Tag Archive for: marriage

Should Justices Kagan and Ginsburg Recuse themselves from the Same-Sex Marriage case?

/in , , , /by

Last Friday afternoon (January 16), the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the 6th Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in DeBoer v. Snyder and three other cases which upheld state laws defining marriage exclusively as the union of one man and one woman.  The 6th Circuit Court’s DeBoerdecision upheld laws preserving traditional marriage in Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee and Kentucky.  Written by Judge Jeffrey Sutton, the DeBoer decision was the only one of five court of appeals decisions which upheld the vote of citizens on traditional marriage.

Title 28, Section 455 of the United States Code states “any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

The Supreme Court of the United States could decide in its upcoming term whether same-sex couples nationwide have the right to marry under the Constitution.

Should Justices Elana Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg properly and legally recuse themselves from these cases because they have personally performed same-sex wedding ceremonies and demonstrated their partiality? That is a question those involved in the case are asking.

ginsberg same sex marriage

Justice Ginsberg conducting same-sex marriage. The first Supreme Court Justice to do so.

Justice Kagan performed a September 21st, 2014 same-sex marriage for her former law clerk and his partner Patrick Pearsall in Maryland. Justice Ginsburg performed a same-sex marriage at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. in August 2013.

The American Family Association notes, “Both of these justices’ personal and private actions actively endorsing gay marriage clearly indicate how they would vote on same-sex marriage cases before the Supreme Court. Both Kagan and Ginsburg have not only been partial to same-sex marriage, they have proven themselves to be activists in favor of it!”

The Daily Signals’ Genevieve Wood writes, “Now, I take issue with [President of Everytown for Gun Safety] John Feinblatt’s statement that ‘the majority of the public’ in individual states supports same-sex marriage. Just consider that in the 34 states that have put it on the ballot, voters in 31 of those states voted to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.  Only three states went the opposite way.  The redefinition of marriage is being forced on the public via judicial fiats, not voters at the ballot box.”

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a friend of the court brief (amicus brief) supporting traditional marriage in the 6th Circuit’s DeBoer case on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders (Coalition).

Richard Thompson, the TMLC’s president and Chief Counsel, commented, “The 6th Circuit was the only Court of Appeals that sustained the will of the people expressed by their overwhelming votes in favor of traditional marriage.  And if the Supreme Court strikes down these state laws defining traditional marriage, it will be the worst example of judicial activism since Roe v. Wade.  It will lead to further persecution of Christians who oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds, and over time, the ultimate the demise of marriage and Western civilization as we know it.”

Continued Thompson, “The notion of same-sex marriage has been foisted on our culture by well-planned and executed public relations campaigns and the tremendous influence of militant homosexual activists in the news media, entertainment industry and most of academia.”

Aside from its briefs in the DeBoer case at both the appellate and Supreme Court level, the TMLC has played a prominent role in the defense of traditional marriage.  It was instrumental in crafting the language of Michigan’s constitutional amendment defending traditional marriage which was passed by fifty-nine percent of Michigan voters.  The other states covered by the 6th Circuit’s DeBoer decision passed their laws defining traditional marriage by overwhelming votes, as well: Kentucky by seventy-four percent, Ohio by sixty-two percent, and Tennessee by eighty percent.  Moreover, the TMLC has filed amicus briefs on behalf of the Coalition in support of traditional marriage in several other federal appellate courts across the country.

Will the Court be willing to nullify thousand of same-sex marriages in states where courts have already allowed it?  The language of the Supreme Court’s order granting review has caused a great deal of speculation on what the court will do.  The order specifically limited the argument to two issues: “1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? 2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state?”

The Justices will hear oral arguments in the case in April 2015, and render their decision before by the end of June 2015.  The Court has allotted a total of two and half hours for oral arguments.  Many Court observers have opined that the Court decided to hear the case as a clear sign there are enough votes in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage in all states.  However, to render that kind of decision, the court would have to find that a state has no rational basis for their laws defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman.  Whatever the final outcome, it will likely be a 5-4 decision with Justice Kennedy as the swing vote.

In 2014, TMLC launched a national strategy to defend traditional marriage and formed a legal team headed by senior trial counsel Erin Mersino and co-counsels William R. Wagner and John S. Kane of Lansing, MI as part of an effort to stem the onslaught of federal cases overturning the definition of traditional marriage that were passed by overwhelming majorities of voters.

TMLC’s legal team has worked extensively to file legal briefs on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders in significant cases dealing with same-sex marriage. One of the purposes of these briefs is to negate the homosexual community’s fallacious argument that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is the same as racial discrimination. To date, TMLC has filed four briefs with the Supreme Court, as well as with the 5th and 6th Circuit Courts in support of traditional marriage.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Former Federal Judge Says: “U.S. Supreme Court Justices who Performed Same Sex Marriages Should Recuse or Be Impeached”

Roy Moore: Two U.S. Supreme Court Justices Should Abstain from Gay Marriage Vote

EDITORS NOTE: For those readers interested in sending an email on this issue their members of Congress may click here.

Founder of Human Rights Campaign Indicted for Raping a 15-year old Boy

/in , , , , /by

Terrence Patrick Bean, pictured above with President Obama, founded the “Human Rights Campaign” (HRC). Bean is a Democrat. Bean is a bundler for Barack Obama and the DNC. Bean is a homosexual. Bean is a pederast. Bean has been indicted by an Oregon Grand Jury for raping a 15-year old boy. Bean’s boyfriend Kiah Ley Lawson, has been arrested for sexually molesting the same boy.

The Human Rights Campaign has been working to bring the homosexual lifestyle into K-12 public schools. HRC is working to have marriage amendments passed by a majority of voters in states like Florida overturned in the name of “marriage equality.” HRC is built upon a homosexual agenda that seeks to redefine not only marriage but sexuality itself. HRC’s leader is a radical homosexual who’s work with Democrats has helped to destroy the family structure by destroying the institution of marriage as between one man and one woman raising their biological children.

Bean is going to be tried for the crime of pederasty, the rape and violation of an under age boy by an older man.

Bean has been the poster child for and remains a hero of the radical homosexual movement.

bean-lawson

Homosexual Terrence Patrick Bean (left) mugshot. Kiah Loy Lawson (right) is Bean’s boy friend and has been accused of raping the same 15-year old boy. Photo: Multnomah County Detention Center.

The Oregonian reports:

Detectives from the Portland police Sex Crimes Unit arrested Portland developer Terrence Patrick Bean on Wednesday on a Lane County indictment stemming from alleged sex abuse involving a teenage boy in 2013.

Bean, 66, a prominent gay rights activist and major Democratic Party fundraiser, was arrested at his home in Southwest Portland and booked into the Multnomah County Detention Center at 10:12 a.m.

The indictment charges Bean with two counts of third-degree sodomy, a felony, and one count of third-degree sex abuse, a misdemeanor, police said.

Bean, who bailed out of jail by late Wednesday afternoon, will be arraigned on the indictment in Lane County. …

The alleged incident involved a sexual encounter in Eugene with a 15-year-old boy. …

Bean has been one of the state’s biggest Democratic donors and an influential figure in gay rights circles in the state. He helped found two major national political groups, the Human Rights Campaign and the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, and has been a major contributor for several Democratic presidential candidates, including Barack Obama. He’s also a close friend of former Gov. Barbara Roberts. …

Bean’s Flickr account shows him talking with Obama at several events, posing with first lady Michelle Obama and numerous other political figures, including former President Bill Clinton.  A blog post from his sister, Sue Surdam Bean, detailed her brother’s work on a July 24, 2012 Obama fundraiser in Portland.  She included three photos of Terry Bean’s ride on Air Force One with Obama to a subsequent event in Seattle.

Just two years ago 68 year old Harry Brinkin, another high profile and similarly respected (at least among Democrats) homosexual activist, was arrested in San Francisco for possessing and distributing reams of child pornography.

LarryBrinklin mugshot

Homosexual Larry Brinklin mugshot.

CNS News Reported at the time:

Police said that Brinkin, a former city employee, apparently had photos of children, as young as 1- or  2-years-old, performing sexual acts and being sodomized by adult men in attachments linked to the email address, reported The Chronicle. The email account was also linked to Yahoo discussion groups involving sexual exploitation of young people.

Concerning Brinkin, Theresa Sparks, director of the Human Rights Commission, told the Huffington Post, “It’s almost incredulous, there’s no way I could believe such a thing.”

“He’s always been one of my heroes, and he’s the epitome of human rights activist,” she said. “This is [the] man who coined phrases we use in our daily language. I support Larry 100 percent; hopefully it will all come out in the investigation.”

Read more here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Shhhhh – Top Obama bundler accused of child rape – USA Today

Lane County grand jury indicts prominent gay rights activist Terrence Bean in 2013 case involving a 15-year-old boy

Former boyfriend of Democratic fundraiser Terry Bean arrested on sex abuse indictment

‘Historic’ Sixth Circuit Ruling Upholds Marriage Amendment

/in , , , , /by

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) played an instrumental role in a ruling issued late yesterday afternoon in which the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decided to preserve traditional marriage, stopping the homosexual juggernaut that had been sweeping the nation. In its 2-1 decision, the Sixth Circuit upheld marriage laws from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee.  Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote the opinion joined by Judge Deborah Cook.“Historic” Sixth Circuit Ruling Defers to the People; Upholds Marriage Amendment Crafted by the Thomas More Law Center

The Thomas More Law Center played a significant role in crafting Michigan’s constitutional amendment upheld by the Court.  TMLC also filed an amicus brief (friend of the court brief) on behalf of a Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian leaders supporting traditional marriage.

Responding to yesterday’s ruling, Richard Thompson, TMLC’s President and Chief Counsel commented, “This opinion is an historic and elegant defense of the principle of judicial restraint and deference to democracy and the voice of the people. It could well become the catalyst for the US Supreme Court to finally take-up the issue as well as the basis of an ultimate Supreme Court decision to allow the individual states to decide the definition of marriage.”

The Sixth Circuit ruled that laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman were constitutional, even in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last year in U.S. v. Windsor, which struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”).  The Sixth Circuit held that deference must be given to the individual states to regulate marriage, and that defining marriage between a man and a woman—as it has been for “thousands of years,” “span[ning] almost every society in history”—is a constitutional and rational act of the states.

TMLC played an intricate part in this crucial victory.  In 2004, TMLC crafted the Michigan Marriage Amendment which was upheld by yesterday’s decision.    TMLC cautiously ensured that the Marriage Amendment served no discriminatory purpose and explained its reasoning in the amendment itself, stating:

To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.

Mich. Const. Art. I, § 25.

Michigan’s Marriage Amendment was passed by fifty- nine percent of Michigan’s voters.  Supporters of “homosexual marriage” have not tried to pass their own legislation through the usual channels of democracy, but have tried to use judges to bypass the ballot box. Their strategy has proven successful in several courts across the county. It failed in the Sixth Circuit.

Instrumental to the Sixth Circuit’s decision was TMLC’s amicus brief that provided a full legal analysis explaining why marriage amendments that protect traditional marriage are constitutional.  The brief was submitted as part of TMLC’s national strategy to defend laws protecting traditional marriage and to enlighten courts on why traditional marriage is the only sound response to the approximately 90 cases filed in the past year by pro-homosexual activists.  TMLC has filed several briefs nationally as an answer to this assault on Christianity and traditional family values.

TMLC’s amicus brief was filed on behalf of a Coalition of African-American pastors and Christian leaders to reflect the voice of a majority of African-Americans that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is not the same thing as racial discrimination and that tradition and morality should not be discarded as a basis of the law as the pro-homosexual judges have done in their opinions.

A legal team consisting of TMLC’s senior trial counsel, Erin Mersino, and Co-counsels William R. Wagner and John S. Kane of Lansing, MI, has been filing briefs in significant cases dealing with traditional marriage.

Coalition member, Pastor Danny Holliday of Victory Baptist Church, of Alton, Illinois reacted to yesterday’s ruling, “I am grateful to God because the Sixth Circuit overturned the decisions, concluding the definition of marriage should be left to the voters — not judges — and that voters should be allowed to decide whether gay marriage is a good idea or not.”

Coalition member, Minister Stacy Swimp, of Greater Bibleway Temple, stated, “I thank God that the U.S. 6th Circuit Court has lived up to its appointed responsibility to interpret law rather than create new laws. The ruling is indeed a major victory for traditional marriage and a strong affirmation of our nation’s Judeo Christian values and culture.”

Janet Boynes, another Coalition member reacted, “This is a great victory for those of us who believe in the sanctity of marriage, but we know the fight isn’t over. We pray for Circuit Judge Jeffrey Sutton and his family as they might have to face the rage of those with opposing views.

The Sixth Circuit adopted many of TMLC’s legal arguments including its point of view that preservation of our Nation’s tradition and morality should not be replaced with the trendy, moral relativism of only the last decade.  The brief states, “Some truths are self-evident. Among them are that men and women are different. In fact, it is clear from our very existence that men are made for women, and women for men. None of us would be here but for that truth. Another self-evident truth is that it is best for children to be raised by their parents whenever possible. There have been many theories to the contrary throughout history, but they have all proven vacuous at best. Public policy that recognizes and acts on these truths is not unfairly discriminatory. In fact, the only way to have sound public policy is to build on such truths.”

Click here to read the Court’s Opinion

Judge Upholds Tennessee Marriage Amendment by Bethany Monk

/in /by

A state judge in Tennessee ruled in favor of the voter-approved constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. This is the first time a judge has upheld such an amendment since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June 2013.

The Tennessee case involves two men who obtained a marriage license in Iowa four years ago. The couple is now seeking a divorce in Tennessee.

simmons_russell_e

Roane County Circuit Judge Russell E. Simmons

In the decision, Roane County Circuit Judge Russell E. Simmons “rejected the idea that the Windsor decision undercut state authority,” Supreme Court reporter Lyle Dennison wrote on ScotusBlog.com.

Though the ruling applies only to this couple, it’s still notable.

“The value of this decision is in being able to counter the Left’s boasting that same-sex marriage is a ‘done deal’ in the courts. It’s not,” said Focus on the Family Judicial Analyst Bruce Hausknecht. “And if the recent oral arguments in the 6th Circuit cases involving marriage amendments — of Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio and Michigan — provide any clues as to that court’s upcoming decision, it looks like those states’ right to define marriage as one-man, one-woman could receive a huge judicial boost as well.”

A similar case has been heard at the Texas Supreme Court. A decision has not been issued. Jonathan Saenz, president of Texas Values, applauds Simmons for respecting marriage.

“The federal government and activist judges have no authority to redefine marriage in Tennessee, Texas, or any other state,” he explained. “It should continue to be a state’s right to recognize the ‘best definition of marriage’ and affirm the unique good that a mom and dad play in a child’s life. We will continue to proudly stand for what’s right, no matter how hard the federal government and the out-of-control judiciary tries to redefine marriage against the will of the people and states.”

Hausknecht agrees.

“The definition of marriage is a state issue, as Justice Kennedy told us in last summer’sWindsor decision,” he said. “It’s time that the courts took him at his word.”

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Read the decision in Borman v. Borman.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Citizen Link.

Why is natural marriage good?

/in , , , , , /by

Natural is better than unnatural, right? Frank Turek in his op-ed titled “Natural Marriage is Not Bigotry, It’s Biology” writes:

The real reason governments have an interest in promoting natural marriage because only natural marriage perpetuates and stabilizes society. Strong marriage laws encourage men and women to procreate and then stay together to mother and father their children. That benefits children and all of society because children raised in biological two-parent homes tend to do better and cause society much less trouble than children raised in other situations.

Why is this so? Because men and women are different. Mothering and fathering are different. A mother brings unique benefits to her child that a father cannot provide and vice versa.

Here is my simple and powerful case for marriage the way nature intended.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/ZR_Bb8IPZHI[/youtube]

Florida Senator Marco Rubio gives defining pro-family, pro-straight and pro-American speech

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has taken on social issues in a major speech given at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. Senator Rubio is taking the high ground on issues that are important to the majority of Americans.

In “Strong Values for a Strong America” Rubio states, “A strong America is not possible without strong Americans – a people formed by the values necessary for success, the values of education and hard work, strong marriages and empowered parents. These are values that made us the greatest nation ever, and these are the values that will lead us to a future even better than our past.”

Rubio notes, “No one is born with the values crucial to the success sequence. They have to be taught to us and they have to be reinforced. Strong families are the primary and most effective teachers of these values. As the social philosopher Michael Novak once said, the family is the original and best department of health, education and welfare. It is crucial in developing the character of the young. And those efforts can be reinforced in our schools, religious institutions, civic groups and our society.”

Rubio comes out strong as the pro-family, pro-straight and pro-American candidate for President in 2016. Immediately after his speech Rubio was attacked for the following statement:

Now, I know that given the current cultural debates in our country, many expect that a speech on values would necessarily touch upon issues like same sex marriage and abortion. These are important issues and they relate to deeply held beliefs and deeply divisive ideas.

We should acknowledge that our history is marred by discrimination against gays and lesbians. There was once a time when the federal government not only banned the hiring of gay employees, it required private contractors to identify and fire them. Some laws prohibited gays from being served in bars and restaurants. And many cities carried out law enforcement efforts targeting gay Americans.

Fortunately, we have come a long way since then. But many committed gay and lesbian couples feel humiliated by the law’s failure to recognize their relationship as a marriage. And supporters of same sex marriage argue that laws banning same sex marriage are discrimination.

I respect their arguments. And I would concede that they pose a legitimate question for lawmakers and for society.

But there is another side of debate. Thousands of years of human history have shown that the ideal setting for children to grow up is with a mother and a father committed to one another, living together, and sharing the responsibility of raising their children. And since traditional marriage has such an extraordinary record of success at raising children into strong and successful adults, states in our country have long elevated this institution and set it apart in our laws.

That is the definition of marriage that I personally support – not because I seek to discriminate against people who love someone of the same sex, but because I believe that the union of one man and one woman is a special relationship that has proven to be of great benefit to our society, our nation and our people, and therefore deserves to be elevated in our laws.

Watch the YouTube video of Rubio’s speech:

Read the full text of Rubio’s speech here.

In Florida 1 million Christians either did not register or did not vote in the 2010 general election. Obama won Florida by less than 80,000 votes. Perhaps Rubio is on to something?

When tolerance becomes a one-way street it leads to at best religious intolerance and at its worst social suicide. Rubio has taken the moral high ground.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Straight White Guy’ Festival Outrages Same-Sex Marriage Supporters

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of  M.Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO.

Florida Appeals Court says “NO” to homosexual “marriage” licenses in the state.

/in , , , , /by

The Christian Family Coalition (CFC) Florida reports that the Florida Democratic League (FDL), and People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality (PULSE), two parties in the homosexual so-called “marriage” lawsuit,  filed more than 6,000 signatures with Miami-Dade County Clerk Harvey Ruvin calling on Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Sarah Zabel to dismiss the pending discriminatory lawsuit.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

“In a nation of laws, no one can be above the law. What law gives Plaintiffs the right to arbitrarily,  declare a personal behavioral choice, be it sexual or otherwise, a constitutional “right,” and then file a sham lawsuit to force the rest of society to accept it as such?, said Florida Democratic League Chairman Dr. Eladio Jose Armesto.

“Six days ago, Monroe Circuit Judge Luis Garcia shocked voters when he arrogantly trashed the votes of nearly 8 million Floridians. The backlash to that corrupt decision was so great that over the last six days more than 6,000 Miami-Dade residents  signed a letter to Judge Zabel calling on her to dismiss this discriminatory lawsuit”, stated People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality (PULSE) Executive Director Nathaniel Wilcox.

“Undoubtedly, there is a growing backlash to the homosexual so-called ‘marriage’ lawsuit in Miami-Dade when 6,000 of those who elected Judge Zabel signed a letter in just days asking for the sham lawsuit’s dismissal. This is evidence of the growing anti-corruption backlash taking place”, concludes Anthony Verdugo, Founder and Executive Director, Christian Family Coalition (CFC) Florida.

Intolerance Florida Style: In any War of Ideas support the Civilized man (or woman)

/in , , , , /by

When tolerance on any issue becomes a one way street then civil society is at risk. Case in point, tolerance is something that homosexuals demand.

Homosexuals demand that everyone embrace their unhealthy lifestyle as something good and “gay.” They demand schools allow children to access homosexual websites in the name of their “particular needs“. They demand that Christians, Jews and Muslims not follow their religious beliefs and speak out against sodomy. They demand that those who support traditional marriage be singled out and demonized for being intolerant. They demand an “equal right” to marry, when there is none.

This issue is becoming a political hot potato in Florida.

Preserving and Protecting Traditional Marriage is a plank of Republican Party Platform. The What We Believe 2012 Republican Party Platform states, “The institution of marriage is the foundation of civil society. Its success as an institution will determine our success as a nation. It has been proven by both experience and endless social studies that traditional marriage is best for children.”

Fort Lauderdale TEA Party member Danita Kilcullen sent out an email which pointed out that Republican Broward County Commissioner Chip LaMarca and Republican school board candidate Heather Brinkworth, who Governor Rick Scott recently appointed to the Broward County School Board, marched in the gay pride parade in Wilton Manors on June 21, 2014.

Since doing this Kilcullen has been demonized. In an email to Kilcullen, Carolyn Kelly states (WARNING: Graphic language):

Open letter to Danita…

Nice to see after all these years that you have turned into a good “Jesus loving, God fearing compassionate conservative”!! Danita as we get older most of us have figured out that life is too short to worry about this shit! Let everyone live their lives as they choose and if marriage is part of it, gay or straight, hallelujah! Danita your world view is about as small as a grain of sand on the beach…you and your “believers” cannot put the lid back on the can…life moves forward…its not static or going back two-hundred years as you and your tea bag minions would like it to!

Your group of people, the T-party (tea baggers) did not exist until after Obama was elected President…we all can read between the lines on that one, which reads racists and bigots! It is also is readily apparent that tea baggers as a group must be very miserable people by preaching so much hate to the world under the guise of Christianity. I feel sorry for you that you are so unhappy in your personal life that you have to exert this much energy to preach hate from a soapbox everyday of your life. You would like nothing more to bring the rest of us down to your level. Your message that you project is…if you aren’t white and straight please go back to the closet! Sorry Danita that your life so f*****g miserable that your blatant hatred for so many groups of people has not only ruined your life, but most of the people around you.

It turns out Carolyn Kelly used to be David Eckert. Kilcullen writes:

Carolyn Kelly once was David Eckert who married my best friend, Susan Roberts. David also became our best friend during their courtship and Brian & I were best-man/woman at their outdoor wedding on the intracoastal and our son, Julian, 3 or 4 years old was ring bearer. The marriage was troubled from the start and even during their dating period. They divorced and we tried to remain friends with both. Eventually we stopped hearing from David and he would not return phone calls. A couple of years later I got a phone call on my birthday from David saying he was ready to talk to us. We wondered if he might be gay.

The following day when we were supposed to meet him in one of all of our favorite restaurants, Brian came home and said, “Get ready… it’s worse than you can even imagine,” and told me he was wearing lipstick, had long fingernails, etc. I was already in tears on the way to the restaurant and said I could not go in. Brian said just come for as long as you can and we’ll leave when you need to. We walked in and I did not see him. I took a seat in a booth and Brian walked around looking for him. All of a sudden from out of the bar, walking toward me was a 6’2″ long-haired blond in blue jeans and a white, puffy, long-sleeved blouse, carrying a purse. He slid into the booth across from me and I instantly fell apart. He had breasts and obviously had been taking hormones and his voice was higher pitched. He said he had known since he was small (he was adopted). He said he had been receiving counsel for more than a year, that his family had abandoned him and that is what he was told to expect from both family and friends.

Then he told us he would be flying to London for the sex change. I sobbed the entire time we were there. When we left, I knew that David was dead and for me, it really was as if I’d been to a funeral. For two months I cried and grieved. That was our last contact.

Brian continued to try to talk him out of the surgery and had lunch with him a couple of times. Believe me when I tell you he was freak show and I did not want Brian seen with him, even though he was trying desperately to save him.

David had his surgery and until today we have had no contact. But because I fight this issue, he calls me a “hater.” I do not hate him.

There are two kinds of people. The loving and tolerant and the hating and intolerant. From this one email thread I think you can see the stark differences. One is civil, the other a savage. Ayn Rand wrote, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.” In this case support the civilized woman against the savage man, now a woman.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of The Peoples Cube.

Why Black Men Need More White Women

/in , , , , , , /by

Black women constantly complain about the dearth of “eligible” Black men to date and marry. Noted sociologist William Julius Wilson has argued that “the increasing levels of non-marriage and female-headed households is a manifestation of the high levels of economic dislocation experienced by lower-class Black men in recent decades.”

He further argued that, “When joblessness is combined with high rates of incarceration and premature mortality among Black men; it becomes clearer that there are fewer marriageable black men relative to black women who are able to provide the economic support needed to sustain a family.”

Then you add in the unfortunate increase in homosexuality within the Black community and you have a recipe for disaster.

This is why Black men need more White women like Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham. Even though they are conservative media personalities, they have done more to promote the well-being of Black males than many of the very women who stridently complain about the lack of “eligible” Black men.

Coulter is a friend and I find her comments regarding the Black community very insightful. Look at what she said two years ago on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.” She said, “Groups on the left, from feminists to gay rights groups to those defending immigrants, have commandeered the Black civil rights experience.”

She continued, “I think what – the way liberals have treated Blacks like children and many of their policies have been harmful to Blacks, at least they got the beneficiary group right. There is the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow laws. We don’t owe the homeless. We don’t owe feminists. We don’t owe women who are desirous of having abortions, but that’s — or — or gays who want to get married to one another. That’s what civil rights has become for much of the left.”

Stephanopoulos asked, “Immigrant rights are not civil rights?” Coulter responded, “Civil rights are for Blacks…what have we done to immigrants? We owe Black people something…We have a legacy of slavery. Immigrants haven’t even been in this country.”

Earlier this year, she said, “I mean my whole life I’ve heard Republicans hate Black people, I’ve never seen any evidence of it until I read Marco Rubio’s amnesty bill. We are the party that has always stood up for African-Americans. Who gets hurt the most by amnesty, by continuing these immigration policies it is low-wage workers, it is Hispanics, it is Blacks.”

I don’t know Ingraham personally, but I like what she had to say last month about Democrats and Blacks. “

[Congressman] Steve Israel is reprehensible in what he said [on alleged racism in the Republican Party]…Nancy Pelosi, throw her into the ring [for similar comments]…I say this is a race to the bottom…The Democrats have failed the Black youth in this country with their terrible economic approach. Do we call that racist?

“…They turn their heads away from the millions upon millions of Black babies slaughtered in the womb over 10 years… Is that racist?…Is it racist that they allow inner cities to continue to crumble as families decay across the board in America – especially hard hit is African-American families…It is reprehensible and it’s all about November…This is not about ‘They care about Black people.’ They care about their majority eroding away.”

So, let me make sure I understand. Black women complain about the state of “eligible” Black males to date and marry, yet they support the policies of a president who is going to make the problem much worse.

Under Obama, Blacks have regressed on every economic, social and moral indicator that is tracked. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the current Black unemployment rate is 11.6 percent; for Blacks aged 16-19 it is at 36.8 percent.

However, the average Black unemployment rate during the terms of the last three presidents, as well as the average over the past 30 years, are noteworthy. Under Clinton, it was 10 percent; under George W. Bush, 9.3 percent but under Obama, 14 percent for the total time he has been in office. The 30-year average for Blacks is 12.4 percent.

Campaign slogans notwithstanding, this isn’t the kind of change we have been waiting for.

Obama has done more for same-sex marriage couples than he has for his same-race brothers and sisters. In fact, Newsweek dubbed him our first gay president – not for his sexual orientation, but for his relentless pandering to homosexuals.

He has also advocated amnesty for those in this country illegally, which will only continue to increase the unemployment rate in the Black community, especially among low and under-skilled Black workers. This will further decrease the pool of potential Black men for women to date and marry. Let’s face it, our women are not going to marry someone who is unemployed or underemployed.

Historically, Black women have been notoriously protective of their men and children. It is ironic that Coulter and Ingraham, two conservative White women, are now assuming that role. We Black men need more White women like Coulter and Ingraham, not Black women who will give a pass to a failing Black president.

Injustice in the name of Justice!

/in , , , /by
Harvey Ruvin

Harvey Ruvin, Miami-Dade Clerk of Courts.

MIAMI, FL – Today, the Christian Family Coalition Florida (CFCF), Florida’s premier human rights and social justice advocacy organization, denounced Miami-Dade Clerk of Courts, Harvey Ruvin, for deliberately going behind voters backs and secretly withdrawing a motion to abate on the discriminatory anti-voter rights lawsuit seeking to overthrow Florida’s constitutional respect for marriage as one man, one woman.

“Harvey Ruvin has made a grave mistake by failing to discharge his duties as Clerk of the County, under his signed Candidate Oath, he is obligated to support the Constitution of the United States and Constitution of the State of Florida. His actions are unethical and deplorable.”

View Harvey Ruvin’s Candidate Oath here. (See page 2)

Motion to Intervene:

Simultaneously, Liberty Counsel, an international pro-constitutional rights law firm argued for a motion to intervene, that is allowing human rights organizations like People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality (PULSE) and the Florida Democratic League (FDL), to be parties to the case and argue in defense of the eight million voters who cast their ballot in the historic 2008 election which enacted Florida’s constitutional respect for marriage as one man, one woman.

Amazingly, in a brazen display of hypocrisy, homosexual extremists have asked Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Sarah Zabel to DENY marriage advocates their day in court. “We fully expected extremists to try to deny marriage advocates their Constitutional right to equal protection and due process rights to intervene in this discriminatory anti-voter rights lawsuit. You cannot on the one hand, play victim, and claim that your Constitutional rights being denied, then turn right around and ask the very same court, to deny others their Constitutional rights.”

ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN FAMILY COALITION (CFC)

The Christian Family Coalition (CFC) is a widely acclaimed human rights and social justice advocacy organization serving Florida’s children and families for over 10 years. Through its daily community outreach, political education programs, and voter registration, CFC effectively mobilizes thousands of fair-minded voters across the state and actively works with municipal, county, state, and federal elected officials to advance common sense, family-friendly, non-discriminatory values and public policies. The CFC is highly respected for its sought-after, educational voter guides consulted by thousands of houses of worship and their voters all across Florida.

HuffPo labels Florida the “anti-gay state”! Why?

/in , , /by

In May 2013 the Huffington Post reported, “Florida lawmakers let two important LGBT rights bills languish this year, sealing the state’s reputation as an ‘anti-gay state‘ for another 12 months. One bill created a statewide domestic partnership registry, uniting a patchwork of select municipalities that grant health care visitation, among other rights, to same-sex couples.”

FL Senator Nancy Detert, District 28.

State Senator Nancy Detert (R- District 28)  has become the champion for a statewide domestic partnership registry. She was the swing committee vote on CS/SB 196: Domestic Partners.

The Florida gay rights group pushing for the creation of domestic partnership registries is called “Equality Florida“. Equality Florida issues are: Adoption, Discrimination, Family Recognition, Hate Crimes, Student Safety/GSA and Voter Mobilization.

The Student safety issue for Equality Florida is support for the US Department of Education anti-bullying campaign in public schools. CBS reports, “University of Texas at Arlington criminologist Seokjin Jeong analyzed data collected from 7,000 students from all 50 states. He thought the results would be predictable and would show that anti-bullying programs curb bullying. Instead — he found the opposite. Jeong said it was, “A very disappointing and a very surprising thing. Our anti-bullying programs, either intervention or prevention does not work.”

In 2008 the Florida Definition of Marriage, Constitutional Amendment 2 passed by over 61%. The Amendment reads:

This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.

The “substantial equivalent of” are domestic partnership registries say critics.

It is expected domestic partnership registries will come up during the 2014 legislative session. This gives many pause, given what has happened in other states where gay marriage has been instituted. Massachusetts, the first state to adopt gay marriage, is perhaps the best example of how the social fabric, schools, businesses, legal system and culture are fundamentally changed when marriage is redefined.

The below video provided by the pro-family group MassResistance.org provides a historical review of changes and their impact:

EDITORS NOTE: Wikipedia lists states, counties and cities that have instituted domestic partnership registries. The following are those listed for Florida.

  • Broward County (Fort Lauderdale): Residents of the county or at least one partner employed by the county. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Clearwater: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Gainesville: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Key West: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Kissimmee: Employees of the city. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • Leon County: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Miami Beach: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • Miami-Dade County: Residents of the county or at least one partner employed by the county. Both opposite- and same-sex couples. The cities of Miami and South Miami also grant additional benefits to domestic partners registered in Miami-Dade County.
  • Monroe County: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples. County employment benefits only.
  • Orange County: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Orlando: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • Palm Beach County: Residents of the county or at least one partner employed by the county. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • Pinellas County: Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Sarasota: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples. City employment benefits only.
  • City of St. Cloud: Employees of the city. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of St. Petersburg: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Tampa: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of Tavares: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • Volusia County: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.
  • City of West Palm Beach: No residency requirement. Both opposite- and same-sex couples.

Florida Churches changing bylaws after gay marriage ruling

/in , , , , /by

Prophecy News Watch reports:

Worried they could be sued by gay couples, some churches are changing their bylaws to reflect their view that the Bible allows only marriage between one man and one woman.

Although there have been lawsuits against wedding industry businesses that refuse to serve gay couples, attorneys promoting the bylaw changes say they don’t know of any lawsuits against churches.

Critics say the changes are unnecessary, but some churches fear that it’s only a matter of time before one of them is sued.

“I thought marriage was always between one man and one woman, but the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision said no,” said Gregory S. Erwin, an attorney for the Louisiana Baptist Convention, an association of Southern Baptist churches and one several groups advising churches to change their bylaws. “I think it’s better to be prepared because the law is changing. America is changing.”

In a June decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that defined marriage as between a man and a woman for purposes of federal law. A second decision was more technical but essentially ushered in legal gay marriage in California.

Kevin Snider is an attorney with the Pacific Justice Institute, a nonprofit legal defense group that specializes in conservative Christian issues. His organization released a model marriage policy a few years ago in response to a statewide gay marriage fight in California. Snider said some religious leaders have been threatened with lawsuits for declining to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies.

Dean Inserra, head pastor of the 1,000-member City Church Tallahassee, based in Florida, said he does not want to be alarmist, but his church is looking into how best to address the issue.

Inserra said he already has had to say no to gay friends who wanted him to perform a wedding ceremony.

“We have some gay couples that attend our church. What happens when they ask us to do their wedding?” Inserra said. “What happens when we say no? Is it going to be treated like a civil rights thing?”

Critics, including some gay Christian leaders, argue that the changes amount to a solution looking for a problem.

“They seem to be under the impression that there is this huge movement with the goal of forcing them to perform ceremonies that violate their freedom of religion,” said Justin Lee, executive director of the Gay Christian Network, a nonprofit that provides support for gay Christians and their friends and families and encourages churches to be more welcoming.

“If anyone tried to force a church to perform a ceremony against their will, I would be the first person to stand up in that church’s defense.”

Thirteen states and the District of Columbia now recognize gay marriage.

Some Christian denominations, such as the United Church of Christ, accept gay marriage. The Episcopal Church recently approved a blessing for same-sex couples, but each bishop must decide whether to allow the ceremony in his or her local diocese.

Read more.

The Supreme Court’s Marriage Decisions by the Numbers

/in , , , , /by

The following is courtesy of the Heritage Foundation:

The morning after two important—and troubling—Supreme Court decisions in the Proposition 8 and Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) cases, here’s the lay of the land. The important take away: The marriage debate is every bit as live today as it was yesterday morning. Some key numbers following the decisions:

50  The number of states whose marriage laws remain the same after the Court’s marriage decisions.

38  The number of states with laws defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. That includes California and Florida, where the scope of today’s Prop 8 decision beyond the specific plaintiffs will be the subject of ongoing debate and, most likely, further litigation.

12  The number of states that can now force the federal government to recognize their redefinition of marriage. The Court struck Section 3 of DOMA, which means that it must recognize same-sex marriages in states that redefine marriage.

1  The number of sections of the Defense of Marriage Act struck down yesterday (Section 3). Section 2, which ensures that no state will be forced to recognize another state’s redefinition of marriage, is still law.

0  The number of states forced to recognize other states’ redefinition of marriage.

Ryan Anderson discusses what the Supreme Court did in its marriage decisions—but why the proponents of same-sex marriage failed to achieve their goal of a court-imposed nationwide redefinition.

The important news you may not be hearing is that the U.S. Supreme Court did not redefine marriage across the nation. That means the debate about marriage will continue. States are free to uphold policies recognizing that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, so that children have a mother and a father.

In the states, support for marriage as the union of a man and a woman remains strong. Many believe the Court should have respected the authority of California citizens and Congress.

On DOMA, it appears the Court did not respect Congress’s authority to define marriage for the purposes of federal programs and benefits. The Court may have gotten federalism wrong.

On Proposition 8, the citizens of California who voted twice to pass Prop 8 should have been able to count on their Governor and Attorney General to defend the state’s constitution. That’s what democratic self-government is all about.

Download your free copy of TheMarriageFacts.com.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Marriage: What It Is, Why It Matters, and the Consequences of Redefining It

/in , , , /by

Ryan T. Anderson from The Heritage Foundation has released a comprehensive report on marriage. Here is the abstract:

Marriage is based on the truth that men and women are complementary, the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman, and the reality that children need a mother and a father.

Redefining marriage does not simply expand the existing understanding of marriage; it rejects these truths.

Marriage is society’s least restrictive means of ensuring the well-being of children. By encouraging the norms of marriage—monogamy, sexual exclusivity, and permanence—the state strengthens civil society and reduces its own role.

The future of this country depends on the future of marriage.

The future of marriage depends on citizens understanding what it is and why it matters and demanding that government policies support, not undermine, true marriage.

The report addresses three important questions: At the heart of the current debates about same-sex marriage are three crucial questions: What is marriage, why does marriage matter for public policy, and what would be the consequences of redefining marriage to exclude sexual complementary?

To read the full report click here.

RELATED COLUMN: The Well of Lonliness by Mary Kay Ruppel

Family Group Vows to Remind Voters Of Consequences of 296

/in , , /by

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA— Florida Family Action has released documentation today gathered from the Duval County Supervisor of Elections office displaying how the citizens of Jacksonville voted on Florida’s Marriage Protection Amendment in 2008. The report is broken out by each Council Member’s district, showing both the precise number and percentage of voter’s voting for marriage and against the creation of new gay rights on this issue.

Not a single district had less than 59% voting in favor of the Defense of Marriage Amendment, which amended the Florida Constitution to include language to prohibit “no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.”

Percentages range from district to district, all showing a decided majority in favor of maintaining the traditional definition of marriage. Districts 1, 8, 10 and 11 had more than 70% voting in favor of the Amendment, with 78.9% of District 12’s citizens voting Yes.

John Stemberger President of Florida Family Action released the following statement today:

Jacksonville residents will not be fooled about the real intent and purpose of this ordinance. Full legalized gay marriage is the goal of its proponents. 2012-296 is just a stepping stone to that end. In every state where traditional marriage laws were overturned to allow homosexual marriages, whether by judicial decision or state legislature, proponents of gay marriage cited the collective scheme of non discrimination ordinances that created new protected classes like the one proposed in 296. Local ordinances of this nature have been consistently used as legal precedent for introducing gay marriage. Even state constitutional amendments supporting traditional marriage, like California’s recently overturned amendment, are not safe. We pledge to remind the constituents in every Council Member’s district who votes for this bill on August 15 about its true effect. It would be our hope that members of the Council will remember both the commanding vote margin in this research and the recent record lines outside of Chick fil A stores in Jacksonville this past week in support of natural marriage.

This data has been released for the information of the City Council while they are considering Ordinance 2012-296, a bill that would amend several City ordinances to add “sexual orientation, and perhaps gender identity or expression” to the listings of personal conditions or statuses which cannot be discriminated against. The ordinances proposed to be amended include Public Accommodations, Fair Housing, and others.

Voting yes on 296 would be decidedly against the will of the citizens of Jacksonville, who overwhelmingly voted to uphold the traditional definition of marriage when given the chance. The City Council may wish to consider the way their constituents voted when this similar issue was presented directly to them.