“Hate crimes” part 9
The following is from the American Family Association. I received it in early May. The website for the Association is http://www.afa.net/.
“‘I have posted watchmen on your walls, O Jerusalem; they will never be silent day or night. You who call on the Lord, give yourselves no rest….’” Isaiah 62: 6 (NIV)
“Homosexual Agenda—reprinted from AFA Journal, March, 2009 http://www.afajournal.org/
‘End of the Culture War?’
How the President and Congressional Democrats plan to end the battle over homosexuality
By Ed Vitagliano
Christians had better start praying that President Barack Obama is unable to keep his word when it comes to his campaign promises.
Over the course of his political career, but especially since he has been campaigning for the opportunity to call the White House home, Obama has made this fact very clear: He is in favor of virtually the entire gamut of items on the gay activist wish list.
Now that he is firmly ensconced at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, we are about to witness the full power of the federal government being thrown behind the homosexual movement. (And yet some “misguided christians” voted for him?—my addition) Christians who already have been fighting a defensive action (Isn’t it about time we went on the offensive? Defensive wars are almost always LOST! We have the power of GOD on our side if we would only use it! What’s that old saying? “Use it or lose it!”—my addition) against the gay juggernaut should be preparing themselves to be overrun.
‘Rainbow world’
From his clear statements, there can be little doubt that Obama is overwhelmingly supportive of the homosexual ‘civil rights’ movement. The new president has a broad vision (Actually, he lacks both Spiritual vision and Spiritual wisdom—my addition) of a rainbow world in which there is no moral distinction between gay or straight.
The day after his inauguration, the Obama White House posted on its Web site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/) what it called ‘The Agenda,’ which included a section addressed to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) community.
‘Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us,’ Obama is quoted as saying. (In fact, it is the homosexual activists who have divided us by demanding “rights” for immoral, depraved, detestable, perverted, sinful behavior—my addition.) ‘But at its core, this issue is about who we as Americans. (Immoral, depraved, detestable, perverted, sinful?—my addition) It’s about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect.’ (If he really believes this blasphemy, he is more delusional than I thought—my addition.)
So those who hold to a Christian view of the world are exploitative? Their motivation is to divide the nation? Never before has an American president said such things so boldly. (Never before has a President tried so boldly to paint black as white and white as black. Isn’t it time that we respond even more boldly as the Christians in the 1st century did? Not afraid to face death for the cause of CHRIST!—my addition)
Homosexual lobby groups such as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s largest homosexual group, are giddy with anticipation.
On Inauguration Day HRC president Joe Solmonese said: ‘Today’s inauguration represents a paradigm shift. The pendulum has swung away from the antigay forces and toward a new president and vice president who acknowledge our equality…. (The pendulum has swung from good to evil and we need to get it swinging back to good—my addition) Our community and many others are looking at a new day of welcome and great promise.’ (A new day of “welcome” and “promise” for sinful behavior and godlessness—my addition.)
Solmonese has the same sense of optimism regarding the new Congress. In a press release in early January, he said, ‘With increased ranks of pro-equality lawmakers in both the House and Senate, new possibilities are open to us.’ (Homosexual activists try to always stress “equality.” This has NOTHING to do with equality. It has to do with sinful, despicable behavior that is condemned by GOD throughout both the Old and New Testaments—my addition.)
With a Democratic president ready to sign just about anything a Democratically-controlled Congress sends to his desk, what can we expect to see? (IF Christians don’t unite to battle this evil on EVERY front! However, if we do unite, we will win this war if we have the will to OBEY GOD and to win by BOLDLY GETTING INVOLVED—my addition)
(I have changed the listing order putting “hate crimes” first instead of second and ENDA second instead of first because the “hate crimes” legislation has already passed the House of Representatives. A common practice of legislative bodies is to proceed from the bill they believe is the most likely to pass to, finally, the bill they believe will be the most difficult to pass as they build on their momentum—my addition.)
Hate crimes
As HRC describes it, The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act/Matthew Shepard Act ‘gives the Justice Department the power to investigate and prosecute bias-motivated violence … where the perpetrator has selected the victim because of the person’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.’ (I think that covers just about every person in the country doesn’t it? It’s just that it will not be used to protect every person in the country. It will be used to protect just the select few—my addition.)
On its Web site, the new Obama White House promises that it ‘will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation’ and ‘expand hate crime protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act.’ (See my post on May 5, 2009—“Hate crimes”—where I discuss “what is a hate crime?”—my addition)
Where such laws have been passed around the world, however, the reach has often been extended to incorporate ‘hate speech.’ Christians are concerned that religious speech—such as sermons declaring homosexuality to be a sin—would soon come under scrutiny.
ENDA
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is a proposed federal law which would have the effect, according to HRC, of ‘making it illegal to fire, refuse to hire or refuse to promote employees simply based on a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.’
The Obama White House said it ‘supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and believes that our anti-discrimination employment laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity.’ (Do these individuals walk around with signs declaring I’m a homosexual? [I’ve NEVER seen a job application that asks if you are a homosexual, although there might be such applications. It might not be a bad idea!] The only way for a perspective employee to know that someone is a homosexual is for that perspective employee to tell him in some fashion. If someone declared to me “I’m homosexual and I’m proud!” He would not be hired! He is proclaiming that he is proud to be sinning against the moral law of GOD. What kind of employee would he be and why should I have to find out? My philosophy with my publishing company is to use ONLY contract labor! I don’t plan on ever having employees! You can’t force me to hire what I don’t hire—my addition.)
HRC claims that ENDA does not apply to religious organizations (Isn’t that discriminatory—another one of their constant cries—my addition), but the 2007 version of the law only provided a religious exemption for religious positions that were involved in actual teaching or proclamation of doctrine. (And that can be easily overturned by a 9 member, unelected Court majority—my addition.)
Such a limited exemption, some pro-family legal experts argue, would mean that a Christian school that was hiring a secretary, janitor or football coach (or a female or male P.E. instructor—my addition) would not be allowed to reject a homosexual who applies for the slot.
Christian concerns about ENDA are not paranoia. As with the case of hate crime laws, when ENDA-style measures have been passed globally, religious institutions quickly come under pressure.
For example, the Canadian ministry Christian Horizons, which works with the disabled in 180 group homes run on Christian principles, was fined $23,000 in 2008 for terminating a female employee who was actively engaged in a homosexual relationship. All employees had signed an agreement prior to being hired in which they promised to refrain from immorality, including homosexual conduct.
That wasn’t good enough, declared the human rights tribunal which heard the case brought by the fired lesbian. The tribunal not only issued the fine, it instructed the ministry to remove the immorality clause from the employee agreement and ordered the ministry to start forcing its managers to undergo sensitivity training (brainwashing—my addition) to accept homosexuality. (Welcome to Canada’s new world and what may well be facing the United States if we sit back and let it happen! Do you really trust government NOT to do this type of thing?—my addition)
Gays in the military
The current policy regarding homosexuals in the military will probably be discarded, although just when this might occur is not yet clear. (President Barack Hussein Obama has just announced that his administration is going to “examine” this issue—my addition.)
Military law forbids homosexuals from serving in the armed forces, but during the Clinton administration an additional layer was added—‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ That policy constrains the military from asking about sexual orientation but allows the dismissal of a homosexual whose sexual orientation—for any reason—becomes public.
The White House Web site says: ‘President Obama agrees … that we need to repeal the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy. … Discrimination should be prohibited. …’ (In my opinion, he is delusional if he thinks openly homosexual behavior will be welcomed into the ranks of heterosexuals in the military. He is asking for trouble and discontent in the military. Something that certainly is not needed when we are facing the continued threat of terrorists. The President has no concept of what is and what is not discrimination. Homosexual behavior is depraved, immoral, and prohibited by the word of GOD—my addition.)
Opponents of the repeal argue that the step would prove disastrous to the military. According to one poll, 58% of those currently in the military said they opposed overturning the ban—and 24% said they would either leave the military or consider such a move if homosexuals were allowed in. (I think the numbers are probably actually higher! We could have a mass exodus of male, heterosexual members of the military. Perhaps that is his hidden agenda!—my addition)
Gay adoption
“During his 1996 primary election campaign for the Illinois State Senate Obama answered a questionnaire submitted by a homosexual newspaper in Chicago. He said, ‘I believe in the rights of gays and lesbians to become foster parents, adopt children and have the right to custody of their own children on the same basis as heterosexuals.” (So much for a family unit as designed by the CREATOR of the universe. A family needs both a mother AND a father—NOT two mothers or two fathers. GOD did not design the world for homosexual families. Homosexual behavior is a SIN! Man can NOT design anything better than GOD did!—my addition)
His support of homosexual adoption in recent years has not changed. In a letter to a gay rights group in Massachusetts last summer, Obama said, ‘[W]e have to eliminate discrimination against LGBT families. And that’s why we have to extend equal treatment in our family and adoption laws.’ (His opinion is in direct opposition to GOD’S word and will—in DIRECT OPPOSITION!—my addition)
Pro-family groups, however, have argued that studies demonstrate that a child does best when raised by both biological parents, and that children benefit from having both a male and female role model in the home. (Duh! This is the design established by GOD—my addition.)
Same-sex marriage
The one area where pro-family groups might catch a break is on the issue of same-sex marriage. During both the primary and general election campaigns Obama said he did not support homosexual marriage. (Don’t kid yourself. If the other portions of the homosexual agenda are adopted, so will homosexual marriage. First, all that has to occur is that the Defense of Marriage Law be repealed. If it is, all States will have to constitutionally accept the same-sex marriages that are now legal in five States. Same-sex marriage WILL spread throughout the United States if the Defense of Marriage Law is repealed!—my addition)
However, a number of factors make it doubtful whether or not Obama is truly committed to defending traditional marriage. For one thing, during his early political career, Obama said on the 1996 questionnaire: ‘I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.’
While it is not unusual for politicians to change their views on major issues over time, Obama has demonstrated a deep antipathy toward any serious efforts to protect traditional marriage against homosexual encroachment. The White House Web site states that the president wants to ‘repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA),’ which was signed into law in 1996 by then-president Bill Clinton. DOMA defines marriage in all federal matters as being between a man and a woman and declares that no state must be forced to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state.
When Obama was a U.S. senator, he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006—a measure put forth by defenders of the traditional family that would have strengthened the sentiments expressed by DOMA. (This was a Constitutional Amendment. The Amendment stated the following: “Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states:
Article
Section 1. This article may be cited as the ‘Marriage Protection Amendment’.
Section 2. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.”—my addition)
An amendment was considered necessary because there were concerns that DOMA might not survive lawsuits and thus the one man/one woman definition of marriage should be placed in the U.S. Constitution. (It was a sad day for the United States when it was even considered necessary that such am Amendment should be placed within the Constitution. It was an even sadder day when the Amendment did not pass. How LOW has this nation sunk into depravity? We claim that mothers have a “right” to MURDER their unborn babies and that sinful homosexual behavior is also a “right”—my addition.)
Finally, the new administration says on its Web site that Obama wants to ‘enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions.’
So there seems to be little reason for Obama not to change his mind again and come out in full support of same-sex marriages. (If the opportunity presents itself, he will!—my addition) After all, with a nation in economic turmoil and people anxious about their families and livelihoods, very few people probably care about social issues right now. (THEY SHOULD! As I said before the election, the number one crisis in this nation and ultimately the only important crisis is the MORAL CRISIS!—my addition)
In any case, with or without same-sex marriage, homosexual activists are about to hit the jackpot. (Homosexual activists have declared that they MUST have same-sex marriage—my addition) This nation cannot really sustain itself with two warring parties that firmly stand upon two mutually exclusive views of sex, marriage and family.
There’s no doubting in which camp Obama and most Democrats are prepared to stand.” (There seems to be some doubt where Christians are prepared to stand and whether or not they are willing to go to war over these issues! If we DO NOT, we will get what you allowed to happen! You can NOT serve both GOD and man!—my addition)
The following is from the American Family Association. I received it in early May. The website for the Association is http://www.afa.net/.
“‘I have posted watchmen on your walls, O Jerusalem; they will never be silent day or night. You who call on the Lord, give yourselves no rest….’” Isaiah 62: 6 (NIV)
“Homosexual Agenda—reprinted from AFA Journal, March, 2009 http://www.afajournal.org/
‘End of the Culture War?’
How the President and Congressional Democrats plan to end the battle over homosexuality
By Ed Vitagliano
Christians had better start praying that President Barack Obama is unable to keep his word when it comes to his campaign promises.
Over the course of his political career, but especially since he has been campaigning for the opportunity to call the White House home, Obama has made this fact very clear: He is in favor of virtually the entire gamut of items on the gay activist wish list.
Now that he is firmly ensconced at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, we are about to witness the full power of the federal government being thrown behind the homosexual movement. (And yet some “misguided christians” voted for him?—my addition) Christians who already have been fighting a defensive action (Isn’t it about time we went on the offensive? Defensive wars are almost always LOST! We have the power of GOD on our side if we would only use it! What’s that old saying? “Use it or lose it!”—my addition) against the gay juggernaut should be preparing themselves to be overrun.
‘Rainbow world’
From his clear statements, there can be little doubt that Obama is overwhelmingly supportive of the homosexual ‘civil rights’ movement. The new president has a broad vision (Actually, he lacks both Spiritual vision and Spiritual wisdom—my addition) of a rainbow world in which there is no moral distinction between gay or straight.
The day after his inauguration, the Obama White House posted on its Web site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/) what it called ‘The Agenda,’ which included a section addressed to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) community.
‘Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us,’ Obama is quoted as saying. (In fact, it is the homosexual activists who have divided us by demanding “rights” for immoral, depraved, detestable, perverted, sinful behavior—my addition.) ‘But at its core, this issue is about who we as Americans. (Immoral, depraved, detestable, perverted, sinful?—my addition) It’s about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect.’ (If he really believes this blasphemy, he is more delusional than I thought—my addition.)
So those who hold to a Christian view of the world are exploitative? Their motivation is to divide the nation? Never before has an American president said such things so boldly. (Never before has a President tried so boldly to paint black as white and white as black. Isn’t it time that we respond even more boldly as the Christians in the 1st century did? Not afraid to face death for the cause of CHRIST!—my addition)
Homosexual lobby groups such as the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the nation’s largest homosexual group, are giddy with anticipation.
On Inauguration Day HRC president Joe Solmonese said: ‘Today’s inauguration represents a paradigm shift. The pendulum has swung away from the antigay forces and toward a new president and vice president who acknowledge our equality…. (The pendulum has swung from good to evil and we need to get it swinging back to good—my addition) Our community and many others are looking at a new day of welcome and great promise.’ (A new day of “welcome” and “promise” for sinful behavior and godlessness—my addition.)
Solmonese has the same sense of optimism regarding the new Congress. In a press release in early January, he said, ‘With increased ranks of pro-equality lawmakers in both the House and Senate, new possibilities are open to us.’ (Homosexual activists try to always stress “equality.” This has NOTHING to do with equality. It has to do with sinful, despicable behavior that is condemned by GOD throughout both the Old and New Testaments—my addition.)
With a Democratic president ready to sign just about anything a Democratically-controlled Congress sends to his desk, what can we expect to see? (IF Christians don’t unite to battle this evil on EVERY front! However, if we do unite, we will win this war if we have the will to OBEY GOD and to win by BOLDLY GETTING INVOLVED—my addition)
(I have changed the listing order putting “hate crimes” first instead of second and ENDA second instead of first because the “hate crimes” legislation has already passed the House of Representatives. A common practice of legislative bodies is to proceed from the bill they believe is the most likely to pass to, finally, the bill they believe will be the most difficult to pass as they build on their momentum—my addition.)
Hate crimes
As HRC describes it, The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act/Matthew Shepard Act ‘gives the Justice Department the power to investigate and prosecute bias-motivated violence … where the perpetrator has selected the victim because of the person’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.’ (I think that covers just about every person in the country doesn’t it? It’s just that it will not be used to protect every person in the country. It will be used to protect just the select few—my addition.)
On its Web site, the new Obama White House promises that it ‘will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation’ and ‘expand hate crime protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act.’ (See my post on May 5, 2009—“Hate crimes”—where I discuss “what is a hate crime?”—my addition)
Where such laws have been passed around the world, however, the reach has often been extended to incorporate ‘hate speech.’ Christians are concerned that religious speech—such as sermons declaring homosexuality to be a sin—would soon come under scrutiny.
ENDA
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is a proposed federal law which would have the effect, according to HRC, of ‘making it illegal to fire, refuse to hire or refuse to promote employees simply based on a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.’
The Obama White House said it ‘supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and believes that our anti-discrimination employment laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity.’ (Do these individuals walk around with signs declaring I’m a homosexual? [I’ve NEVER seen a job application that asks if you are a homosexual, although there might be such applications. It might not be a bad idea!] The only way for a perspective employee to know that someone is a homosexual is for that perspective employee to tell him in some fashion. If someone declared to me “I’m homosexual and I’m proud!” He would not be hired! He is proclaiming that he is proud to be sinning against the moral law of GOD. What kind of employee would he be and why should I have to find out? My philosophy with my publishing company is to use ONLY contract labor! I don’t plan on ever having employees! You can’t force me to hire what I don’t hire—my addition.)
HRC claims that ENDA does not apply to religious organizations (Isn’t that discriminatory—another one of their constant cries—my addition), but the 2007 version of the law only provided a religious exemption for religious positions that were involved in actual teaching or proclamation of doctrine. (And that can be easily overturned by a 9 member, unelected Court majority—my addition.)
Such a limited exemption, some pro-family legal experts argue, would mean that a Christian school that was hiring a secretary, janitor or football coach (or a female or male P.E. instructor—my addition) would not be allowed to reject a homosexual who applies for the slot.
Christian concerns about ENDA are not paranoia. As with the case of hate crime laws, when ENDA-style measures have been passed globally, religious institutions quickly come under pressure.
For example, the Canadian ministry Christian Horizons, which works with the disabled in 180 group homes run on Christian principles, was fined $23,000 in 2008 for terminating a female employee who was actively engaged in a homosexual relationship. All employees had signed an agreement prior to being hired in which they promised to refrain from immorality, including homosexual conduct.
That wasn’t good enough, declared the human rights tribunal which heard the case brought by the fired lesbian. The tribunal not only issued the fine, it instructed the ministry to remove the immorality clause from the employee agreement and ordered the ministry to start forcing its managers to undergo sensitivity training (brainwashing—my addition) to accept homosexuality. (Welcome to Canada’s new world and what may well be facing the United States if we sit back and let it happen! Do you really trust government NOT to do this type of thing?—my addition)
Gays in the military
The current policy regarding homosexuals in the military will probably be discarded, although just when this might occur is not yet clear. (President Barack Hussein Obama has just announced that his administration is going to “examine” this issue—my addition.)
Military law forbids homosexuals from serving in the armed forces, but during the Clinton administration an additional layer was added—‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ That policy constrains the military from asking about sexual orientation but allows the dismissal of a homosexual whose sexual orientation—for any reason—becomes public.
The White House Web site says: ‘President Obama agrees … that we need to repeal the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy. … Discrimination should be prohibited. …’ (In my opinion, he is delusional if he thinks openly homosexual behavior will be welcomed into the ranks of heterosexuals in the military. He is asking for trouble and discontent in the military. Something that certainly is not needed when we are facing the continued threat of terrorists. The President has no concept of what is and what is not discrimination. Homosexual behavior is depraved, immoral, and prohibited by the word of GOD—my addition.)
Opponents of the repeal argue that the step would prove disastrous to the military. According to one poll, 58% of those currently in the military said they opposed overturning the ban—and 24% said they would either leave the military or consider such a move if homosexuals were allowed in. (I think the numbers are probably actually higher! We could have a mass exodus of male, heterosexual members of the military. Perhaps that is his hidden agenda!—my addition)
Gay adoption
“During his 1996 primary election campaign for the Illinois State Senate Obama answered a questionnaire submitted by a homosexual newspaper in Chicago. He said, ‘I believe in the rights of gays and lesbians to become foster parents, adopt children and have the right to custody of their own children on the same basis as heterosexuals.” (So much for a family unit as designed by the CREATOR of the universe. A family needs both a mother AND a father—NOT two mothers or two fathers. GOD did not design the world for homosexual families. Homosexual behavior is a SIN! Man can NOT design anything better than GOD did!—my addition)
His support of homosexual adoption in recent years has not changed. In a letter to a gay rights group in Massachusetts last summer, Obama said, ‘[W]e have to eliminate discrimination against LGBT families. And that’s why we have to extend equal treatment in our family and adoption laws.’ (His opinion is in direct opposition to GOD’S word and will—in DIRECT OPPOSITION!—my addition)
Pro-family groups, however, have argued that studies demonstrate that a child does best when raised by both biological parents, and that children benefit from having both a male and female role model in the home. (Duh! This is the design established by GOD—my addition.)
Same-sex marriage
The one area where pro-family groups might catch a break is on the issue of same-sex marriage. During both the primary and general election campaigns Obama said he did not support homosexual marriage. (Don’t kid yourself. If the other portions of the homosexual agenda are adopted, so will homosexual marriage. First, all that has to occur is that the Defense of Marriage Law be repealed. If it is, all States will have to constitutionally accept the same-sex marriages that are now legal in five States. Same-sex marriage WILL spread throughout the United States if the Defense of Marriage Law is repealed!—my addition)
However, a number of factors make it doubtful whether or not Obama is truly committed to defending traditional marriage. For one thing, during his early political career, Obama said on the 1996 questionnaire: ‘I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.’
While it is not unusual for politicians to change their views on major issues over time, Obama has demonstrated a deep antipathy toward any serious efforts to protect traditional marriage against homosexual encroachment. The White House Web site states that the president wants to ‘repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA),’ which was signed into law in 1996 by then-president Bill Clinton. DOMA defines marriage in all federal matters as being between a man and a woman and declares that no state must be forced to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state.
When Obama was a U.S. senator, he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006—a measure put forth by defenders of the traditional family that would have strengthened the sentiments expressed by DOMA. (This was a Constitutional Amendment. The Amendment stated the following: “Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states:
Article
Section 1. This article may be cited as the ‘Marriage Protection Amendment’.
Section 2. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.”—my addition)
An amendment was considered necessary because there were concerns that DOMA might not survive lawsuits and thus the one man/one woman definition of marriage should be placed in the U.S. Constitution. (It was a sad day for the United States when it was even considered necessary that such am Amendment should be placed within the Constitution. It was an even sadder day when the Amendment did not pass. How LOW has this nation sunk into depravity? We claim that mothers have a “right” to MURDER their unborn babies and that sinful homosexual behavior is also a “right”—my addition.)
Finally, the new administration says on its Web site that Obama wants to ‘enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions.’
So there seems to be little reason for Obama not to change his mind again and come out in full support of same-sex marriages. (If the opportunity presents itself, he will!—my addition) After all, with a nation in economic turmoil and people anxious about their families and livelihoods, very few people probably care about social issues right now. (THEY SHOULD! As I said before the election, the number one crisis in this nation and ultimately the only important crisis is the MORAL CRISIS!—my addition)
In any case, with or without same-sex marriage, homosexual activists are about to hit the jackpot. (Homosexual activists have declared that they MUST have same-sex marriage—my addition) This nation cannot really sustain itself with two warring parties that firmly stand upon two mutually exclusive views of sex, marriage and family.
There’s no doubting in which camp Obama and most Democrats are prepared to stand.” (There seems to be some doubt where Christians are prepared to stand and whether or not they are willing to go to war over these issues! If we DO NOT, we will get what you allowed to happen! You can NOT serve both GOD and man!—my addition)
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 9:36 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home