Same-Sex Marriage and the Proposed Marriage Amendment

Same-Sex Marriage
and the Proposed Marriage Amendment

There is a proposed amendment to the Constitution to define marriage, which is necessary because of the number of federal judges who insist on creating rights rather than administering them.

The definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, excluding all other combinations, could have been written into the Constitution, but some things just go without saying. At least they used to. Not that long ago, perversion was accompanied by stigma and social ostracism. Perversion is defined as "Deviation from the normal path, whether it be in the area of one's intellect, emotions, actions, or reactions." In other words, it's abnormal.

Normalizing homosexuality will lead to polygamy, and beyond. As I always say, this kind of incrementalism only goes one direction. Once homosexuality is normalized and legitimized, that won't be the end of the friction between radical leftists and normal people — the average everyday people who would prefer to have American society operate under the traditional rules and expectations we embraced until just recently. (People like that are known as "conservatives.") The envelope will be pushed even more.

For centuries, the traditional family was the basic building block of our society, but now that concept is being diluted because of the redefinition of "family" and "marriage". The actions of a few leftist judges in the northeastern part of the country can affect all fifty states, so the only sure way to address this matter legally, aside from the wholesale impeachment of public officials, is through an amendment to the Constitution. But even that solution is questioned by some conservatives, as shown in this first article:

Judicial Tyranny? In response to the court's sodomy ruling last term, conservatives are talking about passing a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It's really touching how conservatives keep trying to figure out what constitutional mechanisms are available to force the courts to acknowledge the existence of the Constitution. But what is the point of a constitutional amendment when judges won't read the Constitution we already have?

California ban on same-sex marriage struck down. The California Supreme Court struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage Thursday [5/15/2008], saying sexual orientation, like race or gender, "does not constitute a legitimate basis upon which to deny or withhold legal rights." In a 4-3 120-page ruling issue, the justices wrote that "responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation."

California's Top Court Overturns Same-Sex Marriage Ban. The California Supreme Court overturned a ban on gay marriage Thursday, calling such a prohibition unconstitutional and paving the way for California to become the second state where gay and lesbian residents can marry. In the 4-3 decision, Chief Justice Ron George wrote for the majority that domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage.

Gay Rights vs. Democracy: The high court of California has made gay marriage into a right that is immune from restriction by the majority of citizens in the state. We already know what California citizens think about gay marriage: they oppose it. A referendum outlawing gay marriage was passed with the support of the state's voters. More than 60 percent of voters cast their ballots against gay marriage. How, then, can a court invalidate the referendum and over-rule the will of the people? Basically through a kind of legal fraud.

Tyranny In the Name of Progress:
California court bans religious objections to same-sex pregnancies. Once again, judges in California have taken sides in the culture wars. On Monday [8/18/2008], in North Coast Women's Care v. Benitez, the Golden State's highest court ruled that doctors may not rely on their religious principles to refuse in-vitro fertilization for same-sex couples. The decision runs roughshod over the First Amendment's free-exercise clause, seeking to supplant Judeo-Christian principles with the state-imposed religion of secularism. This is a false choice under the federal Constitution, which makes room for both.

California Court Strips Children of Right to Mother and Father. Most of the media coverage of the California Supreme Court's decision has focused on the court's declaration that there is a right to same-sex marriage. The ruling invalidated California's Proposition 22, a state ballot initiative that passed with 61 percent of the vote in 2000, and which banned same-sex marriage in the state. But the California Supreme Court decision goes beyond simply giving same-sex couples the right to call their unions a "marriage." It also strips children of the right not to be artificially conceived or adopted by people other than a mother and a father.

The New York Times is surprised to find...
A Poll Finds Californians Still Oppose Gay Marriage. More than half of Californians support a proposed ballot measure that would overturn a recent ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state, a poll has found. Fifty-four percent of registered voters would back the measure, according to the survey by The Los Angeles Times and KTLA-TV. Thirty-five percent oppose the proposed measure, which is expected to be on the November ballot.

Gay Marriage Returns. California's Supreme Court is not the law of the land, but its 4-3 ruling, titled "In re Marriage Cases" for six consolidated appeals, explicitly told both the state's voters and its elected legislature to get lost. Back in 2000, California voters by 61% approved a proposition asserting that the state could only recognize a "marriage" between man and woman. Now comes the court.

Gov. Moonbeam's Revenge: By the narrowest of margins, the California supreme court ruled Thursday [5/15/2008] that Proposition 22, passed by 62 percent of California voters in 2000, is unconstitutional. ... On the legal front, this opinion breaks radically new ground: The California supreme court is the first in the country to find a fundamental right to same-sex marriage. ... In a slam-dunk for gay-marriage advocates, the Court also affirmed a sweeping equal-protection right to gay marriage, grounded in the right to have one's family relationships accorded equal respect and dignity.

Hallmark Adds Same-Sex Marriage Cards. Most states don't recognize gay marriage — but now Hallmark does. The nation's largest greeting card company is rolling out same-sex wedding cards — featuring two tuxedos, overlapping hearts or intertwined flowers, with best wishes inside. "Two hearts. One promise," one says.

Care Enough to Send the Very Worst. Hallmark, a privately owned company and the biggest name in greeting cards, is releasing same-sex marriage cards. This latest marketing venture comes despite the fact that homosexual "marriage" has only been imposed by the courts in two states. The cards include two tuxedos on the front or two hearts intertwined.

California court won't delay gay weddings until vote. California's highest court on Tuesday refused to stay until after the November election its decision legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. Conservative religious and legal groups had asked the California Supreme Court to stop its order from becoming effective until voters have the chance to weigh in on the issue.

The Editor says...
The voters have already "weighed in on the issue" when they voted on Proposition 22 That's why the Supreme Court's ruling is so repugnant.

County clerk will stop performing weddings before same-sex couples can apply for licenses. Kern County Clerk Ann Barnett has announced that her office will stop performing all weddings a few days before June 17, the date that same-sex couples can legally apply for marriage licenses. Barnett's staff processes marriage licenses for hundreds of Kern County residents each year and it will continue to do, for both straight and gay couples, beginning June 17 as required by law, she said in a written statement.

Two California counties to halt all weddings, gay or not. County officials in at least two California counties say they'll stop performing all wedding ceremonies by next week, arguing that they don't have enough resources to marry both gay and straight couples. Officials in Kern and Butte counties cited budget and staffing constraints as the rationale for halting the ceremonies.

Update:
California Supreme Court keeps anti-gay marriage initiative on ballot. A voter initiative to reinstate a ban on same-sex marriage will remain on the November ballot, the California Supreme Court decided unanimously Wednesday [7/16/2008]. The court issued a brief order rejecting arguments that the initiative, Proposition 8, was an illegal constitutional revision and that voters had been misled when they signed petitions to put it on the ballot.

Victory for Christian registrar who refused to carry out gay 'weddings'. A Christian registrar who was harassed and discriminated against after she refused to carry out same-sex civil partnership ceremonies has won a key legal battle. Lillian Ladele, 47, said that she was treated like a pariah by colleagues at Islington council in North London after she said that she could not carry out the ceremonies as a matter of religious conscience.

Christian registrar who refused to marry gay couples reveals bullying ordeal. The devout Christian registrar who won a landmark legal battle over her refusal to carry out gay 'weddings' has spoken for the first time about the devastating campaign of bullying she suffered at the hands of her politically correct colleagues. Lillian Ladele says she was treated as a 'pariah' because her traditional values were at odds with the dogmatism of equalities-obsessed Islington Council.

California same-sex weddings will affect other states. After wedding-day celebrations subside, gay and lesbian couples from other states who marry starting this week in California face sobering challenges. Many will return home to states which explicitly reject same-sex unions. Major gay-rights groups are urging them not to rush into lawsuits demanding that their marriages be recognized. Lawyers warn that they may have difficulty divorcing if things go awry.

That's No Man, That's My Wife. As you may have noticed, the California Supreme Court recently decided by a 4-3 margin to green light same-sex marriages. In doing so, they over-turned a ballot measure that 61% of the voters approved in 2000, which stated that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California." Although there is nothing in the state constitution that warrants that vote being set aside by four jurists, these days there's nothing unusual about 56% of the judges over-ruling 61% of the electorate.

Male priests marry in Anglican church's first gay 'wedding'. Two male priests exchanged vows and rings in a ceremony that was conducted using one of the church's most traditional wedding rites — a decision seen as blasphemous by conservatives. The ceremony broke Church of England guidelines and was carried out last month in defiance of the Bishop of London, in whose diocese it took place.

Same-Sex Marriage and Immoral SUVs: There is a verse in the Bible that comes to mind: "So justice is driven back, and righteousness stands at a distance; truth has stumbled in the streets, honesty cannot enter" (Isaiah 59:14). It's a prophetic utterance of a time when judgment would be turned inside out and backward. Right would be wrong, wrong would be right and truth would be the victim, having "stumbled in the streets." It would seem we are there. At the same times as the New York Times was implying that anyone driving an SUV is committing an immoral act, they were praising the new age of freedom being ushered in by the California rush of same-sex marriages.

The Editor says...
The book of Isaiah is full of interesting reading, mainly because of its many long-range predictions that turned out to be true. The verse quoted above is quite applicable, but read the next verse (59:15) as well:

"Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment."*

Mormon Church enters gay marriage fight. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is asking California members to join the effort to amend that state's constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Same-sex marriage decision may help Republicans. The California Supreme Court's historic ruling affirming the right of same-sex couples to marry is certain to inject the issue into the 2008 presidential race and could help Republicans by serving up a red-meat issue to rally conservative voters. The court's 4-3 decision echoes the Massachusetts Supreme Court's ruling legalizing gay marriage before the last presidential election in 2004, which led San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to begin issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.

Wedded to Activism. The California supreme court, by a 4-to-3 margin, ruled Thursday that it is not sufficient that California has enacted a domestic-partnership scheme that makes available to same-sex couples "virtually all of the same substantive legal benefits and privileges" as marriage. The court instead invented a "right of same-sex couples to have their official family relationship accorded the same dignity, respect, and stature as that accorded to all other officially recognized family relationships." In short, it required that marriage itself — both the term and the institution — be redefined to be fully available to same-sex couples.

Over The Threshold. The civil purpose of marriage is not and never has been to reaffirm the love of two people for one another. Nor is marriage primarily a business arrangement. This country and healthy societies around the world and throughout history have given marriage special legal protection because of the recognition that it's the one institution that ensures the society's future through the orderly upbringing of children.

California Ruling on Same-Sex Marriage Fuels a Battle, Rather Than Ending It. [Mathew D.] Staver, the founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a Florida group that defends traditional marriage, flew to Dallas on Thursday night [5/15/2008] for a late dinner meeting with a fund-raiser. The topic was how to finance a campaign for the California Marriage Protection Act, a November ballot initiative that would amend the state Constitution and effectively undo the court's decision. … The amendment would insert 14 words into the California Constitution — "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California"….

You Can Fight The Imposition Of Same-Sex Marriage In America. On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that same-sex marriage should be legal in the state. This decision was made despite millions of voters approving Proposition 22 in 2000. Proposition 22 stated clearly that the people of California wanted marriage to be only a union of one man and one woman. Proposition 22 expressed the will of 61.4% of California citizens. But their will has been overthrown by four liberal activist judges on the California Supreme Court.

Activist wamts to impeach judge for gay ruling. A conservative political activist is demanding that the Iowa Legislature impeach Polk County District Judge Robert Hanson, who ruled last month that state's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. Bill Salier, a Nora Springs farmer and former Republican candidate for U.S. Senate, said Wednesday [9/12/2007] that he is passing petitions favoring the judge's impeachment.

"Gays" Don't Want "Marriage" After All. Getting married isn't even on the radar screen for the vast majority of homosexuals. … By co-opting and misapplying the language of the genuine civil rights movement, homosexual activists — along with kindred leftists in the media, government and elsewhere — are making considerable strides toward reshaping our culture. They've enjoyed much success in attaining official government recognition of a disordered and empty, though demonstrably mutable, sexual lifestyle.

Another case against gay parents raising kids. London author Dawn Stefanowicz has published a compelling memoir entitled "Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting." In this compelling book, she presents an open and honest account of her anguishing experiences as a child growing up in a dysfunctional home dominated by a homosexual father and a submissive mother.

Civil unions aren't marriage. In a 3½-hour session that sounded sometimes like a law school seminar and sometimes like a radio talk show, the California Supreme Court this week wrestled with the question of whether the state Constitution's guarantee of "equal protection of the laws" requires the recognition of same-sex marriages.

NHS could pay surrogates £15,000 to have babies for gays. Surrogate mothers could be given up to £15,000 of Health Service money to have children for gay couples, it emerged yesterday [1/30/2008]. An NHS trust is considering funding the service for infertile couples -- whether they are heterosexual or of the same-sex.

Gore Expresses Support for Homosexual Marriage. Al Gore, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and self-proclaimed "inventor of the Internet," has earned a new moniker: champion of homosexual marriage. And while some observers are excited about Gore's endorsement of same-sex marriage, the laws at the state level show overall that traditional marriage is supported by a vast majority of Americans and legislatures.

Philadelphia Mayor Presides Over Same-Sex 'Wedding'. Outgoing Philadelphia Mayor John Street officiated at his first same-sex commitment ceremony at City Hall on Saturday [11/24/2007]. A pro-family organization said the event marked a "dark day in the history of the City of Brotherly Love."

Court: Gay marriage in Canada should be recognized in New York. An appeals court has ruled that a gay couple's marriage in Canada should be recognized in New York. The Appellate Division of state Supreme Court today reversed a judge's ruling in 2006 that Monroe Community College did not have to extend health benefits to an employee's lesbian partner.

Massachusetts Liberals Unhinged. [Eileen] McNamara's column encapsulates the haughtiness with which liberals proselytize their social scheme and the utter disdain with which they hold those who do not agree with their attempts to impose their will on an unreceptive public. In essence, she is saying that if you don't agree with the proponents of same sex marriage, you are a bigot. This episode has laid bare the elitist, insufferable and anti-democratic nature of liberalism for all to see.

Who's to blame for anti-gay-marriage initiatives? Homosexual relationships surely have existed throughout history, but homosexuals have not sought marriage rights nor has any society formally sanctioned such relationships through its laws, that is until the late 20th century, and then in just a very few societies. Now, some judges in the United States have cast aside tradition and law in favor of an experiment in reordering society, without the democratic consent of the citizens of the affected communities. Should it surprise anyone that a backlash has ensued?

Maryland taxpayers may be forced to subsidize homosexual lifestyle. Pro-family activist Matt Barber is warning Maryland taxpayers that they may soon be forced to support the homosexual lifestyle with their pocketbooks. Barber, policy director for cultural issues for Concerned Women for America, says Maryland appears on the fast track to becoming the 15th state to grant domestic partner benefits to homosexual state employees.

Governor flies flag for gay marriage in pride parade. Onlookers cheered and waved "thank you" signs yesterday as Deval Patrick became the first governor to march in Boston's gay pride parade, days before an anticipated vote on a ballot question that could bar same-sex marriages.

Court Restores Nebraska's Same-Sex Marriage Ban. Supporters of banning gay marriage won two major court rulings Friday [7/14/2006], with a federal appeals court reinstating Nebraska's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage and the Tennessee Supreme Court dismissing an effort to keep a proposed ban off the November ballot.

Gay "marriage": [Homosexuals] argue against a "ban on gay marriage" but marriage has for centuries meant a union of a man and a woman. There is no gay marriage to ban. Analogies with bans against interracial marriage are bogus. Race is not part of the definition of marriage.

Bias in the Headlines: The Walt Disney Company's decision to allow same-sex couples to purchase the high-end Fairy Tale Wedding Package has generated lots of news coverage — with headlines frequently biased in favor of so-called homosexual "marriage." … Gay "marriage" is not recognized in Florida or California, where Disney's amusement parks are located. The ceremonies that will be performed on the company's properties and cruise ships will not be weddings. They will be commitment ceremonies, which have been performed in Disney parks for some time.

Massachusetts lawmakers approve gay marriage vote. Massachusetts lawmakers approved a measure on Tuesday [1/2/2007] that could give voters a chance next year to ban gay marriage in the only U.S. state where it is now legal. But the 200-member Legislature, which has been waging a grueling legislative battle over the issue, immediately moved to reconsider its vote — a tactic that gay-marriage supporters hope could be used to defeat the proposal later Tuesday.

Gay Impasse: Social policy throughout the United States has evolved from the conviction that unions between men and women bring forth welcome fruits, primarily the children who become citizen-successors and provide for the continuation of the state. In terms of civil status, such a union is — and is called — marriage. A marriage has derivative rights and responsibilities, including child care. The gay lobby seeks to neutralize those special inducements to marriage.

New Jersey Supreme Court Says there is No Fundamental Right to Same-Sex Marriage. In a decision that came dangerously close to authorizing same-sex marriage, the New Jersey Supreme Court concluded in the case of Lewis v. Harris that there was, in fact, no constitutional right under the New Jersey Constitution for same-sex marriage. This aspect of the opinion is very important. … The court noted that both the U.S. Supreme Court and decisions in New Jersey "fall far short of establishing" that same-sex marriage was a fundamental right.

Homosexual Marriage In Canada Killing Free Speech. The legalization of same-sex marriage in Canada has put law and religion on a collision course. The Catholic organization, the Knights of Columbus, in Port Coquitlam, B.C., was required to pay a fine for causing 'hurt feelings,' when it denied the use of the organization's hall to a lesbian couple to celebrate their wedding. Religion-based social services, such as counseling and adoption services, are now required to conform to the same-sex marriage law. The tax-exempt status of churches has become the subject of intimidation and harassment.

Labour kills off 'husbands' and 'wives' . Labour has removed the traditional terms "husband", "wife" and "spouse" from a wide range of official forms, and replaced them with the word "partner". Civil servants at Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs, which is responsible for tax collection, yesterday [11/17/2007] admitted the new term was a convenient "catch-all" and a part of "modern language". The move is said to take into consideration the range of relationships that now have a legal standing.

Gays cannot 'marry' in New York. New York's highest court ruled yesterday [7/6/2006] that the state's marriage laws are constitutional and that homosexual couples cannot "marry."

Homosexuals at the Boston Globe told to marry or lose benefits. Memo to Boston Globe gay and lesbian Guild employees: Get married or lose your domestic partner benefits. Globe staffers have been told that health and dental benefits for gay employees' domestic partners are being discontinued. Gay couples who want to keep their benefits must marry by January 1, 2007.

Why Did Hagel Vanish for Marriage Vote? The "conventional wisdom" just can't explain Nebraska. The "conventional wisdom" (read: liberal media spin) on last week's U.S. Senate vote regarding the Marriage Protection Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was that the vote was scheduled for purely political reasons — to mobilize the Republican Party's conservative base for the November midterm congressional elections.

Marriage is about children. The debate over the federal marriage amendment is really a debate about children. Or, at least it should be, because at its core marriage is really all about children. Society, and therefore government, has a direct and compelling interest in children. They are the future of any society and a society that is not recruiting suitable replacements in sustainable numbers is at best in decline and possibly facing extinction.

Constitutional convention? Supporters of a constitutional amendment to keep the courts from legalizing homosexual marriage, stunned by poor support in the recent Senate vote, are beginning a campaign for a constitutional convention.

Bait and switch: Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) was one of the few who actually talked about the Marriage Protection Amendment itself. He called any vote for the amendment "a vote for bigotry, pure and simple." Well, that's pretty straightforward. If Mr. Kennedy is correct, then about half the Senate, the president of the United States, the Pope, Billy Graham, the late Mother Teresa, Franklin Roosevelt, the Founding Fathers and a majority of the U.S. electorate are or were drooling, raving hatemongers.

Eleven States Vote to Ban Same-sex Marriage. In a resounding, coast-to-coast rejection of gay marriage, voters in 11 states approved constitutional amendments [on Election Day] limiting marriage to one man and one woman. The bans won by a margin of 3 to 1 in Kentucky and Georgia, 3 to 2 in Ohio, and 6 to 1 in Mississippi.

Alaska legislators balk on same-sex benefits. The state Legislature decided Monday [11/20/2006] to flout a court order to provide health insurance for gay partners of state employees. Now it remains to be seen what effect, if any, the legislation will have.

[Just a reminder: The legislature is supposed to make laws, not the courts.]

Gay-marriage ban coasts. Texans voted overwhelmingly Tuesday [11/8/2005] to bolster the state's ban on same-sex marriage by writing it into the state constitution, rejecting concerns that the broadly worded amendment could go much further than intended.

Alabama: 'No' to gay unions. Voters overwhelmingly approved a measure banning gay marriage, making Alabama the 20th state to amend its constitution to keep same-sex couples from the altar. With 99 percent of precincts reporting, the amendment was favored by 81 percent, or 735,057 voters, and opposed by 19 percent, or 169,777. Forty-five states, including Indiana, have specifically barred same-sex marriage through statutes or constitutional amendments.

Alabama Voters Endorse Ban on Gay Marriage. Alabama voters … overwhelmingly endorsed a ban on gay marriage Tuesday [6/7/2006], giving it 81 percent approval.

On June 7, 2006, Alabama voters approved this law, but the event received almost no coverage in the mainstream media. Of course, there are many other examples of suppressed news.

Judge strikes down Georgia ban on gay marriage. A judge has struck down Georgia's ban on same-sex marriages, saying a measure overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2004 violated a provision of the state constitution that limits ballot questions to a single subject. The ruling by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell had been eagerly awaited by gay-rights supporters who filed the court challenge in November 2004, soon after the constitutional ban was approved.

[This is typical leftist strategy: If you can't win at the ballot box, run to the courtroom.]

Georgia to appeal gay marriage ban ruling. Georgia will appeal a judge's ruling that struck down its voter-approved ban on gay marriage, and the governor said Wednesday he will call a special legislative session if the state Supreme Court doesn't rule on the issue soon. "I think the people spoke overwhelmingly. I think the people of Georgia knew exactly what they were voting for," Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue said.

Same-sex amendment? Those who wish to make a libertarian point against the amendment currently proposed have got to grope for appropriate language, which doesn't come readily to mind. Because the point at issue has to do not exclusively with connubial relations, but with the sanctions that are visited by the state on connubial unions.

Conservative Groups Boycott Ford After All. "Ford has every right to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to groups promoting homosexual marriage. But those who oppose homosexual marriage have every right not to buy automobiles made by Ford Motor Company," said the American Family Association, which has reinstated its boycott against the car-maker. AFA Founder and Chairman Don Wildmon says the year-long boycott will commence because Ford has backed out of a deal to avoid supporting the homosexual agenda.

Update:
Support for homosexual agenda remaining 'Ford tough'. Ford Motor Company has signed on as a major sponsor of the 2007 national convention for Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). Family advocates — among them a group boycotting the automaker and an individual soon to speak at Ford's annual shareholders meeting — say it is just one of many moves by Ford in its ongoing support of homosexual activism.

Southwest Airlines stands by sponsorship of DC 'homosexual pride' event. Southwest Airlines is defending its recent sponsorship of a homosexual pride celebration in Washington, DC, last weekend. The airline says it has no regrets about its decision.

Bringing the church to its knees. We live in interesting times when the Catholic Church has to defend its doctrinal beliefs regarding the adoption of children against those who insist that the church adjust its policies to reflect the preferences of gays and lesbians.

No out-of-state gay marriages in Massachusetts. The state's highest court ruled Thursday [3/30/2006] that same-sex couples from other states cannot legally marry in Massachusetts.

House rejects gay marriage ban amendment. The House rejected a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage on Tuesday [7/18/2006], a setback that conservatives hope to turn to their advantage in the fall elections.

Polygamy next in line? The argument proponents of same-sex "marriage" most fear in the coming debate on the Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA), and are doing their best to ignore or discount, is that legalized polygamous marriage is next if society accepts same-sex "marriages" as legitimate and legal.

Once same-sex marriage is OK, polygamy's next. The Minnesota Legislature is considering proposing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Many opponents claim that definition is antiquated and discriminatory. A committed relationship should be the only criterion for marriage, they say. But wait. What if a person loves two people, or three or more?

Blurring the lines. In an essay 10 years ago, I pointed out that it is utterly logical for polygamy rights to follow gay rights. After all, if traditional marriage is defined as the union of (1) two people of (2) opposite gender, and if, as advocates of gay marriage insist, the gender requirement is nothing but prejudice, exclusion and an arbitrary denial of one's autonomous choices in love, then the first requirement — the number restriction (two and only two) — is a similarly arbitrary, discriminatory and indefensible denial of individual choice.

Matrimonial multiplication. When social conservatives argue legalizing same-sex "marriage" could lead to legalized polygamy, same-sex "marriage" advocates either laugh or sneer. It's a scare tactic, they say. It'll never happen. … Wrong. In these politically correct times, do-gooders expand definitions until words — or institutions — lose all meaning. Marriage can mean what you want it to mean. And if you don't prosecute all crimes in a category, you can't prosecute one.

"The goal of the radical homosexual agenda is to eliminate any and all laws regulating consensual sexual conduct. This would mean the elimination of laws banning polygamy as well as those that ban sex between adults and minors."
- Mathew D. Staver,
President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel

The Editor says...
Let's hit the high beams and look even further down the road.

The Slippery Slope of Same-Sex "Marriage": Homosexual "marriage" proponents categorically reject the definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. So does a Missouri man who wants to marry his horse. Instead, the sole criterion for marriage becomes the presence of "love" and "mutual commitment." But once marriage is no longer confined to a man and a woman, it is impossible to exclude virtually any relationship between two or more partners of either sex — even non-human "partners."

Protests greet UK's first gay unions. Lesbian couple Shannon Sickels and Grainne Close became the first gay couple to be "married" in the UK, sparking protests outside Belfast City Hall.

Omaha stakes: Last Thursday [5/12/2005], a federal judge in Omaha overturned Nebraska's constitutional amendment that banned same-sex "marriage." And the press reaction to the story was muted. Why? Because this decision proves that we and other critics of the courts and advocates for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex "marriage" have been right all along.

The Reporters Who Didn't Bark. There's a reason that the media hasn't asked national Democrats what they think about California's same-sex marriage bill. The media knows this is an issue of intense interest across the political spectrum. The mainstream media also knows that every single time the question of same-sex marriage has been submitted directly to the voters, it has been overwhelming rejected.

Gay agenda means less freedom for all. The latest Gallup polling on attitudes regarding same-sex marriage shows a trend that should concern conservatives as well as all Americans.

NEA will promote homosexual, polygamous marriages to students. Our talking points as conservatives on the problems with same sex marriage should ALWAYS include the effect on what every student will be forced to learn: "When I grow up, I can marry a man or a woman." (Or two, or three?)

AFL-CIO Promotes Homosexual "Marriage". The political activism of labor unions is growing, and drifting far from labor issues. Recently it was learned that the AFL-CIO has endorsed and is using member dues to promote homosexual "marriage."

Sodomy Decision is a "Battering Ram" in the Hands of Homosexual Activists. Family values activist Gary Bauer calls the ruling a "disaster for the pro-family side of America's culture war." He believes homosexual activists will use this decision to promote same-sex marriages — and that, he says, "will open the floodgates." … "I've argued repeatedly that if we have same-sex marriage, you cannot then constitutionally stop a man who wants to marry three women," he says. "People say that's nuts — but legally, one follows the other."

N.J. ruling on gays may echo at the polls. Same-sex couples in New Jersey must be given all the benefits and rights enjoyed by married men and women, but state lawmakers will have to decide whether they can officially wed, the state's highest court ruled Wednesday. The ruling leaves open the possibility that state lawmakers will follow the lead of Vermont and Connecticut and allow "civil unions."

Same-Sex Marriage: Hijacking the Civil Rights Legacy. The movement to redefine marriage to include same-sex unions has packaged its demands in the rhetoric and images of the civil rights movement. This strategy, though cynical, has enormous strategic utility.

[In other words, the argument is based on a false premise, but it might work!]

Australia invalidates gay-relationship law. Conservative Prime Minister John Howard's federal government has invoked special powers to invalidate a territory's law that had been the first in Australia giving legal recognition to same-sex relationships.

Vermont Inn Sued for Resisting Same-Sex Civil Union Ceremony. Homosexual activists have targeted a small, family-owned inn in Vermont and are threatening its owners with financial ruin if they do not provide planning, resources and accommodation for a same-sex civil union ceremony.

Now that we've voted: When our youth are influenced by the "fairness" argument for gay "marriage," help them understand that matrimonial law is not based on "feelings" or "fairness," but on moral and natural law judgments that marriage is inherently heterosexual, monogamous, fruitful, and permanent.

We the people: In 11 of 11 states, including liberal Oregon, voters by generally huge majorities declared their belief that it should be between a man and a woman. "We the people" clearly are unwilling to bow before the preferences of "we the judges" — and if some judges don't back off from arrogantly trying to write their beliefs into law, their authority is likely to be circumscribed one way or another.

Gay marriage "rights". In all the states where gay marriage was on the ballot [in 2004], the voters voted against it — as they should have. Of all the phony arguments for gay marriage, the phoniest is the argument that it is a matter of equal rights.

Same-Sex "Marriage" Is Not a Civil Right. Without exception, every adult in Maryland already has a right to marry. But everyone also has restrictions on whom they may marry — again, without exception. No one is permitted to marry a child, a close blood relative, a person who is already married, or a person of the same sex. These restrictions apply equally to everyone — there is no discrimination involved.

The marriage newspeak: Back in 2003, a few days after the highest court in Massachusetts unveiled a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, I ventured a prediction. "Sooner than you think, it will become improper to speak of unique sex roles in family life," I wrote.

The sky doesn't fall in a day. The pro-family community has always maintained that the oxymoron of same-sex "marriage" is detrimental to the institutions of marriage and family, harmful to children, and ultimately destructive to our society. Nothing taking place in Massachusetts over the last 15 months or so has altered that prognosis. You see, this debate is really not about "equal rights," as the proponents of homosexual behavior like to frame it, but about redefining marriage, family, and, yes, American culture.

American Family Association boycotts Ford. A conservative Christian group launched a boycott against Ford Motor Co. Tuesday [5/31/2005], saying the second-largest U.S. automaker has given thousands of dollars to gay rights groups, offers benefits to same-sex couples and actively recruits gay employees. "From redefining family to include homosexual marriage, to giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to support homosexual groups and their agenda, to forcing managers to attend diversity training on how to promote the acceptance of homosexuality… Ford leads the way," American Family Association chairman Donald Wildmon said in a statement.

See Ford boycott update above.

For whom the wedding bells toll? Can a child have three legal parents? Should parenthood be routinely determined by something other than biology? Should we extend the right to marriage to same-sex couples? To groups of people? Or should we abolish marriage as a legal institution? Not so long ago, such questions would have been raised only in a science fiction tale. Not anymore.

Why Homosexual "Marriage" is Wrong: It denies the self-evident truth of nature that male and female bodies are designed for and complement each other. Opposite-sex marriage is the natural means by which the human race reproduces.
AIDS, gonorrhea, genital herpes, chlamydia, syphillis.
Gay Marriage Quicksand: Nationalizing marriage laws will only grant more power over our lives to the federal government, even if for supposedly conservative ends. A far better approach is for Congress to exercise its existing constitutional power to limit the jurisdiction of federal courts.

How Gay Activists and Liberal Judges Are Trashing Democracy to Redefine Marriage: Peter Sprigg explains that a Constitutional amendment on marriage is a certainty — the only question is whether it will come from arrogant judges who will write into that document "rights" that the Founding Fathers could never have imagined, or from those who are determined to protect our most fundamental institution.

Facts and consequences of the homosexual lifestyle: The Red Cross has a blood donor policy which rejects blood from men who've had sex with other men because of the high probability of HIV infection. But that reason isn't good enough for the people who care more about the success of the gay agenda than they do about the health of the American public. And if homosexuals meet their goals of obtaining protected class status and the right to marry, it will soon become national policy to ban any sort of discrimination against them, putting the lives of Americans at risk. The truth is, if we let this train leave the station, the fight over our blood supply will be just one car in a long train of problems created by same-sex "marriage."

Gay marriage? A secular world that ratifies homosexual marriage would provide a legal foundation that would open the floodgates to civil litigation against religious leaders, institutions and worshipers. In such an environment, churches might be sued for declining to provide their sanctuaries for gay marriages, for example. Ministers could be sued for hate speech for giving a sermon on moral behavior. Churches that protest homosexual unions could face revocation of their tax exemption status. It's ironic that those who oppose churches' involvement in state concerns nonetheless have no compunction when it comes to the state dictating what churches can do.

Dr. Dobson Calls for Procter & Gamble Boycott. Focus on the Family founder and chairman Dr. James C. Dobson will urge listeners to his internationally syndicated radio show on Thursday to boycott two of the best-known products in the Procter & Gamble line in response to the company's tacit endorsement of gay marriage.

State of the Unions: Amending the Constitution is serious business. There's a reason it's been done only 27 times over the last two centuries. But a 28th amendment may not be far off. Lawmakers will vote soon on whether to consider a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as the legal union between one man and one woman.

An amendment to stop moral decay. The gay marriage issue has struck a nerve in the black community and may well mark the beginning of a sea change in black voting behavior. Pastors who have voted Democratic all their lives have told me and others that this issue has lead them out of the Democratic Party.

CBS Television Markets "Gay" Marriage to America. The proof of network bias lies in the huge difference between what was said in this interview and what ended up on the air. It is a case of blatant censorship!

San Francisco Mayor Permanently Ordered to Stop Issuing Same-Sex Marriage Licenses.

Homosexual Marriage: A Slippery Slope? I disagree that society's march toward sanctioning homosexual marriage represents enlightened thinking. I also strongly reject the notion that our movement in this direction is no big deal.

Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples: Are homosexual households simply another variant of human relationships that should be considered, along with marriage, as "part of mainstream American society"? On the contrary, the evidence indicates that "committed" homosexual relationships are radically different from married couples in several key respects. This paper presents evidence from gay activists themselves indicating that behind the push for gay marriage lies a political agenda to radically change the institution of marriage itself.

Principles Which Guide AFA's Opposition to the Homosexual Agenda: [#6] The homosexual movement's promotion of same-sex marriage undermines the God-ordained institution of marriage and family which is the foundation of all societies.

We Must Take a Stand for the Federal Marriage Amendment. The family has never faced a graver threat than the push for homosexual marriage. And there is no time to waste in doing our part to protect the family from this danger.

A Shotgun Amendment: For thousands of years, every society, and every major religious faith, has held that marriage is a unique relationship by which one man and one woman are joined together for the primary purpose of forming and maintaining a family. Then along came the Massachusetts Supreme Court.

The end of the gay-marriage debate? The fundamental building block of civilization is about to undergo a radical change — a change not only unsupported by a clear consensus, but opposed by a majority of American adults.

Marriage Massachusetts-style: The Old Testament Book of Judges — part of a wisdom and truth long discarded by the "In Dow Jones we trust" crowd — said it best: "In those days there were no kings and everyone did what was right in his own eyes." Once that shift has taken place in sufficient numbers, once we become indifferent to immutable truths, the floodtide is not a matter of if but when.

Are children of gay parents worse off other children? As same sex couples line up for marriage licenses in Massachusetts, the question achieves greater urgency.

Massachusetts Supreme Court abolishes capitalism! Last week, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court discovered that the state constitution — written in 1780 — requires the state to allow gay marriages. The court gave the legislature six months to rewrite the law to comply with the heretofore unnoticed gay marriage provision in a 223-year-old constitution….

Who supports same-sex marriage? There is nothing in mainstream Christianity or Judaism that supports same-sex marriage. There is nothing biblically supportive — and there is much biblically opposed — and there was not one major religious leader or thinker in Jewish or Christian history prior to the present generation who argued for same-sex marriage.

Marriage Defender Says Homosexual Push Could Destroy Traditional Marriage. William Murray says Scandinavia has had nearly a decade of legal homosexual marriage, and it has nearly destroyed the institution of marriage altogether.

The beginning of the end for America? To redefine marriage — the very core of what we know as family — is to wreak havoc on every other institution that holds our country together.

What Activists and the Leftist Media Don't Tell Us About "Domestic Partnerships": Those who claim that "gay marriage" won't endanger heterosexual marriage are the same people who insist that a prayer in school will traumatize their children. Both issues have a great impact on society.

Top 10 Reasons to Support the Marriage Affirmation and Protection Amendment: Reason #1 — The people oppose same-sex marriage. This is a government by the people, for the people.

"Gay Marriage" Is Not Only Wrong; It's Socially Destructive. Facts contradict the claim that redefining the institution would harm no one.

"Gay marriage" is not about "rights". Proponents of traditional values are making a tactical error in allowing the homosexual lobby to frame the issue of same-sex marriage merely as one of equal rights for gays. Much more is at stake.

How same-sex marriage threatens liberty: The 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status given to thousands of churches, nursing homes, schools, ministries, universities and radio stations may be at risk if an organization "discriminates" against a legally protected status, such as same-sex marriage.

What's Wrong With Letting Same-Sex Couples "Marry?" Marriage is not a creation of the law. Marriage is a fundamental human institution that predates the law and the Constitution. At its heart, it is an anthropological and sociological reality, not a legal one. Laws relating to marriage merely recognize and regulate an institution that already exists.

Preserving Marriage, Saving Society. In 2004, homosexual activists have strategically skipped the public square. They have instead pushed their agenda of legalizing same-sex "marriage" to the judiciary because there, no public debate is required in order to achieve the silver bullet they desire — a court-mandated shift in public policy.

Unequal Rights: We hear a lot about "equal rights" in the debate over homosexuality and marriage. But these supposed "equal rights" are really nothing but "special rights."

Study finds gay unions are brief. A recent study on homosexual relationships finds they last 1-1/2 years on average — even as homosexual groups are pushing nationwide to legalize same-sex "marriages."

"Civil Unions" Bill Shelved Due to Grass Roots Pressure: After pro-family groups organized numerous rallies, phone calls, radio shows, and ads targeting the districts of moderate assemblymen, the author of AB 1338, the bill to legalize "civil unions, announced he would table the bill for future consideration.

The War Against the Family: The new pagans take particular offense to the concept of the traditional Christian home. Redefining the family is a major priority as is destroying the traditional Christian concept of the home.

Doing Your Own Thing: Why Same-Sex "Marriage" Undermines Family Stability. If we define marriage as "whatever the adults want," the result is harm for children, society, and for the consenting adults. This the advocates of gay "marriage" refuse to concede.

Salvation Army to Lose Funding Over Domestic Partner Flap: The Salvation Army of Portland, Maine, is about to lose $60,000 in annual local government funding for refusing to provide health care benefits to the domestic partners of its homosexual employees.

Update:
Salvation Army Targeted Again Over "Domestic Partner" Issue: The well-known charitable agency stands to lose $60,000 in annual government funding because it refuses to provide health-care benefits to the domestic partners of its homosexual employees.

California homosexual bills challenged: Saying the governor is circumventing the will of the voters, California legislative and legal watchdog groups are planning a counter-attack in the wake of Gov. Gray Davis' recent signing of a bill granting to homosexuals a dozen rights traditionally associated with marriage.

Jump to The Boy Scouts vs Political Correctness
Back to News from the Culture War
Back to the Home page

"Do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor [the] covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."
- I Corinthians 6:9-10