Gay Marriage Threatens Our Freedom

Gay Marriage Threatens Our Freedom

By James Milliken, Jr.

Referenda on changing the legal definition of marriage to include same-sex relationships have become a recurrent feature of our electoral landscape in recent years.

Voters have rejected the proposed changes every time. Redefining marriage is indeed a big deal, which is not only a threat to liberty, but a significant step in the direction of totalitarian tyranny.

Despite thirty-plus campaigns, there has been little informed public discussion about what marriage is and the state's interest in maintaining traditional marriage (sadly, the proponents of redefining marriage prefer to rely on name-calling and intimidation, which leaves little room for dispassionate debate). As a consequence, many voters have never heard the actual arguments in defense of traditional marriage, but only the strawmen that its opponents are fond of pummeling, most of which (on the surface) appeal to the idea of freedom.

For example, I once heard a nationally-syndicated radio talk-show host, a self-identified libertarian who generally takes a conservative position, say: "not one person has been able to call in and tell me how two men or two women marrying each other will harm their own marriage" (in other words, mind your own business). Or how often have you heard something like "traditional marriage supporters are anti-freedom; they want to keep gay people from marrying the partner of their choice." I see a third of these strawmen every Sunday outside my church, where a protester holds a sign that says: "When did I get to vote on your marriage?"

Despite their surface plausibility, none of these arguments withstand more than cursory scrutiny. Consider the case of the radio personality: of course nobody had ever successfully argued on his show that two men or two women marrying each other would harm their own marriage, because nobody anywhere defends traditional marriage on that ground; the arguments against redefining marriage are much more fundamental. The real question is whether then union of a man and women is different from that of two men or two women (hint: the answer has something to do with babies), and whether the state has an interest in fostering and protecting exclusive heterosexual relationships that it does not have in same-sex relationships. The radio host didn't mention whether he had ever had that discussion on his show (curious, because that is what I hear defenders of traditional marriage talking about).

This threat is not merely theoretical. The very real consequences of the encroaching tyranny of the gay marriage crowd are already becoming apparent. A couple years ago, for instance, a redefinition of marriage passed by the Maine legislature was narrowly overturned in a "Peoples Veto" referendum. A critical factor in the repeal was the attempt by gay-marriage advocates to deprive a public-school social worker named Don Mandell of his license (and hence his livelihood) because he had appeared in a pro-traditional marriage ad (this in response a coworker who had appeared in a pro-gay marriage ad and had faced no censure).

There are numerous reports from around the country of teachers whose standing is threatened, or of students who are disciplined, for doing no more than expressing a pro-traditional marriage opinion. Outside of the school system we see professional photographers, Knights of Columbus halls, and even dating services facing lawsuits simply because they decline to include same-sex weddings among their services. In the case of Chik-Fil-A we have seen public officials threaten to ban a business simply because its owner has expressed his personal support of traditional marriage, which is still the law of the land in most of our country. It is not at all far-fetched to project that today's harassment will become full-scale prosecution if the full gay marriage legal agenda is enacted (as is already the case in Canada and parts of Europe).

If that weren't bad enough, it gets worse. The redefinition of marriage by the state would not only mean a violation of the freedom of those who disagree: it would be a giant step closer to a government that is genuinely totalitarian.

More than that, and perhaps of more interest to libertarians and other lovers of freedom, families are, along with organized religion, the most important "mediating institutions" between the individual and the state. Mediating institutions are groups of people large and small that help serve as a check on the government, and provide individuals with a way of influencing the state much more effectively than they can do on their own. These independent sources of authority are essential to the preservation of liberty: without them the behemoth of the state would easily crush the lone citizen. That's why totalitarians of every stripe make the subjugation or even destruction of these institutions (especially the family and organized religion) a top priority. Giving the state the power to manipulate, redefine and hence to unmake such essential protectors of freedom must necessarily lead to an ever more powerful state, and an ever smaller place for individual liberty.

The desire of libertarians to work to preserve personal freedom is quite understandable, but the legal redefinition of marriage would do just the opposite: it necessarily means the loss of freedom to express and to act according to beliefs at odds with the gay agenda; more ominously, it will grant to the state an enormous and unprecedented power for remaking society according to its own designs.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/10/gay_marriage_threatens_our_freedom.html#ixzz2Ad69UeTw

John Edwards, Roger Clemens, and Federal Witch Hunts

Here's another example of why I don't trust my government, and why I want it to do less.

The prosecutions of John Edwards and Roger Clemens were a disgrace.

They wasted our tax dollars.

They cost years of life and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees for these men.

The "not guilty" verdicts of both men was the only redeeming aspect their trials.

They should never have been prosecuted in the first place. The "laws" under which they were prosecuted had no moral or constitutional legitimacy.

Consider the Edwards case: Campaign finance regulations are an assault on freedom of conscience and the First Amendment. If I support a candidate, I have the human right to support him any way I want, directly or indirectly. My free press rights allow me to express myself, even if (especially if) it's about elections!

(In fact, campaign laws make it HARDER for the "little guy" to organize, whereas the wealthy can afford to pay lawyers and accountants to jump through regulatory hoops.)

The Clemens case was equally disgraceful. Is it okay to lie to someone who asks you about something that's none of their business? I think it is.

Drug prohibition, including steroid prohibition, is not authorized by any provision in the Constitution, and it violates the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Congressional hearings on steroids in baseball was a grandstanding, affront to the rule of law and called into question who should've gone on trial. (Hint: They probably have Chairman in front of their name.)

Moreover, Edwards and Clemens _had no victims_. They neither initiated violence nor engaged in theft. Therefore, their alleged actions weren't crimes.

I hope that Congress and the Justice Department's witch hunters - oops, District Attorneys - learn valuable lessons from these disgraces.

For the Edwards and Clemens juries sent a powerful message: agree or disagree with their ethics and actions, but these men do not belong in prison.

Regrettably, it may have been only due to their fame and pricey legal teams that Edwards and Clemens got off. Poor defendants often don't have a chance against overzealous prosecutors.

That's why you must repeal all federal victimless crime laws and end silly crusades such as "campaign finance reform" and the War on Drugs. I agree with DownSizeDC.org on this issue and the post.

Unions That Divide: Churches Split Over Gay Marriage

At a black Pentecostal church in Raleigh, N.C., the Rev. Patrick Wooden entered the sanctuary on Sunday to a standing ovation, exulting that God’s “high hand” had led voters last week to pass a statewide amendment banning same-sex marriage. He took to the pulpit and denounced President Obama for taking a stand “in support of sin,” and “in opposition to the biblical model of marriage.”

Same-sex marriage became a reality in the United States in 2004 in the wake of a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court that it was required under the equal protection clause of the commonwealth' Constitution. Prior to 2012, same-sex marriage was also legalized in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C. Early in 2012, Washington State and Maryland both approved same-sex marriage laws, but neither took effect immediately and both were expected to be challenged in referendums.

In early May, North Carolina voted in large numbers for a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriages, partnerships and civil unions, becoming the 30th state in the country and the last in the South to include a prohibition on gay marriage in the state constitution. A thousand miles away, at a predominantly white, Lutheran church in Madison, Wis., where a rainbow banner greets churchgoers arriving for services, the Rev. Susan Schneider preached that gay men and lesbians were included when Jesus commanded his followers to love one another: “Knocking down the walls is what Jesus was after.”

Mr. Obama’s declaration last week that he supports same-sex marriage prompted ministers around the country to take to their pulpits on Sunday and preach on the issue. But in the clash over homosexuality, the battle lines do not simply pit ministers against secular advocates for gay rights. Religion is on both sides in this conflict. The battle is actually church versus church, minister versus minister, and Scripture versus Scripture.

The dividing lines are often unpredictable. There are black churches that welcome openly gay couples, and white churches that do not. Some Presbyterian churches hire openly gay clergy members, while others will not. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that homosexual behavior is a sin, but there are Catholic priests who secretly bless gay unions.

And leaders in the United Methodist Church have been debating whether to ordain openly gay ministers for four decades, and voted again just this month to uphold their prohibition. But there are Methodist ministers who perform same-sex marriages in defiance of church rules who share the denomination with ministers who preach that America is going the way of Sodom and Gomorrah because of homosexuality.

More at the New York Times

If marriage loses, we all lose

The indispensible social pillar of marriage is being undermined and marginalized in our national discourse. I am concerned that some conservative leaders are backing down in their defense of marriage while making overt concessions to the pro-homosexual community.

Tragically, we are seeing a trend within conservative ranks de-emphasizing the importance of defending marriage from the attacks of pro-homosexual activists. And pro-marriage initiatives appear to be declining at the very time they are most desperately needed!

Some conservative leaders are either avoiding the issue or are actively diminishing the role of the marriage issue in 2012’s campaigns. There are even suggestions that natural marriage may not get much support at all in 2012’s conservative party platforms.

This retreat is totally unacceptable! If marriage loses, we all lose!

The Honorable Ken Blackwell, a Visiting Professor of Law at Liberty University School of Law and highly respected political commentator, recently said it this way:

“Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. The fundamental institution of human civilization should be preserved as it has been known through the entirety of American history and Western civilization.”

Respected conservative columnist Don Feder also weighed into this controversy:

“Surrender on gay marriage is surrender on marriage – which is surrender on the family and, ultimately, surrender on civilization. Unfortunately, many conservative intellectuals have lost sight of a crucial fact: American exceptionalism rests on three pillars – faith, family, and freedom. Remove any one, and the entire structure collapses.”

If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do? The fact is, you and I and other enlightened pro-family citizens are going to have to be the ones who come forward to defend natural marriage in America!

I urge you to take a moment to sign our Statement of Support upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

We are calling on all of our friends and supporters to insist that President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (DOJ), congressional leaders, and military leaders actively comply with and defend the Defense of Marriage Act! This duly-passed act of the United States Congress is the law of the land and will remain so until that status is changed due to a holding by the U.S. Supreme Court!

Click here to sign Statement of Support upholding the federal Defense of Marriage Act: http://www.lcaction.cc/656/petition.asp

As you know, we are also incensed that activist judges have ruled in favor of same-sex “marriage” at the expense of society’s greater good in several states where the clear majority of voters support marriage as being a union between one man and one woman.

This proposed law must also be defeated.

Liberty Counsel Action is on the front lines of marriage’s defense.

This battle for traditional marriage and family has enormous national significance and a split in conservative opinion on marriage only encourages the homosexual community’s quest for full national recognition of same-sex “marriage.”

Kentucky's alleged equality organizations failing

Since I was been absent things have gotten better, witness the awesome power of the Family Foundation of Kentucky:

The future of instant racing gambling in Kentucky is back in the hands of a trial judge who the Kentucky Court of Appeals on Friday ordered to further develop the issues surrounding the slot-like game.

The 2-1 decision doesn't expressly prohibit instant racing at Kentucky Downs in Franklin near the Kentucky-Tennessee state line and Ellis Park in Henderson. Instead, the court sent the case back to Franklin Circuit Judge Thomas Wingate with instructions to allow the Family Foundation of Kentucky and the state to explore several issues surrounding the game, in which patrons bet on historic races without knowing the names of the trainers, jockeys or horses involved.

In December 2010, Wingate upheld a proposal allowing tracks to accept pari-mutuel bets on rebroadcasts of the old races. The Family Foundation intervened in a lawsuit seeking to clarify the issue.

By not allowing the state and the Family Foundation of Kentucky to exchange evidence and flesh out the issues, it is impossible to tell what the trial judge relied on to justify upholding instant racing, Senior Judge Joseph E. Lambert wrote for the appeals court.

Martin Cothran, a senior policy analyst for the Lexington-based Family Foundation of Kentucky, said the ruling levels the playing field in the litigation.

"With an issue as ripe for corruption as expanded gambling, the public has a right to question, know and understand the underlying facts relating to the gambling activity and the special interests involved," Cothran said.

Social clubs like the faux and defunct Kentucky Fairness Alliance pose no threat to family values in Kentucky. Other social groups, Lexington Fairness and the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization or GLSO are also without power or merit, just a bunch of homosexuals getting together to get drunk? Cocktail anyone?

Louisville Fairness Campaign has proven how useless they are with the Berea ordinance. Chris Hartman the director of Louisville Fairness Campaign publicly promised a Madison County Human Rights Commission.  They created it and omitted the gay agenda, a major slap in the face to Hartman's credibility.

Hartman also proved that he himself is a bully, covered by major news outlets:

The leading supporter of the so-called “Bullying Bill” became verbally and physically abusive in a Capitol Annex hallway with an opponent of the bill after the bill went down to defeat in a House committee, attracting the attention of State Police and other observers. The Family Foundation called on the Fairness Campaign to issue a public apology for the behavior of its director, Chris Hartman. “If you are really opposed to bullying, the last thing you probably want to do is engage in it in plain sight after a meeting in which a bill prohibiting it was just discussed,” said Family Foundation spokesman Martin Cothran. Hartman obstructed the path of Andrew Walker, who had lobbied the committee against the bill, harassing him as he was leaving the restroom after the meeting and began interrogating him in an intimidating way. Several minutes later, Hartman cornered Walker again and began verbally bullying him with charges of being opposed to student safety.

According to Louisville’s Courier Journal, Hartman “became verbally and physically abusive toward Andrew Walker, a policy analyst for The Family Foundation of Kentucky, who had lobbied against the bill.” As a result, The Family Foundation of Kentucky has called on the Fairness Campaign to issue a public apology for the behavior of Hartman.

Personally I think criminal charges should have been filed but the Louisville Fairness Campaign still has some political strength.

Kentucky Equality Federation's former president, Jordan Palmer successfully lobbied the feds to prosecute the first so-called gay hate crime in the United States. So what? They also forced the city of Hazard to make changes and got a true Christian suspended from his job just because he didn't want homosexuals kissing in his pool.

With Palmer no longer in the drivers seat, the future political power of Kentucky Equality Federation is in question. With Palmer and his political connections gone Kentucky Equality Federation will collapse on itself.  Palmer stepped down for health reasons, he probably has AIDS knowing how easy the gays have sex.

Joshua Koch the Kentucky Equality Federation's new president condoned the illegal removal of a freedom of speech billboard which told God fearing people the truth: "Abortion is Murder and Homosexuality is a Sin!" Just how hard do you think the Lexington Police Department is going to investigate the removal of that billboard with a gay mayor?

Be warned, David Adams may be busy but I am back!

T-shirt company victim of modern witch hunt

Kentucky.com
Ky. Voices: T-shirt company victim of modern witch hunt
By Martin Cothran

The Family Foundation of Kentucky covered this story and commented in the Lexington Herald:

Martin Cothran is spokesman for the Family Foundation, a conservative advocacy group.

Herald-Leader columnist Tom Eblen cheered on the witch hunt over a Christian businessman's refusal to print T-shirts with a message that contradicts his religious views.

The man is being hauled before the Lexington Human Rights commission, which is being called upon to throw him into the political water to see if he floats.

Taking up his torch, Eblen added his voice to those of the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization and Lexington Mayor Jim Gray, who are chanting the political equivalent of "Burn him!"

The University of Kentucky, too, has added its increasingly anti-religious voice to the din. This is the same university that refused to hire a science professor on the grounds that he was an evangelical, resulting in a complaint to the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights, which was completely ignored.

Eblen and the rest of the mob are arguing that the business, Hands on Originals, has violated the Lexington Fairness Ordinance, an ordinance which added coverage for sexual orientation to that for race, religion, gender and national origin in anti-discrimination laws governing housing, employment and public accommodations.

The ordinance prohibits a business from refusing to serve a person on the basis of his sexual orientation.

In a famous scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, a woman is accused of being a witch. The reason? "She looks like one." To Eblen and the rest of the witch hunters, Hands On Originals looks like it's discriminating, even though it's not.

What Eblen and the mob haven't noticed in the midst of their frenzied denunciations is that Hands On Originals did not discriminate against any customer on the basis of sexual orientation. In fact, the business has an expressed policy against it. What it did do was refuse to print a T-shirt with a message that went against its religious convictions.

It didn't refuse to print the T-shirts because of who was asking it to print them; it refused to print them because of what the T-shirts said. This is not prohibited by the ordinance.

Had the group come to Hands On to print a shirt that said "I love the Wildcats," there would have been no problem.

Ironically, the people really discriminating are UK and any other organization that pulls its business from the T-shirt company, since they are doing so on the basis of the owner's religious beliefs. If they were providing the service rather than receiving it, they would be the ones violating anti-discrimination laws.

It used to be witches who were supposed to contort themselves into strange positions, but now gay activist groups, marching under the banner of tolerance, are twisting themselves into the tolerance police, intent, not on preventing discrimination against individuals, but on using the power of government to force others to agree with them.

But in their increasingly intolerant crusade, they have apparently failed to take note of the consequences.

Imagine that you ran a T-shirt business and a white supremacist group came to you to print T-shirts that said, "Down with N-----s!" According to the reasoning of Eblen and the mob, anti-discrimination laws would require you to print them. Not to do so would be to discriminate against a racial group, in this case, Aryans.

Here's where the gay rights activists and liberal journalists meet the Aryan Nation.

Eblen's bizarre reasoning doesn't end there. He ventures into the issue of what Christianity actually says about homosexuality, saying that, the way he reads it, the Gospels aren't against it. Notice the subtle avoidance of the rest of the New Testament, in which Paul leaves little doubt about the issue. Or the Old Testament, which doesn't exactly read like a gay rights tract.

Then, as if to amuse those of his readers who have actually read the thing, he charges those who disagree with him with selectively reading the Bible.

Might as well burn the Bible along with the witch.

I have a new slogan for a T-shirt: "Down with the Tolerance Police!" I'll take it to a gay-owned T-shirt company and point out that, according to the groups who say they represent them, they have no choice but to print it.

If we allow homosexual marriage to be considered legal and valid, what abominations will follow?

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" - Dr. Edmund Burke

I read a news article today that the sex group Kentucky Equality Federation cosponsored a site with Marriage Equality USA to tell sex stories on a new domain www.marriagestories.org.

I hope my fellow Kentuckians will join me in bombarding this site with the word of God and legitimate man and woman marriage stories. Many sex groups are now involved like Freedom to Marry, Equality Mississippi, a gay wedding magazine, and homosexual bloggers around the country.

How can you show a group of people the evil and error of their deeds if they will not listen?

Any child knows that God created Adam and Eve; NOT, Adam and Steve! The very notion of two homosexuals getting married is repulsive and disgusting. In Romans 1:26 God calls homosexual "love"... vile affections, i.e., morally reprehensible affections. God's Word condemns homosexuality, which is why Sodomites today are relentlessly trying to corrupt the Bible. Romans 1:25 told us they'd do this, "Who changed the truth of God into a lie..."

When a society begins to accept and even condone depravity it is not long for this world. We are constantly told by the left to embrace this 'lifestyle' and its participants. To now say anything negative about homosexuality is considered to be 'hate speech'.

In many states, we now see the left pushing private businesses to extend insurance benefits to 'same -sex partners'. We also see lily-livered politicians caving into pressure from gay rights groups.

If we allow homosexual marriage to be considered legal and valid, what abominations will follow? Legalized bestiality? Will it become acceptable for adults to openly molest children? NAMBLA members are no doubt salivating at the prospects! It is a very slippery slope indeed.

Gays on every corner in Lexington this weekend. Keep your children home.

The sodomites will be taking over Lexington this weekend. Most of it sponsored by QX.net and I plan on finding out who owns this company. I want to make sure none of my tax dollars are going to a pro-sodomite organization.

Leviticus 18:22: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

The good news: The degeneration of Kentucky Fairness Alliance continues according to the internet, they have lost the Northern Kentucky Chapter also. That is Lexington, Richmond, and now Northern Kentucky. To our advantage, this organization is its own worst enemy.

The bad news: The Northern Chapter of KFA is now called Equality Northern Kentucky and they identity themselves as a task force, not an actual organization.

We must stand firm here in Kentucky and make sure it doesn't turn into another California! As one smart person has pointed out, with all the sin currently in the world, we are close to the rapture.

I must wonder why sodomite leader Jordan Palmer and the folks at Kentucky Equality Federation have distanced themselves from Lexington Fairness - Bluegrass Fairness, or whatever their name is today. To make things worse here in Kentucky, sodomite Palmer was on record recently as saying Kentucky's gay marriage ban must be repealed. Good luck with that one Mr. Palmer, it will never happen.

The good news: I hear Jordan Palmer will be moving to another state soon to take on a new project.

The bad news: Kentucky Equality Federation is currently looking for an executive director to replace their president sodomite.

Tolerating a sodomite pride festival and allowing sodomites to get married are very different things. There are too many good Christian folks here in Kentucky to ever allow that to happen.

I believe that the reason why we must fight against the gay-behavior-affirming heresy and error in the Christian churches is precisely because unrepentant homosexuals will miss heaven and the ultimate realization of transcendent good.

What is left for them?

Transcendent evil.

They are so caught up in the flesh that they don't even realize it is evil in the first place! What's more, they refuse to ever acknowledge it and, instead, re-name it as a "blessing from God."

Like Michael G. Mickey, I will be staying in this weekend also. The first homosexual who steps foot on my lawn will be arrested. Mike says it best when he said he will come out again when he "can drive through the city without fear of my 7-year-old asking me why two men are kissing on the street corner."

Drag Queen Research at the University of Louisville

The Family Foundation of Kentucky did a great job with this:

Gay Marriage Ban Makes California Ballot

Some bad news for those in Kentucky wanting to see man on man, and woman on woman marriages.

Folks, let us pray daily that California will pass this amendment.

An initiative that would again outlaw gay marriage in California has qualified for the November ballot, the Secretary of State announced.

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen said Monday that a random check of signatures submitted by the measure's sponsors showed that they had gathered enough names for it to be put to voters.

The measure would amend the state constitution to "provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

If approved by a majority of voters on Nov. 4, the amendment would overturn the recent California Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in the state. It is similar to gay marriage bans that have been adopted in 26 other states.

Last month the attorneys general of 10 states joined conservative legal groups in urging the California Supreme Court to delay finalizing its ruling to legalize same-sex marriages.

The states involved are Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah. Except for Florida and New Hampshire, all of them have state constitutional provisions banning gay marriage.

The attorneys general asked the California high court to stay its May 15 ruling until after the November election, when California's voters likely will decide whether to adopt a similar amendment, which would overturn the court's decision.

What happens in California is being watched carefully elsewhere because unlike Massachusetts, the only U.S. state where same-sex couples can now marry, California does not have a residency requirement for obtaining a marriage license.

Why was Kentucky not on the list? Ask our new Attorney General, Jack Conway, a progressive democrat.

I am sure this making the California Ballot quickly ended the celebration for the new executive order Governor Beshear signed yesterday (in favor of homosexuals and drag queens) at Kentucky Equality Federation since the sex groups president, Jordan Palmer, is on the Board of Directors for Marriage Equality USA.