. 8. Prop 8 is basically backed by churches wanting to make their doctrines law. That's wrong. These are the same people who would force ALL students to listen to their religious utterances (prayers) and who would snub those who don't believe as they do. They would teach creationism in the schools if they could and denouce evolution, again advancing their missionary agenda. For these reasons I have reconsidered my position and will vote for Angela Chunka, Elizabeth Jaka and Dr. Steve Lilly to serve as members of the Vista Unified School Board.

bodecea wrote on Oct 18, 2008 3:36 PM:"yes on 8" sadly does not know that we have THREE branches to our government, not just one or two. The CA Supreme Court did the job the CA Constitution assigned to it...to weed out unconstitutional laws regardless of how many people misguidedly voted for them. All people like "yes on 8" are doing is showing how woefully inadequate their own education was.

bodecea wrote on Oct 18, 2008 3:40 PM:"To to all"

What does "choice" have to do with civil rights? Your religion is also a choice...does that mean we can pass laws discriminating against YOUR right to civilly marry? How about if we get a majority to pass such a law? Would you just roll over and accept the will of the majority then? I'm guessing you would fight for your civil rights just like law-abiding, tax-paying gay Californians are doing right now.

You are a Segregationist...and we all know on which side of history Segregationists are on in this great country.

Re To Wow and others wrote on Oct 18, 2008 6:15 PM:11:37 response ... It's only hypocritical if it's true and since you only know me by one brief post on one article, you don't have enough information to call me anything.

Tolerance vs Acceptance wrote on Oct 18, 2008 6:45 PM:No one is asking anyone to 'accept' anything. Acceptance is being in personal agreement with something. Conversely, to tolerate something is only to be fair and objective towards things that may be outside of your personal belief or comfort zone.

No one is asking you to like or dislike anything. You don't agree with same sex marriage ... FINE ... don't marry someone of the same sex. Problem solved.

I personally don't agree with organized religion and seriously question those who need some higher power to tell them the difference between right and wrong. Because of that, I don't belong to a church and guess what ... no problem.

The only thing being asked in this proposition is that EVERY legal, law abiding & tax paying citizen of this state is treated EXACTLY the same in the eyes of the government and the law. Not in your personal lives or homes and not in your churches.

Everyone has their own individual right to agree or disagree with what/whoever they want. The same way that a privately run/funded church has the right to perform or not perform whatever ceremonies they see fit according to their individual doctrines. That will not and cannot change.

What you can't do is deny one citizen something that is granted to another when they both pay the same taxes, follow the same laws, live in the same neighborhoods and share the same responsibilities to both family and community. That would be what they call discrimination and it has no business being in our laws, communities or constitutions.

Artsyrat wrote on Oct 18, 2008 8:14 PM:We're in trouble! Medical Marijuana is legal, abortion is legal, gay marriage is legal. Holy _____, what is happening to America?!!! We openly support and accept drug use, murder of babies and gay marriage. I can't even imagine what's coming next. Scary....

Just wondering wrote on Oct 18, 2008 8:28 PM:why the school district are saying that this is non of their business when the "alternative lifestyle" is going to be taught to our students......THAT IS THE BUSINESS OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. Any moron can figure that one out.

Les wrote on Oct 19, 2008 5:15 AM:Jim Gibson, Stephen Guffanti, who do you think you are to attempt to sway my vote on a matter that is clearly nowhere close to the purview of the Vista School Board. Who do you think you are to attempt to indoctrinate my children in matters that are none of your business? The fact the teacher’s union spent more than a million dollars on this proposition does not miraculously turn it into an education matter, it only demonstrates teachers are overpaid, if their unions have that amount of money to throw at things outside of their interest. Mr. Gibson, you are quoted as saying "I do believe it is an educational issue when the CTA spends more than $1 million on a proposition," he said, adding that he also believes children will be better off if Prop. 8 passes. Wrong, you are just plain wrong. This matter is not an educational issue and our children are better off if the school district stays out of what is a family matter. Families decide what to teach their children about gay issues, families decide what to teach their children about marriage issues, families, not you! I for one cannot wait to vote someone, other than you, into your former positions.

Teachers vs TCA and Rights wrote on Oct 19, 2008 11:10 AM:Once again, people don't seem to see the difference between teachers, and the teacher's union. Teachers shouldn't be supporting one view or the other in the schools because it's not part of their job description. But the teacher's union is free to support whatever position they think will get their members the most "stuff". And, if the folks on the left support the unions, and the folks on the left support gay marriage, then you can be the union will support gay marriage.

One other point. From what I understand, in California, ALL the rights accorded to married couples are also accorded to civil unions. So not being legally called a "marriage" doesn't wouldn't seem to effect anyone's rights whatsoever.

For instance, males are males, and females are females. Both have the same rights, but that doesn't mean we start calling females males, or the other way around. One is one thing, and the other is another thing.

So if marriage is defined as a union between members of the opposite sex, and civil union is defined as between members of the same sex, but both have the same rights, what's the problem?

The only conclusion I can come to is that members of the homosexual community want something MORE than rights. What they really seem to want is to usurp a term, apparently for no other reason than to make themselves more "accepted".

And this is what most people are against. Not the rights anyone holds to do as they please with a "partner", or to form legal unions with those partners. They just believe that the definition of the word "marriage" is not a union between two people of the same sex.

MP wrote on Oct 19, 2008 4:01 PM:To Teachers vs TCA

First of all in CA it's Domestic Partnership, not Civil Union. Secondly it is not just a different name. There are many rights that are not equal when you are domestic partners. For example: Domestic partners do not receive Social Security, veteran's benefits and pension plan survivor benefits upon death of partner. They are not guaranteed equal benefits from employers. They are excluded from long-term care benefits. They are not guaranteed family leave to care for ill partner. And that's just a sample of the rights that are not equally conveyed by domestic partnership. Thirdly, and most importantly "the very act of denying gay and lesbian couples the right to marry – traditionally the highest legal and societal recognition of a loving commitment – by definition relegates them and their relationship to second class status." That is from an LA Times editorial.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON 8 AND GIVE EVERY CALIFORNIAN THE SAME FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS.

wendy wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:56 PM:it's a sad day when you have to explain to your children why gay people aren't allowed to get married like heterosexual couples. Fear is what it all boils down to. Many heterosexual people are afraid of gay people, because they lack the understanding and are ignorant on the matter. Much of this stems from religion, so, in that case... if there is real separation of church and state, then why are people continuing to bring their religious beliefs into this? who are YOU to say whether or not someone can get married or not? Who gave YOU the right to "play god" with the rights of homosexual people? shame on you for judging and discriminating. They'd be allowed to get married... that's all. No one's forcing you and your children to attend the wedding. If you are a decent human being, religious or not, vote no on 8.

Jen wrote on Oct 25, 2008 1:35 PM:The issue is that the California Teachers association already contributed $1.3 million to defeat prop 8, so for people to spout comments that the school board officials should basically keep their nose out of the whole issue is a bit disingenuous to say the least.
And as far as prop 8 supporters being viewed as intolerant,mean spirited people, that is untrue. It's funny how we are intolerant, but those opposing 8 aren't???......(it's okay for them to tell us that our children will be taught that same sex marriage is the norm and we can't do a thing about it.) Talk about intolerance!