Marriage Has Been Preserved in Maine

Nov. 04, 2009
Defeat In Maine A Harsh Blow To Gay-marriage Drive
Analysis: Loss In Maine Could Be Staggering Blow To Gay-marriage Movement Nationwide

AP) The stars seemed aligned for supporters of gay marriage. They had Maine's governor, legislative leaders and major newspapers on their side, plus a huge edge in campaign funding. So losing a landmark referendum was a devastating blow, for activists in Maine and nationwide.

In an election that had been billed for weeks as too close to call, Maine's often unpredictable voters repealed a state law Tuesday that would have allowed same-sex couples to wed. Gay marriage has now lost in all 31 states in which it has been put to a popular vote - a trend that the gay-rights movement had believed it could end in Maine."

Today's heartbreaking defeat unfortunately shows that lies and fear can still win at the ballot box," said Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

With 87 percent of the precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 percent of the vote. They prevailed in many of Maine's far-flung small towns and lost by a less-than-expected margin in the state's biggest city, Portland.

"The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation," declared Frank Schubert, chief organizer for the winning side.

Read the rest here.

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative group that steered substantial funds to fight gay marriage in both California and Maine, was elated by Tuesday's result, saying it shows that "that even in a New England state, if the voters have a chance to have their say, they're going to protect and defend the commonsense definition of marriage."

Thank God that WE THE PEOPLE are making the CORRECT DECISIONS AT THE BALLOT BOX to keep marriage as the union of one man and one woman!

Cornerstone Of Our Civilization

Marriage between a man and a woman is the cornerstone of our civilization. - Congressman Steve King. Be sure to go to the World Net Daily Radio America site to listen to the entire interview. It's excellent!

Which Study Tells the Truth?

The following is an email that I received from Ron Prentice of Protect Marriage.com. The fact that the media would release one report (that favored "strong warnings against therapists attempting to reorient homosexuals to heterosexuality," but refused to report on the fact that "therapeutic work to alter one’s sexual “orientation” has been successful, and remains consistent over time" demonstrates the blatant bias of the press. The article goes on to say, "Therapeutic work, if undertaken, is especially successful when teamed with religious faith. This study has received little to no attention in the media."

More proof that the Lamestream media is very biased. They only pick and choose what THEY want to report - not the facts of the matter at hand. Remember this the next time you read whether or not homosexuality is immutable; that is, can a person’s sexual orientation change? It depends on which study you want to believe.


Aug. 12, 2009

Dear Friends,

Two important events took place in the past week, but only one has found its way into the mainstream media. First, the American Psychological Association (APA) issued a report from its task force on “therapeutic responses to sexual orientation.” In the report, strong warnings were issued against therapists attempting to “reorient” homosexuals to heterosexuality. This one got significant press.

Yet at this week’s APA convention held in Toronto, two psychologists released the most recent statistics from their longitudinal study of sexual “reorientation" through therapeutic treatment. This study found that therapeutic work to alter one’s sexual “orientation” has been successful, and remains consistent over time. Therapeutic work, if undertaken, is especially successful when teamed with religious faith. This study has received little to no attention in the media.

While the APA task force issues strong warnings against psycho therapeutic goals of changing one’s sexual “orientation,” another reputable study presents data showing long-term success with reorientation.

Why does it matter? Because the issue of the day is whether or not homosexuality is immutable; that is, can a person’s sexual orientation change? This is one of the critical questions that will no doubt be addressed in the courts of America.

In the battle over marriage’s definition, now moving toward the U.S. Supreme Court, the homosexual lobby proclaims that sexual orientation cannot be changed. In carefully chosen words, pro-gay communications state that gays are “born that way.” They do not say, however, that homosexual orientation is genetic, because research does not agree. But you can bet that immutability will be argued in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case now underway in the federal district court in San Francisco.

Perry v. Schwarzenegger is growing in size and costs, and is shaping up to be the legal case that may decide the fate of marriage’s definition in every state of the country. Issues such as immutability, rights, compelling government interests, and child development will all figure in to materials presented to the Court.

The Proposition 8 Legal Defense Fund has been granted the right to intervene in this case on behalf of the official proponents of Prop 8, to singularly represent the majority of California’s voters who placed traditional marriage into the constitution of the state. Our committee, alone, is defending the will of the voters. And as the importance of this legal case builds, so do the expenses of top-rate legal representation! Our coffers were significantly depleted in defending the constitutionality of Prop 8 before the California Supreme Court. This new Perry v. Schwarzenegger federal court challenge means we will need to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to ensure that lawyers for gay marriage activists do not convince federal judges that marriage can be redefined “willy nilly” (as Justice Joyce Kennard famously commented of state court efforts to overturn Prop 8) and replaced with homosexual, genderless marriage. Please consider a generous gift today to the Prop 8 Legal Defense Fund.

The pro-gay lobby’s claim of immutability is one of the things that upsets the African-American community, as gay activists demand their “civil rights,” likening their “plight” to the decades of public and private discrimination suffered by African-Americans.

However, a former administrator at the University of Toledo brings clarity to the issue. Crystal Dixon, fired from her position as Assistant Vice President of Human Resources for her remarks, wrote this in a column to the Toledo Free Press:

As a Black woman... I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are ‘civil rights victims.’ Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman. I am genetically and biologically a Black woman and very pleased to be so as my Creator intended.

And Ms. Dixon was terminated because she spoke her conscience, as a private citizen. This is the course that is being paved in our legislatures and courts across the land: those who disagree with political correctness will be silenced by the imbalanced, irrational laws of “tolerance.”

Please help the Prop 8 Legal Defense Fund today!

Thank you!


Sincerely,

Ron Prentice, Executive Director
ProtectMarriage.com





www.protectmarriage.com




© 2009 ProtectMarriage.com. All Rights Reserved. ProtectMarriage.com is a project of California Renewal (I.D. #1302592)

Study Finds Fathers Crucial to Child Development

No matter what the homosexual activists would want you believe, more and more proof is being shown that children need both a mother and a father for the best development scenario while growing up.

New America Media: Study Finds Fathers Crucial to Child Development

Excerpts:

The study found that children whose fathers had become more involved in their daily care did not show any increase in aggressive behavior or hyperactivity over the next two years, according to Supporting Father Involvement researcher Carolyn Cowan.

“However,” Cowan added, “children of the parents in the control group increased their behavior problems in the same time period.”

The research suggests that a father’s increased involvement in his child’s daily life provides emotional benefits for both the child and the parents.
In order to best reach the participants, the research sites worked to make sure the sessions were both clinically and culturally competent.


[T]he study is unique for several reasons: It is one of few studies to focus on the role of fathers in childrearing. It also focuses on the five integral aspects of life: self- esteem, a couple’s relationship, the parent-child relationship, family legacies or rituals, and community support and stressors. Unlike other studies, each group has a male and female facilitator, which organizers say provides a model to encourage shared responsibilities.

The "Higher Law" Argument Re: SS Marriage Debate

The following article link asks the question, "Why is the morality question missing in the same-sex marriage debate?" [Note: You may need to enter your email address to view the online newspaper. Also, use the arrows at top of page to get to page 5 where the article is located. Sorry for the inconvenience - I wasn't able to copy and paste it here.]

Excerpt:

If we are mere animals, then there are no moral laws other than what any group of people may choose. If we are created in the image of God, then there are moral laws that transcend all of humanity. This has been called the "Higher Law" argument.

The author discusses what our founding fathers meant when they wrote the words, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

This section is most important when it comes to the same-sex marriage debate:

They saw it to be "self-evident" that the moral basis for law came from our Creator and therefore certain laws could be deemed immoral based on the premise of higher law.

It is important to read the entire article. However, the author makes his greatest point (IMHO) when he wrote:

There is a world of difference between the establishment of a religion and the establishment of morals based on higher law.

That is truly an excellent point! How often have biblically-based Christians gotten the complaint from homosexual activists and their cohorts, "don't push your Christianity upon me," or something similarly worded to make the baseless claim that we are "forcing our religion down their throats?"

Nothing could be further from the truth!

Most Christians know that we do not have the power to "force our religion" on anyone. A person is called by the Holy Spirit towards repentance and the saving grace through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior! All we can do is point a person in the direction of salvation. Christ does the saving through the power of the Holy Spirit!

The fact that there are "morals based on higher law" is indisputable. Whether a person recognizes that Higher Law or not doesn't make a difference. It is there.

We all know that murder is wrong. If a person doesn't want to believe that homosexual behavior is wrong, too, then he is denying the sexual design and purpose for which God made him or her!

The author is correct! Our founding fathers "were tethering the morals of our nation to a higher law."

In the body of the essay, you will read about the immoral Communistic atheism that led to the slaughter of millions of people in the Soviet Union. When people ignore the moral law set into motion by our Creator which was established by His Higher Laws, then we have moral decay, moral depravity, death and destruction. The chaos that results when reprobate minds ignore the Higher Law's call for morality and righteousness is evident every day in this life. The evidence is seen in the evil, sin and death that man inflicts upon his fellow man when he does not have the indwelling Spirit of God to guide him away from the abyss of spiritual oblivion and back to reconciliation with God.

The author shares what many of us who voted YES ON PROPOSITION 8 here in California already have experienced.

The attack on sexual morality will not stop at marriage. There will be no higher law to stop the next moral descent to the lowest common denominator. There must be something in this life that is much more than common. There must be some things sacred. The moral foundation of this nation is one of them.

Thank you, Pastor Jim Reed, for telling it like it is!

A Warning About Vile "Bruno" Movie

This was not the type of movie that I would ever see, but when I read the following email, I felt it necessary to warn readers about this disgusting movie. If you feel led to donate to Movieguide: The Family Guide to Movies and Entertainment then CLICK HERE.


This Friday Universal Pictures, one of the six major Hollywood studios, is releasing BRÜNO.

Based on our screening of it, and the opinion of many other critics, BRÜNO is the most vile, perverse movie ever made by a mainstream movie studio. This disgusting, abhorrent movie contains (among other things) extremely graphic scenes of heterosexual and homosexual sex acts, explicit scenes and extended close-ups of full male and full female nudity, an extended scene of a totally nude heterosexual woman repeatedly whipping a homosexual man in his bikini briefs, partial nude scenes (including full rear male nudity) where body parts are partially covered up with black bars placed in strategic places, obscenely graphic verbal descriptions of perverse sex acts in dialogue and conversations with real people, and images of a male black baby from Africa in a hot tub with white adults who are clearly interested in doing some kind of sex acts with one another.

This movie is going out to thousands of theaters in neighborhoods like yours. Many of these theaters are located in shopping malls and movie multiplexes where children of all ages congregate, with and without parents or adult guardians.

Time is short, so we have to act now!

Studies have shown conclusively that movies like this will harm the psychological development of children and teenagers of all ages. Other studies have shown that almost half of all movie theaters do not card underage children who try to get tickets to such vile R-rated movies as BRÜNO by themselves, unaccompanied by adults.

This despicable type of pornographic paganism and child abuse must be stopped and stopped completely!

The physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well being of your children and grandchildren is at stake!!!

Right now you and I have the ability to notify city managers, prosecutors and elected officials in cities and communities all across the country to ask them to ban this movie before it opens in your community.

BUT, since this movie opens on Friday, you must act now!

Please pray for this project to notify about this disgusting movie. We have many, many communities to notify because this will need to be stopped at a local, not a national, level. We simply can't do this without your immediate help!

Please CLICK HERE and make a donation so we can alert hundreds of communities. Each donation of $79 sends the letter to 200 local District Attorneys in order to mobilize this effort.

Please help us now!

Below is the fax that we have prepared to send. Act now and we can stop this pornographic atrocity. Together, we can make a difference in the lives of your children and grandchildren, and the future of America.

God bless you.

Yours truly,

Dr. Ted Baehr


Donate here.

July 8, 2009

Dear City Manager:

Our organization has just viewed the upcoming “R-rated” movie “Brüno,” which is scheduled to come out in local movie theaters Friday, July 10. Having attended a screening of the movie, we can factually state that the movie contains the following obscene, pornographic and offensive material (and more besides):

• Extremely graphic sex scenes (including depicted heterosexual intercourse, depicted oral sex (including anal licking), depicted homosexual sodomy, and sadomasochistic whipping of a homosexual in his bikini briefs by a fully nude female “Dominatrix”);
• Scenes of full frontal male and female nudity (including extended close-ups of a man swinging his fully nude penis)
• A mocking, sexually explicit interview with a pastor who specializes in “making gay people straight” that is clearly intended to provoke the pastor by crudely offending him in a vulgar manner;
• Adopting an African child as a fashion accessory and “man magnet” to be “in” with American culture like Madonna and Angelina Jolie (then shipping that baby – whom the protagonist names “OJ” – on a plane through
checked baggage in a cardboard box);
• Images of a black baby from Africa in a hot tub with white adults who are clearly interested in performing sex acts at some point with one another;
• Making light of the Holocaust and Jews, including mentioning Adolph Hitler in a positive light and a homosexualized outfit mocking traditional Jewish dress;
• A sequence mocking African Americans and black people; and,
• Explicit verbal descriptions of sex acts.



Regardless of your views on sexuality, or your definition of humor, one thing is clear: the content of this movie should not be seen by children of any age, including underage teenagers. Originally rated NC-17, “Brüno” has since been given an R rating. An R rating simply suggests that theaters restrict viewing by children under 17 unless they are with an adult. However, Federal Trade Commission studies have shown that almost half of movie theaters do not enforce the Motion Picture Associations restrictions, and that one-third of unaccompanied 13-year-olds have purchased tickets for an R-rated movie. Additionally, many children sneak into R-rated movies or get tickets from some sick adult who finds it humorous to flood an impressionable child’s mind with obscene content. Clearly, however, “Brüno” still contains NC-17 content as well as pornographic content.

With this reality in mind, we formally ask your City Council to file an injunction against the showing of this movie in your city, or at least restrict the film to 17 and over regardless of adult accompaniment. To determine whether this movie fits the community standards of your locality, as legally defined by the United States Supreme Court, you may have to require your local movie theaters to screen the movie ahead of time for the Council, or a duly designated committee of the Council, to determine what formal action to take regarding “Brüno.”

Please let us know if there is something we can do to help you in this battle for our children.

Sincerely,

Ted Baehr, Juris Doctor
Publisher of Movieguide®

Shattering Myths

All I can say is IT'S ABOUT TIME!! FINALLY a journalist tells it like it is without the liberal leftist hateful ideology that is often spewed against conservative Christian women who happen to be beautiful, but more importantly, also are great women in wonderful families, with intelligent minds, great hearts, true Christian faith, and hope (the REAL kind) to change this nation for the better.

If it were me writing the article, I would have included much more of the accomplishments of Sarah Palin as Governor of Alaska. But I really liked what was shared about Kathy Ireland.

The Washington Times: Opinionated Prejean, Ireland shatter myth
Attractive, articulate not incompatible.

Excerpts:

Take former supermodel Kathy Ireland, who is now the chief executive officer of a $1.4 billion company. She unabashedly says her faith guides her in everything she does and that it's possible to be for women's rights and also be pro-life.

Carrie Prejean, the former Miss California and Miss USA contestant who spoke out against gay marriage, says her future includes "me speaking out and taking a stand for what I believe in."


Miss Ireland credits education for another recent change in her life. She says she has always been a passionate supporter of women's rights, but she recently changed her views on abortion.

"I was pro-choice," she says. "It wasn't something I would ever choose for myself, but I felt, 'Who am I to tell a woman what to do with her body?' " Miss Ireland says her revised approach is based on science, not faith.

"You can be an atheist and know it is not OK to take a life," she says. "I dove into the medical books. I said, 'Please show me some evidence that an unborn baby is not a human being.' But there wasn't any. I read everything I could get my hands on. I called Planned Parenthood. I talked to my pro-choice friends. Nothing. The moment life begins, there is a blueprint for DNA.

"Some people assume because I am pro-life I am anti-woman, but that could not be further from the truth," she says.

Sarah Anne Sumpleoc of Fredericksburg, Va., who writes the blog Girls, God and the Good Life, says she thinks the culture may be heading to a time when conservative role models may not be such a rarity. She tries to write about role models on the blog often "because girls are looking for it."

"Whether you are 13 or 30, we all look for role models," she says. "We want to say, 'I want to be like that.' There are a whole lot of women doing amazing things, living what they believe and not afraid to show it."

Read entire article here.

Hat Tip:

Washington Times