Court Upholds Only Half of Prop. 8??

'An arm and a leg cut off marriage'

California Supreme Court upholds only half of Prop. 8

Sacramento, California -- Today's ruling by the California Supreme Court that some 18,000 homosexual "marriages" are valid, despite the vote of the people to prohibit such legal recognition, has frustrated and disappointed pro-family citizens who voted for true protection of marriage licenses for a man and a woman.

"While it was good that the majority of the justices ruled only man-woman marriages could be performed after Prop. 8 passed, it's wrong and unconstitutional for the judges to permit counterfeit marriages in clear violation of Prop. 8," said Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, a statewide pro-family organization that has been fighting for natural marriage in California for more than a decade. "An arm and a leg have been cut off the natural institution of marriage in California."

Prop. 8 proponents' rebuttal arguments in the voter information guide stated: "Your YES vote on Proposition 8 means that only marriage between a man and a woman will be valid or recognized in California, regardless of when or where performed." Thomasson said, "'Regardless of when...performed' obviously means that pre-existing same-sex 'marriages' are not valid in light of Prop. 8. Why is it so hard to understand what the words 'is' and 'when' mean?"

"The judges have ignored the straightforward, retroactive effect of Prop. 8, which specified that the only valid marriage in California 'is' between a man and a woman, 'regardless of when' the marriage was performed," said Thomasson. "This is unconstitutional and unjust. The court's own rules require that the counterfeit marriages be declared null and void. But instead of respecting the clear text of Prop. 8 and by ignoring the clarifying ballot statements, the court has gone with its own feelings and its own social agenda in violation of the judges' solemn oaths to uphold the written constitution. The voters have been handed back an altered ballot." Today's decision means every homosexual couple that wanted a "same-sex marriage" last year, got one. The decision also means some 18,000 counterfeit marriages will be held out as role models to impressionable children. "By allowing these numerous false marriages to stand, the Supreme Court is holding out to impressionable boys and girls the unnatural role model of homosexual 'marriages'" said Thomasson. "This is not what the people of California voted for. They voted to ensure that the only marriage in California is a marriage between a man and a woman."

The California Supreme Court's own rules depend on ballot arguments to determine voter intent: "In construing constitutional and statutory provisions, whether enacted by the Legislature or by initiative, the intent of the enacting body is the paramount consideration.... We are mindful that the goal of statutory construction is ascertainment of legislative intent so that the purpose of the law may be effectuated." -- In re Lance W. (1985), 37 Cal.3d at 889. Evidence of the legislative or popular intent of an enactment includes not merely the text of the amendment, but also other "indicia of voters' intent," including ballot summaries and arguments. -- Legislature v. Eu (1991) 54 Cal.3d at 504; Lance W., 37 Cal.3d at 888 n.8.

Prop. 8 was approved last fall by 52.3% of the voters. It added Section 7.5 to Article 1 of the California Constitution, reading, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The vote of the people overruled the California Supreme Court, which, on a 4 to 3 vote, had invented "same-sex marriages" in May 2008.
-- end --

SaveCalifornia.com is a leading West Coast nonprofit, nonpartisan organization representing children and families. We stand for marriage and family, parental rights, the sanctity of human life, religious freedom, financial freedom, and back-to-basics education.

Feminist Verbally Abuses Miss California

By now, it is a well known fact that far left liberal loons in the media are doing their utmost evil best to viciously spew verbal attacks against Miss California (who was the Miss U.S.A. runner-up) Carrie Prejean for her HONEST ANSWER concerning HER OPINION AND BELIEFS that marriage is, and should remain, the union of one man and one woman, just as it is revealed through God's Word, the Bible!

Please see my Talk Wisdom post: Conservatism is the Antidote to Tyranny, [Note: Now posted in its entirety below.] which reveals the reasons why secular progressive far left liberals (a.k.a. "Statists") refuse to allow this young woman the liberty to express her God-given beliefs without being verbally harrassed in some of the most despicable ways.

Don't pass up watching the first video. It will make the point of argument in the next video much more poignant.

Next, take special note of the video argument between radio talk show host, Laura Ingraham (who subbed for Bill O'Reilly on T.V. last evening) and a self-professed "feminist" - Gloria Feldt - who, instead of defending a young woman and her heartfelt beliefs, instead, disparages her even further!

The following is a copy of the entire post at Talk Wisdom.

Conservatism is the Antidote to Tyranny

Found the following video today - quite by accident actually. It is absolutely riveting! In the beginning, it asks the question, "Humanity, what have you become? When animals become more human than us...there is a real problem. Near the end you will see the statement, "when animals become more compassionate than humans, it is a sign of the end times. Wake up people." [Note: Some of what is written on the screen of the video doesn't actually apply to this post.]




As I watched this video, a thought jumped out at me. The parallels of the attacks we view in that video and what is happening in our nation today between the current soft tyranny of government which is incessantly attacking the patriots who believe in liberty, freedom, conservative values and ethics, free speech rights, low taxes etc. cannot be missed or denied. [Note: A few paragraphs down, you will see a second video that serves as a perfect example of the far-left liberal haters and their attacks against anyone who does not believe as they do.]

I started reading Mark Levin's book, "Liberty and Tyranny - A Conservative Manifesto" today. Get this book! It is excellent! I have only completed the first two chapters, but Mark has already brilliantly exposed the differences between the liberal leftist progressive "Statists" and their worldview for America, vs. the Conservative ideals that were the foundation of our nation. I have highlighted so many paragraphs that I would love to share.

Levin explains why he doesn't use the term "liberal," but rather the term "statist" to describe the Modern Liberal in the United States today.

The Modern Liberal believes in the supremacy of the state, thereby rejecting the principles of the Declaration and the order of the civil society, in whole or part. For the Modern Liberal, the individual's imperfection and personal pursuits impede the objective of a utopian state. In this, Modern Liberalism promotes what French historian Alexis de Tocqueville described as a soft tyranny, which becomes increasingly more oppressive, potentially leading to a hard tyranny (some form of totalitarianism). As the word "liberal" is, in its classical meaning, the opposite of authoritarian, it is more accurate, therefore, to characterize the Modern Liberal as Statist.

Oftentimes, a video is worth a thousand word essay. Please watch this exchange between radio talk show host, Laura Ingraham (who subbed for Bill on the O'Reilly Factor yesterday) and Gloria Feldt on the subject of the verbal bashing that Miss California has been receiving from the Lamestream Media and the SILENCE of "feminist" groups (that are supposed to come to the rescue of women being verbally attacked like that).



Certainly doesn't remind us of how the herd of buffalo came back (with reinforcements) to rescue the young calf that was viciously being ganged up on by many tigers in the first video above...does it?

In the following paragraph quotes from Levin's book you will see exactly WHY Ms. Gloria Feldt could not bring herself to defend Miss California for her own personal beliefs (despite the fact that she does not agree with them) and actually jumped on the bandwagon to continue the attacks against this young woman.

Levin's book [with my comments added]:

The Statist [think Gloria Feldt in previous video as just one example] veils his pursuits in moral indignation, intoning in high dudgeon* [see update below] the injustices and inequities of liberty and life itself, for which only he can provide justice and bring a righteous resolution. And when the resolution proves elusive, as it undoubtedly does -- whether the Marxist promise of "the workers' paradise" or the Great Society's "War on poverty" -- the Statist [think Obama and many in Congress today] demands ever more authority to wring out the imperfections of mankind's existence. Unconstrained by constitutional prohibitions,[Obama] what is left to limit the Statist's [Obama and most in Congress] ambitions but his own moral compass, which has already led him astray? He is never circumspect about his own shortcomings. Failure is not the product of his beliefs but merely want of power and resources. Thus are born endless rationalizations for seizing ever more governmental authority. [Obama admin, Congress, courts]

In the midst stands the individual,[think Laura Ingraham defending the free speech rights of Miss California in that video] who was a predominate focus of the Founders. When living freely and pursuing his own legitimate interests, the individual displays qualities that are antithetical to the Statist's [Feldt] - [qualities like Laura's and Carrie Prejean's] initiative, self-reliance, and independence. As the Statist [Feldt, Obama, many in Congress] is building a culture of conformity and dependency, where the ideal citizen takes on dronelike qualities in service to the state, [think ObamaBorg Bots] the individual must be drained of uniqueness and self-worth, and deterred from independent thought or behavior. This is achieved through varying methods of economic punishment and political suppression. [the spending bills, promotion of abortion with tax-payer money, silencing conservatives etc.]

The Statist also knows that despite his successful usurpations, enough citizens are still skeptical and even distrustful of politicians and government that he cannot force his will all at once. [this is where Obama and the majority in Congress are making HUGE mistakes - because they are both forcing their will upon the people at a rate that makes the average patriot's head spin!] Thus he marches in incremental steps, [well - used to do it that way], adjusting his pace as circumstances dictate. [like using a financial crisis to get taxpayer money for 9,000 earmarks and porkulus spending]. Today his pace is more rapid, [yup!] for resistance has slowed. [NOT ANYMORE! TEA Party power!!] And at no time does the Statist do an about-face. But not so with some who claim the mantle of conservatism but are, in truth, neo-Statists, [like that traitor Arlen Spector, Olympia Snowe, and Susan Collins] who would have the Conservative abandon the high ground of the founding principles for the quicksand of a soft tyranny. [Obama & cohorts]

Mark goes on and describes the fact that "liberty's treasures defy cataloguing." The Statist's scorn for liberty is misplaced and highly corrosive. Levin observes:

Liberty's permeance in American society often makes its manifestations elusive or invisible to those born into it. Even if liberty is acknowledged, it is often taken for granted and its permanence assumed.

WOW! What a powerful point he makes! In fact, this is why I think that many college students were led astray into the Kool-Aid cult of Obamaland during the campaign. They don't study history and know not of the dangers of socialism. To them, it was something knew (that is...if they even knew what Obama meant by his brand of "hope" and "change.")

I have seen many bumper stickers that have the "COEXIST" word accompanied by different religious symbols on it. That's all well and good, one might say. The fact that we live in a primarily Christian nation allows such freedoms. But the trouble is, when it comes to governing, the Marxism/Socialism/Communism/Islamism agenda of the Obama Admin. doesn't so easily "coexist" with the liberty of our Constitutional Republic. All of those "isms" are, each and of themselves, an increasingly corrosive threat to liberty!! As Mark states in chapter 2 - "the Statist's Utopia can take many forms (see above) but they are all of the same species - tyranny." What's more, as we saw in the Laura Ingraham vs. Gloria Feldt conversation (more like argument!), "the primary principle around with the Statist organizes can be summed up in a single word -equality."

Now watch this. Mark Levin brilliantly lays out the differences between what the Founders meant by the term "equality" vs. how the Statists use (actually - misuse) the term.

Equality, as understood by the Founders, is the natural right of every individual to live freely under self-government, to acquire and retain property he creates through his own labor, and to be treated impartially before a just law. Moreover, equality should not be confused with perfection, for man is also imperfect, making his application of equalism, even in the most just society, imperfect. Otherwise, inequality is the natural state of man in the sense that each individual is born unique in all his human characteristics. Therefore, equality and inequality, properly comprehended, are both engines of liberty.

The Statist, however, misuses equality to pursue uniform economic and social outcomes. He must continuously enhance his power at the expense of self-government and violate the individual's property rights at the expense of individual liberty, for he believes that through persuasion, deception, and coercion he can tame man's natural state and man's perfection can, therefore, be achieved in Utopia. The Statist must claim the power to make that which is unequal equal and that which is imperfect perfect. This is the hope the Statist offers, if only the individual surrenders himself to the all-powerful state. Only then can the impossible be made possible.

During the campaign, Obama is quoted as saying, "[O]ur individual salvation depends on collective salvation." But Mark Levin points out that "salvation is not government's to give. Indeed, it is not a grant to mankind from mankind. Under the wrong conditions and in the wrong hands, this deviant view is a powerful tool against humanity."

This is what millions of Americans, including the TEA Party participants, are sensing from Obama. They are all seeing this soft tyranny creeping up and are highly concerned of what it will look like four years from now. One good thing to note is that our American history and traditions make it more difficult to transform our civil society towards tyranny. And Mark makes this excellent point:

[S]till, tyranny is a threat that looms over all societies, preventable only by the active vigilance of the people.

Levin concludes the first chapter:

The Conservative does not despise government. He despises tyranny. This is precisely why the Conservative reveres the Constitution and insists on adherence to it. An "effective" government that operates outside its constitutional limitations is a dangerous government. By abandoning principle for efficiency, the neo-Statist,[think RINOS] it seems, is no more bound to the Constitution than is the Statist.

[T]he Conservative is alarmed by the ascent of a soft tyranny and its cheery acceptance by the neo-Statist. He knows that liberty once lost is rarely recovered. He knows of the decline and eventual failure of past republics. And he knows that the best prescription for addressing society's real and perceived ailments if no to further empower an already enormous federal government beyond its constitutional limits, but to return to the founding principles. A free people living in a civil society, working in self-interested coorperation, and a government operating within the limits of its authority promote more prosperity, opportunity, and happiness for more people than any alternative. Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny precisely because its principles are the founding principles.

Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny for many reasons. But perhaps one of the most important reasons of all is because we believe, as the Founding Fathers did that prudence must be exercised in assessing change.

Levin:

Prudence is the highest virtue for it is judgment drawn on wisdom. The proposed change should be informed by the experience, knowledge, and traditions of society, tailored for a specific purpose, and accomplished through a constitutional construct that ensures thoughtful deliberation by the community. Change unconstrained by prudence produces unpredictable consequences, threatening ordered liberty with chaos and ultimately despotism, and placing at risk the very principles the Conservative holds dear.

Sounds EXACTLY like what we are going through right now...doesn't it?

Source:
Liberty and Tyranny - A Conservative Manifesto by Mark Levin; Threshold Editions of Simon and Schuster, Inc. 2009 pp. 4, 8-11, 14, 18-19.

*******

* Update:

I have to confess, I really didn't know the complete meaning of the term "dudgeon" when I first quoted it from Mark Levin's book. I figured that it meant something like "anger" and "hatred." This morning, I decided to look up the word in the dictionary. It is a highly descriptive word and fits EXACTLY to the situation that readers have witnessed in the exchange between Laura Ingraham and Gloria Feldt regarding Miss California.

dudg⋅eon1   /ˈdʌdʒən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [duhj-uhn] Show IPA
–noun a feeling of offense or resentment; anger: We left in high dudgeon.

Origin:
1565–75; orig. uncert.


Synonyms:
indignation, pique.

Notice that the first definition claims that the origin was "uncertain."

Now, look at this "obsolete" entry at dictionary.com:

dudg⋅eon2   /ˈdʌdʒən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [duhj-uhn] Show IPA
–noun Obsolete. 1. a kind of wood used esp. for the handles of knives, daggers, etc.
2. a handle or hilt made of this wood.
3. a dagger having such a hilt.

Origin:
1400–50; late ME; cf. AF digeon

There is more! The following entry describes the "smiling Ms. Feldt" quite well as she systematically shoots daggers of hatred against Miss California!

dudg·eon 1 (dŭj'ən)
n. A sullen, angry, or indignant humor: "Slamming the door in Meg's face, Aunt March drove off in high dudgeon" (Louisa May Alcott).

[Origin unknown.]

dudg·eon 2 (dŭj'ən)
n.
Obsolete A kind of wood used in making knife handles.
Archaic
A dagger with a hilt made of this wood.
The hilt of a dagger.

[Middle English dogeon, possibly from Anglo-Norman.]

The following describes how the term "dudgeon" relates to our current use of the term "daggers" when we use it metaphorically to describe "throwing daggers" in verbal spewings of hate:

Dudgeon

Dudg"eon\, n. 1. The root of the box tree, of which hafts for daggers were made. --Gerarde (1597).

2. The haft of a dagger. --Shak.

3. A dudgeon-hafted dagger; a dagger. --Hudibras.
Dudgeon

Dudg"eon\, n. [W. dygen anger, grudge.] Resentment; ill will; anger; displeasure.

I drink it to thee in dudgeon and hostility.

Sir T. Scott.
Dudgeon

Dudg"eon\, a. Homely; rude; coarse. [Obs.]

By my troth, though I am plain and dudgeon, I would not be an ass. --Beau. & Fl.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
Cite This Source

Notice the synonyms:

Synonyms

huff
miff
pique
resentment
ruffled feathers
umbrage
bitterness
anger
displeasure
fury

Did you see that first one - "huff"?? Reminds me of Ariana Huffington! Sometimes people DO live up to the meaning of their name!!! LOL!!!

P.S. Wayne of Jeremiah Films has placed this post (via my Protect Biblical Marriage blog) in his headline list today.

Thanks Wayne! LOTS of good information to read over there!!

Carrie Prejean - No Compromise, Stand Firm on Faith

What an AWESOME SERVICE at The Rock Church today!!! Watch the video of Carrie Prejean with Pastor Miles McPherson: No Compromise: Standing Firm On Your Faith

Carrie Prejean, Miss California and Miss USA’s first runner up, will appear at the Rock Church during services on Sunday April 26th. Prejean is a member of the Rock family and actively serves in church outreach ministries.

During the Q&A portion of last Sunday's Miss USA pageant, Prejean expressed her belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman, touching off a firestorm of widely publicized criticism from Pageant judge and nationally known celebrity blogger, Perez Hilton. In subsequent appearances, Prejean has stood fast in her morals and biblical truths, refusing to compromise her faith.

Sunday's services will feature a discussion with the Rock’s Senior Pastor Miles McPherson, who spent time with Prejean in the critical hours following the pageant. They will share the story behind the controversy that we haven’t heard.

Also posted at Talk Wisdom: No Compromise - Standing Firm On Your Faith

God Bless Carrie Prejean

When I heard the name, "Carrie Prejean," I thought to myself that the name sounded familiar. While texting with my daughter this morning, she reminded me that they had become good friends while they both played on the same softball team years ago. She wrote, "Mom - check out the softball photo of the team in red on the shelf above your computer desk. She had brown hair back then."

Yep...now I remember her! When I have some time (and guidance on how to do it) I will scan and upload that softball team photo.

For now, I want to share a link to the video of Carrie's answer to the homosexual man (who called her a very cruel and ugly name afterwards in his own video), and how very proud we all are of her for standing up for her convictions and not sacrificing them for the pageant crown.

Miss California loses for supporting marriage between a man and woman.

Excerpt:

“Good for Miss California,” said Johnny Franks in The Chattanoogan. She was asked a loaded question by an openly gay judge, and held to her morals when it would have been so easy to “sacrifice them for the crown.” Shame on everybody who booed her—“since when do we live in a pink Nazi society that sensors free speech.”

Some good comments there:

JoAnn
Posted April 20, 2009 at 5:23 pm Permalink
Everybody pray for her, she stood up for her cinvictions, I believe God will bless her. We will be put down for anything against the gay agenda but consider the source, they are serving satan and not God. It is a very different world we live in and it isn’t going to get any better so hang in there for what the Bible stands for and we will win in the end.

John Kehoe
Posted April 20, 2009 at 5:36 pm Permalink
My 18 year old grandson and I watched the tournament, and Miss California had won hands down, but when that flaming gay judge asked that question, and she gave a courageous and correct answer we turned to one another and said she was washed up, because she stood on principle. In any event, I thought the Miss USA pageasnt was on looks and not on politial correctness. When did this change? John Kehoe

james dome
Posted April 21, 2009 at 4:28 am Permalink
She is a winner to God and that’s where it matters. Man’s ways are not God’s ways. This life is temporary.

Karen
Posted April 21, 2009 at 10:55 am Permalink
Kudos to Miss California for being a true American, one who stands for her belief in the face of adversity and even at the cost of a crown. Boo to Perez Hilton for being such a hypocrit, not a champion against bigotry. Boo for the Miss America committee who chose the judges. Miss California’s courage will long outlive the Miss America Contest.

Lastly, isn't it ironic that Miss California is getting all of the attention because of her determination to not be "politically correct?" I don't even know who actually won the pageant!

Hat Tip:

Alliance Defense Fund

This post and comments are also available at my Talk Wisdom blog.

*******

Update: A great email letter from Ron Prentice of Protectmarriage.com:

April 20, 2009

Dear Friend,

It seems that there is no place left where gay activists won’t attempt to force their agenda onto the rest of society. Same-sex marriage, of course, is at the top of their list.

Last night during the Miss USA contest, one of the contest judges, gay gossip blogger Perez Hilton, asked Miss California Carrie Prejean that since Vermont has now legalized gay marriage shouldn’t every state follow suit? Ms. Prejean had the courage to express her views and said, “Well, I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you very much.”

Ms. Prejean’s comments were cheered by the crowd, but a smattering of jeers could be heard in the background by a few who were incensed at her answer. According to FoxNEWS.com, arguments broke out in the lobby of the theater, with one gay man shouting, "I think it's ridiculous that she got first runner-up. That is not the value of 95 percent of the people in this audience. Look around this audience and tell me how many gay men there are." Is there an unwritten rule that Miss USA contestants must hold values in agreement with homosexual activists?

For his own part, Hilton immediately cut a video blog where he ripped Ms. Prejean, calling her a “stupid b***h” and referring to her in language so vile that it can’t even be hinted at by its first letter.

Ms. Prejean was named runner-up in the contest and today there was considerable discussion in the blogosphere about whether her answer might have cost her the title. Prejean told FoxNEWS.com that she had “no regrets” and was happy with the answer she gave.

We’re very proud of Ms. Prejean for speaking her mind in support of traditional marriage. She represented the silent majority in America and expressed a point of view that over 7 million California voters also expressed just last November. In fact, in the history of this issue every single state that has voted on it has voted to affirm traditional marriage.

The outcry from some activists in the gay community over Ms. Prejean’s comments are indicative of how far they will go to force their same-sex marriage agenda on society. Miss California is vilified by Perez Hilton in a video blog for respectfully answering his question, and gay men are shouting against her in the theater lobby. Yet we are supposed to take homosexual leaders at face value that if same-sex marriage were legalized they would never force this teaching onto children in the schools.

Thank you, Miss California, for knowing the truth about marriage and standing up for it, even when you knew that your honest answer may hinder your chances for the crown of Miss USA.

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice
Chairman
ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8


www.protectmarriage.com

Majority of Californians Are With Us.

Received the following email that I found as quite encouraging in the midst of the recent developments in the same-sex marriage battle:

April 6, 2009

Dear Friend,

We continue to wait for the California Supreme Court to issue their much-anticipated decision upholding Proposition 8. As you know, the court heard oral arguments on March 5. A decision is due by June 5, but could come any day. While one can never be certain, most legal experts expect the Court to uphold Proposition 8. We will keep you posted on the outcome.

Key No on 8 Leader Says They Will Lose 2010 Ballot Fight

In a surprising admission, a key leader of the No on 8 campaign has said publicly for the first time that if the homosexual community pursues a new ballot initiative in 2010, “we’re going to lose.” Kate Kendall, Executive Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights and a member of the No on 8 executive committee told a prominent Bay Area gay newspaper that public polls, including the recently published Field Poll, overstate support for gay marriage. “People lie,” she said. “We're at 42 percent or 43 percent. We could claw our way to 48 percent but we never get past 48 percent."

Kendall, who told the Bay Area Reporter that she does not plan to play a leadership role in the next campaign, said that it will take time beyond 2010 for the gay community to mount the kind of public education effort necessary to convince voters to support same-sex marriage. "The 64 million dollar question is when do we go back. No doubt if we lose in court, the only relief is to repeal Prop 8 at the ballot…[H]aving gone through the draining, rigorous Prop 8 campaign I have a better inkling of what it is going to take and in this economy, I worry that we still do not see enough of actual public education conversations that have to happen. We just haven't had enough time."

Protect Marriage is keenly aware of the need to engage the public in education and outreach in support of traditional marriage. We will not sit idly by as the homosexual community attempts to define the same-sex marriage issue on their terms. We are hard at work developing programs to affirm traditional marriage. Those will be announced soon. Stay tuned…

State Settles “Party A/Party B” Lawsuit

You may recall the case of Gideon and Rachel Codding, a young couple who married a few weeks after the California Supreme Court legalized gay marriage. To their dismay, the marriage license provided by the state no longer allowed them to register as bride and groom. Instead, they were forced to register as “Party A” and “Party B.” Incensed, the young couple struck out the references to “party” and instead handwrote “bride” and “groom” on the license. The state refused to accept the license and the couple filed suit seeking to force the state to validate their marriage.

When public outrage began developing about the “Party A/Party B” marriage licenses, the state backtracked and decided to allow couples to refer to themselves as bride and groom. Recently, the state reached a legal settlement with the Coddings and accepted their hand-written marriage license. The state also agreed to pay the couple’s attorney fees.

ProtectMarriage – Yes on 8 Campaign Judged One of the Best in America

The Yes on Proposition 8 campaign has been judged to be one of the best political campaigns waged in America in 2008 by the American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC). The Yes on 8 campaign, managed by Schubert Flint Public Affairs, won numerous “Pollie” awards at the AAPC annual convention last week in Washington DC. Awards included “Public Affairs Team of the Year,” “Best Television and Radio Campaign” for a ballot issue, and “Award of Excellence” for use of cable television. Additionally, our consultants won numerous awards for use of new media activities such as email, online fundraising and Internet advertising.

The executive committee of ProtectMarriage.com commends our consulting team for the recognition they deserve for the winning effort they helped organize on our behalf.

Berkeley to Sacramento March a Flop

In a sign that support for homosexual marriage is fizzling, a much-hyped march of homosexuals between Berkeley and Sacramento was a dismal failure. The march, even though it originated in one of the most liberal communities in the nation, attracted only about 30 participants, according to independent news reports. Organizers had hoped for hundreds of people to make the trek to Sacramento to support gay marriage.

Supporters of traditional marriage have withstood incredible personal and professional attacks since Prop 8 was enacted in November. Countless news reports have chronicled the intolerance of many in the homosexual community in targeting supporters of traditional marriage simply for participating in the democratic process and supporting Proposition 8.

As difficult as it has been to watch the gay community attempt to manipulate public opinion and portray our loyal supporters in the most negative light possible, it is increasingly becoming clear that their efforts are backfiring. Public polls show that support for traditional marriage is on the rise, while support for same-sex marriage is declining. Even leaders in the gay community acknowledge that support for their agenda is over-stated, and they publicly doubt they can gain the support of a majority of voters. Their marches and demonstrations are losing steam.

Sacramento “Insiders” Website Conducting Online Survey on Prop 8 Ruling

The “inside the Capitol” publication Capitol Weekly is conducting an online survey asking people if the ruling of the Iowa Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage in that state should be followed by the California Supreme Court. If you’d like to cast your vote in support of traditional marriage, click here.

Thank you for your continued support of traditional marriage. Though the media doesn’t often report it, the majority of Californians are with us. We are heartened in our faithful support of what God has ordained: marriage is between a man and a woman. On behalf of the leadership of ProtectMarriage.com, we wish you and your family a blessed Easter.


Sincerely,

Ron Prentice
Chairman
ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8

Keep Fighting for our Children!

The following is a copy of a post from my Talk Wisdom blog. There are several reasons why Christians must continue to fight against the rise of the radical homosexual agenda. The main reason is because religious freedom, and the right to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ depends upon it! We must also do it for the sake of our children!!

The indoctrination of homosexuality going on throughout our nation these days is increasing exponentially now that they perceive Resident Obama as a key ally in the White House.

Here is the Talk Wisdom post:


Have you noticed this? The 'gay rights' political machine is thoroughly intent on steamrolling over the majority of the public opinion that holds to the definition of marriage to remain as one man and one woman. In addition, those who hold objections to the homosexual mafia's continual bullying and enforcement of 'gay' issues almost have the appearance of not mattering to Christians anymore.

But don't you ever believe that!

It is one of Satan's greatest ploys - to get believers in Jesus Christ to care more about being "liked" rather than to preach the need for sinners to repent and apply the true gospel for the salvation of souls.

There are several articles about the current rapid fire of events being forced upon America by the radical homosexual agenda activists over at World Net Daily.

1. Christian college creates homosexual housing
'It's a chance for students to be part of a unique experience'

2. Iowa, Vermont 'marriage' decisions 'aberrations'
30 states have 1-man, 1-woman definitions in constitutions

There are several more to read over at WorldNetDaily. Even Michael Savage, who became a new columnist at that website today, has his say in The Rising Tide of Pink Fascism .

There is hope, though. There is always hope! When and in Whom? It is when Christians and conservatives don't give up the fight, continue to speak their minds which are guided by the Holy Spirit of God. Share the Gospel of Christ and take a stand against the moral decline happening in our society today. Read and study the Bible so that you are properly equipped in this battle between good and evil.

The following article is just one example that shows how persistence often pays off:


3. 'Gay' promo objections get eHarmony attention
Customer confirms refund after opposing moral change

Last, but certainly not least, we can see why this problem is widening with wishy-washy, namby-pamby pastors like Rick Warren:

4. America's wishy-washy pastors

It is just too good and too important to only post an excerpt, so here is the article in it's entirety:

Quote:

America's wishy-washy pastors

Posted: April 08, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

America achieved its independence and freedom in the 18th century in large part because colonial pastors stood up for biblical principles, preached them, lived them and refused to back down from them – even in the face of death.

The American War of Independence has been accurately called a "pulpit revolution" for this reason. It was inspired by great men of God who recognized evil and called it by its right name.

What a difference two centuries, combined with affluence and the corporatization of the 501(c)3 church culture has made.

A good example of this was on display on CNN's "Larry King Live" this week, as "America's Pastor" Rick Warren did a soft shoe act on his role in the same-sex marriage battle over Proposition 8 in California.

"You know, Larry, there was a story within a story that never got told," he said. "In the first place, I am not an anti-gay or anti-gay marriage activist. I never have been, never will be. During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never – never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going. The week before the – the vote, somebody in my church said, Pastor Rick, what – what do you think about this? And I sent a note to my own members that said, I actually believe that marriage is – really should be defined, that that definition should be – say between a man and a woman.

"And then all of a sudden out of it, they made me, you know, something that I really wasn't," Warren continued. "And I actually – there were a number of things that were put out. I wrote to all my gay friends – the leaders that I knew – and actually apologized to them. That never got out. There were some things said that – you know, everybody should have 10 percent grace when they say public statements. And I was asked a question that made it sound like I equated gay marriage with pedophilia or incest, which I absolutely do not believe. And I actually announced that. All of the criticism came from people that didn't know me. Not a single criticism came from any gay leader who knows me and knows that for years, we've been working together on AIDS issues and all these other things."

What are we to make of such mealy-mouthed, wishy-washy, namby-pamby hokum?

It's a great illustration of America's most prominent church leader equivocating and backtracking and saying almost nothing coherent so that he will offend no one.

Let me lay it on the line: This is not the way Yeshua talked or behaved. It is not the example of the one whom Rick Warren claims to emulate and worship. There is nothing prophetic or biblical or courageous or principled about this kind of Christian witness.

If there is a subject upon which the Bible is crystal clear – from beginning to end – it is homosexuality. Another subject about which no one can misinterpret what the Bible says is marriage. Let's examine the text:

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


Romans 1:22-27: "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."

Some suggest Yeshua (Jesus) Himself was silent on these matters. Nothing could be further from the truth. First of all, Yeshua said He did not come to overturn the law but to fulfill it. He taught that He was and is the Word – its living fulfillment. He explained that He is eternal and created the Heavens, the Earth and man. The Bible also says God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. And Yeshua never contradicted any of the law. He quoted from it. He taught from it. He explained it. He affirmed it. On the road to Emmaus, He gave two disciples a Bible study from the Torah, revealing Himself at the very core of it.

The law, in fact, was the measuring stick by which He was judged perfect and worthy of serving as the atonement for the sins of mankind – including the sin of abominations like homosexuality.

But Yeshua also spoke very specifically and clearly on the subject about which Rick Warren appears so self-consciously waffling.

In Matthew 19:4-6, it says: "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

Here Yeshua had a golden opportunity to explain any middle ground in this issue of men and women – if there were any.

There is no middle ground on this issue.

Either you believe the Bible or you don't.

If you don't, there are consequences. If you do, you are obligated to take a stand for righteousness. Of course, there are worldly consequences for that, too – for some apparently too great to accept.

Followers of Yeshua have a choice: They can please God or please men. They can accept God's laws, which are not burdensome, and obey them, or they can reject them and try to tickle the ears of men. They can offend God or offend men.

But followers of Jesus cannot find some happy medium where they can please God and please the world. Nobody can.

It's time for America's pastor class to decide where they stand – with the world or with the God of the universe.


Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. His book "Taking America Back: A Radical Plan to Revive Freedom, Morality and Justice" has gained newfound popularity in the wake of November's election. Farah also edits the online intelligence newsletter Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, in which he utilizes his sources developed over 30 years in the news business.


Hat Tip:

World Net Daily

Gay Activist Lunacy & Selfishness

Gay activists and their heterosexual supporters in California remind me of the screaming and crying types of little children who throw a tantrum every time they don't get their way. I'm referring to the type of child who obviously has little or no adult supervision at home and therefore, totally lacks any semblance or form of discipline. These are the types of children at school who would stamp their feet, pound the table, and call the lunch room monitor and yell bloody murder just because they didn't get their way about something.

Here's a silly analogy. Four children are sitting at a lunch table at school. They were given the privilege of having 4 cupcakes placed in the middle of a table. Along comes a fifth child, who decides to bully the rest because he/she wasn't given a cupcake. So, he/she would rather throw the 4 treats on the floor, trample on them, and see the destruction of a privilege that was already given to the other four children - just because he/she can't have one too.

Are there no bounds to their selfishness?

Over at Maggie's Notebook, I read a post that, at first, I didn't even want to re-post here. However, I decided that spreading the knowledge of gay and lesbian activist lunacy here in California is a must; in order for others to be forewarned.

California To Get Rid of Marriage.

Here's a copy of what is written at that link:

Quote:

Why is it that I am not surprised at the tactics that Gays and Lesbians will go to force the idea of Gay marriage on the nation. On November 4, 2008 the voters of California passed Proposition 8 which states:


Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
This passed 52.3% to 47.7%. Thus the voters of California spoke saying no to Gay marriage.

This is not the end of the argument. The supporters of Gay marriage are not going to take that lying down. They have a new tactic. Get rid of marriage. No I am not joking.

California's top election official says supporters can start collecting signatures for a proposed ballot measure to strike the word "marriage" from all state laws.

Supporters of this ballot measure want to replace it with the term "domestic partnership," while keeping all the rights of marriage in place.

Read the full story here.

Domestic Partnership is not the same as Marriage. In a partnership, one can just leave the partnership without legal recourse. In a Marriage it takes a divorce to dissolve it. One can have multiple partners in a Domestic Partnership. In a Marriage a person can have only one spouse at a time.

Forcing all people in California to give up Marriage in favor of Domestic Partnership is wrong. But knowing the liberals, idiots, nincompoops in California they will now pass this idea overwhelmingly and sound the death knoll of the American Family.

If this measure passes how long do you think it will be before it is brought to every state in the US?

Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege. If it was a right the government would have to supply each and every person in the nation with a spouse. They don't. And a couple planning on marrying should not have to go and get a Domestic Partnership license but a Marriage license.

Changing the name of Marriage to Domestic Partnership is just a bad idea. /quote

Hat tip:

Maggies Notebook

Shameful Sean

Know what? I am discovering that it takes a rabid, radical pro-gay bigot to turn the term "shameful" upon its head! Did you catch what Sean Penn said during the Oscars the other night?

The following is a portion of an email letter from ProtectMarriage.com about this incident with Penn:

QUOTE:
February 24, 2009

This just in from Hollywood:

“I think it is a good time for those who voted for the ban against gay marriage to sit and reflect and anticipate their great shame and the shame in their grandchildren’s eyes if they continue that way of support. We’ve got to have equal rights.”
Sean Penn, accepting the Oscar for Best Actor
February 22, 2009

This is the message that was communicated throughout the world on Sunday night during the Academy Award show by Hollywood liberals, including their “best actor” Sean Penn.

In fact, viewers weren’t two categories into the awards show when a gay screen writer bashed the Mormon Church, as much as said that supporters of Prop 8 are hateful bigots and promised that, soon, gays would have the right to marry. He even promised that the Obama Administration would make sure gays could marry “federally.” That brought a big round of applause.

It is perhaps not surprising that Hollywood liberals would use their “awards” show to campaign in favor of gay marriage. After all, many of these same liberals donated or raised millions of dollars to attempt to defeat Proposition 8.

What is perhaps surprising is their brazen attempt to influence public opinion against traditional marriage by manipulating people into thinking that this is a “human rights” issue, or a “civil rights” issue, or even an “equal rights” issue. What they don’t tell people is that gay couples in domestic partnerships in California already have equal rights! Gay domestic partners in California enjoy the same legal rights as married spouses.

Liberal Hollywood activists like Sean Penn know a thing or two about reaching audiences. They make millions – tens of millions – learning how to connect with an audience. One audience they no doubt hoped to influence on Sunday night was the California Supreme Court, which is hearing challenges to invalidate Prop 8 in just ten days. Another audience probably watched the show from the upstairs of the White House in Washington. Still another audience is made up of voters here in California, enough of the 7 million of whom they hope to shame into repudiating their votes cast in favor of traditional marriage the next time the issue is on the ballot. Traditional marriage has served society well, and there are many sound reasons why people support one man, one woman marriage – including continuing the best institution to give children both a mother and a father. Prop 8 wasn’t an attack on gay couples, it was an affirmation of traditional marriage – but you didn’t hear that at the Academy Awards.

ProtectMarriage.com has made very powerful, legally sound arguments in our briefs filed with the Supreme Court. Our attorneys, including former Solicitor General Kenneth Starr, are working hard to prepare to present these arguments directly to the justices on March 5 when the challenges to Prop 8 will be heard. We think that attempts to campaign to get the attention of judges, like we saw from Hollywood the other night, will fall on deaf ears. We are confident that the Court will decide the Prop 8 cases strictly on the law, and we have the law on our side.

However, we must also be mindful of the incessant effort from Hollywood and gay activists to portray our support of Prop 8 in hateful, negative terms. From the protests that have been orchestrated against Proposition 8, to the “outing” of countless donors to our campaign, to the violence and vandalism of our churches, supporters of traditional marriage have been subjected to a carefully orchestrated attempt to erode public support and intimidate our donors and volunteers. It’s time that we fought back, and ProtectMarriage.com intends to do just that! /QUOTE

*******

As I stated in a reply to an anonymous commenter in a previous comment thread - FIND YOUR OWN NAME for gay unions! Hey - THAT'S IT! Call them "gay unions" and stop all of this nonsense and attempts to re-define marriage for everyone else! Just because YOU want it re-defined DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD BE!

Conscience Collides With Political Correctness

How many readers of this blog recall the signs that used to appear in restaurants and bars that said, "We reserve the right to not serve anyone?" At least I think that is how it was worded.

Today, we often find signs that state, "No shirt, no service." or "No shoes, no service."

What was the message behind such signs? The owner of the business had free speech rights to serve, or not serve a person based on their particular behavior.

If a person came into a restaurant without wearing a shirt or shoes, the restaurant owner had the right to refuse service. If a person came into a bar and was boisterous, obnoxious, cursing or - clearly already drunk - the bar tender had the absolute right to not serve that person any alcohol. What's more, the bouncer had the right (as per the instructions of the owner) to escort such a person off the premises!

Our First Amendment rights not only include freedom of speech and freedom of religion; but also freedom of association.

Today, because of ultra-tolerance and political correctness and "hate speech" inferences, the refusal for service by any business owner is often misconstrued as "bigotry," "hatred," "intolerance," etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum. The following link is a case in point:

ADF Truth and Triumph: Point & Shoot
What happens when a photographer's conscience collides with political correctness.

When you read the article, you will see that this Christian woman was CLEARLY TARGETED by the lesbian couple who wanted to punish her for her refusal to photograph their "commitment ceremony." There were PLENTY of other photographers willing to take the job. So, why did they sue this one person?


Gotta run out. Will return to finish this post later.

Why DOMA Matters!

In the following commentary, Niger Innis states EXACTLY why DOMA MATTERS and MUST BE PROTECTED! The following paragraph from the commentary tells us the utmost importance of DOMA:

In the absence of the federal Marriage Protection Amendment, DOMA provides federal statutory protection to states against activists vowing to use the federal courts to force the destructive decisions of judges in Connecticut and Massachusetts on other states.

Mr. Innis goes on and describes how California has now become a "case study" regarding how radical homosexual activists will attempt to use the courts to overcome the passage of the "YES ON PROPOSITION 8" results that came about as a result of millions of voters in California. Why? Because they don't like the results! Well....TOO BAD! I don't like the results of Roe. v. Wade....oh WAIT! BAD EXAMPLE! Roe v. Wade WAS NEVER VOTED ON BY THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! So, over 70 million aborted babies later, we see the devastating results of an over-reaching judiciary - DON'T WE!!??!!

Let's not let the same thing happen to marriage.

Christine

*******

Here's a copy of the complete article:

Wednesday, February 4, 2009
NIGER INNIS:
Gay marriage harms kids
and democracy
COMMENTARY


President Barack Obama's personal triumph over the generational legacy of a broken home has the power by virtue of example to heal and to strengthen marriage in America for the future of our children and grandchildren.

But we hope that the nation's first black president will not allow great harm to be inflicted upon the future of marriage by aligning himself with those who falsely invoke the legacy of "Civil Rights" for the purposes of radically changing the definition of marriage.

Now an emboldened, radical Democrat Congress and its allies in the media are pushing President Obama to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the legal underpinning of state marriage amendments approved by voters in 30 states.


In the absence of the federal Marriage Protection Amendment, DOMA provides federal statutory protection to states against activists vowing to use the federal courts to force the destructive decisions of judges in Connecticut and Massachusetts on other states.

This statutory protection is now more important than ever, as witnessed by the rapacious lawsuits of radical activists in California. If federal DOMA falls, every state marriage amendment stands to be overturned by activists in federal court.

To truly appreciate the intense level of legal Armageddon certain to be unleashed if DOMA falls in Congress, one only needs to look to California.

In May 2008, in the name of civil rights, the California Supreme Court voided the 4.6 million votes of California voters who in 2000 democratically approved Proposition 22 - the California Defense of Marriage Act.

In response to this egregious act by four judges, California voters rallied again to place on the 2008 Election Day ballot a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. The amendment, known as Proposition 8, passed with over 70 percent of the African-American community voting "Yes" to define marriage as a man and a woman.


But like "Groundhog Day," the very same four judges who voided the democratic votes of Californians voters last May are now deciding the same fate for Proposition 8. A court ruling voiding a second democratic vote on marriage in the nation's most populous state would mark the beginning of the end for democracy in America.


The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), one of the "Big Four" historic civil rights groups in America, believes the most important fundamental freedom for all people is the right to govern themselves. Once this simple ideal is realized, other necessary freedoms will automatically follow.

The abolition of the right of the people to govern themselves - or vote - is only a first step in the taking away of civil rights. Because wherever marriage has been redefined, the freedom of religion, association and conscience have been trampled upon in the name of a brave new social, cultural and legal norm that denies the importance of mothers and fathers for children.

When a Massachusetts court created "same-sex" marriage, Catholic Charities in Boston was forced to shut down its adoption services program because it refused to alter the program's 100-year-old mission of placing children in homes with a home with a mother and a father. What happened in Massachusetts is simply a foretaste of what is to come to every state from California to Missouri to Virginia - with or without state constitutional amendments - if federal DOMA falls. That's why the Congress of Racial Equality has partnered with the Alliance for Marriage to launch ProtectDOMA.org, to protect marriage for the future of our children and grandchildren.

While the battle over the repeal of federal DOMA may largely go unnoticed among a financially battered and worried general public, its outcome will undoubtedly leave a legacy for future generations well beyond the nation's financial meltdown.


Western Europe's wholesale embrace of a radical cultural chic and simultaneous rejection of traditional marriage has led to the demographic crisis in which it is currently embroiled. Europe's population is expected to decrease from 728 million now to 658 million by 2050, due to declining birthrates. This phenomenon will put an overwhelming strain on the largess of Europe's social welfare system and economy.


President Obama truly stands at a crossroads. Rather than destroy marriage, he can in fact be its great protector. It is America's job to convince him.

Niger Innis is an advisory board member of Alliance for Marriage and National spokesperson for the Congress of Racial Equality


Hat Tip: www.afmusa.org

Cartoon of Liberal Hypocrisy

While visiting a blog called Kevin's Korner I found this great cartoon of liberal leftist hypocrisy. Could not resist posting it here!




Hat Tips:

Kevin's Korner

World Magazine

More Reasons to Protect Marriage!

Occasionally, there are posts over at my main blog - Talk Wisdom - that deserve to be cross-posted over here. My latest essay is entitled, Inaugural Malignant Narcissism. I hope that you will have time to read all of the links provided. It will give you even more reasons for continuing the effort to protect biblical marriage.

Suit Filed to Prevent Harassment - Prop. 8 YES Voters

It's certainly about time for this!!! Should have been done a long time ago! The homosexual agenda radicals have been thoroughly abusive in so many ways. They have shown their true colors when they lose: NO TOLERANCE. At least this is a step in the right direction to correct their illegal harassment of voters with whom they disagree.

ADF attorneys file suit to stop harassment of Calif. marriage amendment supporters

ProtectMarriage.com suit challenges campaign finance law’s requirement to publicly disclose identity and employer of donors giving as little as $100


SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Alliance Defense Fund allied attorneys together with ADF attorneys filed a lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage California to prevent harassment of citizens who gave as little as $100 to support Proposition 8. The lawsuit documents incidents of harassment and retaliation by opponents who have targeted Proposition 8 supporters after their identities and employers were made public by the state as required by California campaign finance law.

“Putting the names and employers of the people who supported Proposition 8 on the Internet for anyone to see has caused serious problems. No one should worry about getting a death threat because of the way he or she votes,” said James Bopp, Jr., lead attorney for the supporters of Proposition 8. “This lawsuit will protect the right of all people to help support causes they agree with, without having to worry about harassment or threats.”


In November, over 7 million Californians approved Proposition 8. Under a California law, people who gave money to support Proposition 8 had their names, employers, and other personal information listed on the Web site of the Secretary of State of California.

After Proposition 8 passed, people who did not support Proposition 8 used the list of names to go after people who supported Proposition 8. Some people who supported Proposition 8 had their homes and churches vandalized, were forced to resign their jobs, and were even threatened with violence and death. To stop this harassment and these threats, this lawsuit asks the court to stop the release of the names and personal information of people who gave money to support Proposition 8.


“Our laws should ensure free participation in the democratic process, and not result in compromising the free speech and association rights of guaranteed to all Americans,” said ADF Legal Counsel Tim Chandler, who is serving as local counsel in the case. “Citizens shouldn’t have to choose between being involved in the democratic process and subjecting themselves to acts of vengeance.”

The lawsuit challenges parts of California’s campaign finance laws that require people who donate as little as $100 to have personal information revealed on the Internet as unconstitutional violations of free speech. The lawsuit also challenges parts of the campaign finance laws that require reporting of donations after a proposition has been voted on as unconstitutional.


A copy of the complaint filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento Division, in the lawsuit ProtectMarriage.com v. Bowen is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/ProtectMarriageComplaint.pdf.

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

Protect DOMA Website

The rabidly vile and angry protests being waged throughout California by the homosexual activists who are mad that Proposition 8 passed with over 52% of the vote, are not about to give up the fight. In fact, I can still see some of the "no on 8" political signs in my area. They were placed high up on telephone poles so that only someone with a ladder could reach them and tear them down.

The stampedes into churches; the shoving of an 80-yr.-old Christian woman while the huge cross she was carrying was trampled on; the hate-spewing protests in front of Mormon churches - are just a few of the terrible actions being done by rabid homosexual activists.

These people are more than just "sore losers." They are adamant about getting their way and will stop at NOTHING to do so.

I am grateful for organizations like Alliance for Marriage that is already preparing for the next battle. The ProtectDOMA.org website has been launched.

Here is a copy of an email that I received today from Alliance for Marriage:

Gay Activist Press Cites AFM Campaign
as Stumbling Block to Pending Attack
on DOMA in Congress


“Predominantly White” Activists Lament Failure to "Feature People of Color" as AFM’s Diverse Coalition launches ProtectDOMA.org campaign

Last week, the Alliance for Marriage launched one of the most important campaigns in our organization’s history to protect the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in the upcoming 111th Congress.

By launching ProtectDOMA.org -- and immediately commencing our campaign efforts on Capitol Hill -- the Alliance for Marriage Foundation has drawn a line in the sand against radical activists who are determined to export Massachusetts-style “gay marriage” to the entire nation.

AFM’s ProtectDOMA campaign was cited this past week in the gay press:

“The Alliance for Marriage just announced that preserving DOMA - especially by lobbying newly elected members of Congress from people of color communities - is one of their top priorities right now”

– Gay City News, (11/26/08).

But what was most eye-opening about this news story -- which reported on a panel discussion including the Human Rights Commission about same-sex marriage in New York State and the repeal of DOMA nationally -- was a rare window into the activist community and just how absurd their deceptive analogies to America’s civil rights movement have become.

“At a time when the community has been rubbed raw by a debate over the percentage of people of color who voted for Prop 8 and the failure of the No on 8 campaign to feature people of color as spokespeople or to do sufficient outreach to those populations, the New York panel consisted of five white men and one white woman.... The audience was predominately white and male as well….”

For years, AFM has reached out to communities of color - including leaders of the African-American community - to make their voices heard in the historic debate over the future of marriage. Our strategic leadership in building an authentically diverse coalition to protect marriage has been widely recognized in the national media.
“As the community that endured both slavery and segregation, African-Americans will always reject the lie that radical activists have a "civil right" to redefine marriage,” said Niger Innis, an AFM Advisory Board Member and National Spokesperson for the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), one of the "Big Four" historic civil rights groups. “That's because my community - perhaps more than any other - understands in very real terms the consequences of family breakdown. When marriage declines, children and society both suffer.”

Too often, Americans of goodwill are intimidated by the threat of being labeled as bigots for believing what the vast majority of people - of every creed and color - regard as common sense. But the African-American leaders in the AFM coalition have always proclaimed the widespread view in their community that there is no “civil right" to redefine marriage for all of society.

Thank you for helping us to make their voices heard across the nation. Thank you also for your friendship and partnership in our efforts to ensure that more children in America are raised in a home with a mother and a father.

www.afmusa.org

*******
Technorati Profile

CA Justices Recall Threat

Obviously, an LA Times blog would word such a post differently than I would. My choice of a title would have been, "Traditional marriage supporters threaten to recall California Supreme Court justices." Anyway, here's the post:

Gay marriage foes threaten to recall California Supreme Court justices
11:45 PM, November 19, 2008
Last week, the aggressive tactics of Prop. 8 opponents -- street protests, boycotts of business -- made headlines. This week, it appears that backers of the ban on gay marriage are the ones making threats. Yes on 8 forces are talking about a recall against members of the California Supreme Court if they throw out the measure.

To some, the recall talk marks another increase in the post-election battle and a response to the No on 8 protests:

"This push-back in the last two weeks has actually mobilized the Yes on 8 people," said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. If the California Supreme Court were to overturn Proposition 8, "you will see a mobilized group like you have never seen in the state of California." Rodriguez said in an interview Tuesday that some religious leaders are discussing a potential recall of Supreme Court justices. He expects the Supreme Court to overturn Proposition 8, and if that happens, "there are grounds for a recall. We saw that with Gray Davis," he said. "We have an oligarchy, an oligarchy in judges' role in the state of California."

Remember the Gray Davis recall? Well, one of the figures behind it thinks a Prop. 8 recall effort if the justices toss the measure out is a real possibility. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune:

If that happens, watch out for a "barn-burner of an election -- the biggest thing this state has ever seen," says recall election guru Ted Costa. Costa says he's already been contacted by some of the folks who would seek to recall Ronald George, Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno if Prop. 8 is scrapped. He thinks it's premature and risky because talk of a recall "would just (bleep) off the judges." Costa also doesn't sound like he's too thrilled about such a recall, saying it wouldn't be "healthy." Citing all the financial turmoil in California, he said, "If someone's going to do some recalling, that should be the focus."

When it comes to judicial recalls, one woman's name says it all. And Jon Fleischman utters it: "No government official is immune from the voters’ will, whether they be in the executive, legislative or, yes, even in the judicial branch. Remember Rose Bird?"

-- Shelby Grad

HT: LA Times Blogs

Battle for Marriage Continues

The Battle for Marriage Has Just Begun

November 4th was a pivotal moment in America's history: Californians held their government accountable by passing Proposition 8. For the second time in eight years, Californians decided that the government may not redefine marriage for its citizens. However, despite our convincing victory, 52% to 48%, radical homosexual activists have reacted with anger and renewed determination. In the last week since the election, several cities have seen protests by opponents of Proposition 8. Churches have been vandalized, church goers have been bullied.


This type of furry-fueled protestation only hurts their cause as average citizens are alarmed at the sight of church vandalism and intimidation of the religious community. In fact, this response proves the point that their political agenda will be imposed against the public's will-using the government as their tool to achieve their goals.

And now government officials are aligning against the very people they were elected to represent and serve.


Although Governor Schwarzenegger publicly opposed Proposition 8 from the beginning, he is now encouraging the California Supreme Court to overturn Proposition 8, just as they overturned Proposition 22.

This position is in direct contradiction to his previous position on this issue. Both times same-sex marriage legislation has come to his desk, he has vetoed it. In 2005, he vetoed the bill "out of respect for the will of the people" expressed through Proposition 22's passage. In fact, his spokesperson explained that "The governor believes the matter should be determined not by legislative action - which would be unconstitutional - but by court decision or another vote of the people of our state." Well, the court overturned Proposition 22 and then the people overrode the court. Californians have clearly decided in favor of preserving traditional marriage.


Now state lawmakers are also trying to overturn the will of the people by submitting amicus briefs in homosexual lawsuits against Proposition 8.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg announced this week that they and 44 other state lawmakers sent a friend-of-the-court brief expressing their support for overturning Proposition 8. Another lawsuit was brought ealrier this year to prevent Proposition 8 from appearing on the ballot, but it was denied by the court. In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger stated his position on legislative meddling with Proposition 22: "We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote." Yet the legislature and the governor are trying to derail the will of the people.


Governor Schwarzenegger owes the people of California an apology for his duplicitous positions on such an important issue as preserving marriage. State lawmakers must be held accountable for their willful attempts to subvert the will of the people.

Citizens should call Governor Schwarzenegger and lawmakers to express their outrage over this blatant assault on the initiative process.

Less than a week after the election, government officials are trying undo it.


Although past court decisions seem to favor our case, we cannot trust the same judicial system that overturned Proposition 22 to protect our Election Day decision.

We must remain active and hold our government officials accountable. This battle is far from over. Join us as we continue to push forward in our defense of marriage!


PS
In addition to calling the governor and lawmakers to remind them that we the people are their bosses-not vice versa-there is another action item. California Musical Theater official Scott Eckern is on the verge of losing this job because he donated money to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign. Homosexual activists are demanding his termination for making a financial contribution to a cause he morally supports. What is truly outrageous is that this man could lose his job for expressing his religious and moral beliefs. To try and counter the negative publicity, Eckern has given an equal donation to the radical homosexual group Human Rights Campaign. Please contact the California Musical Theater about Mr. Eckern's ability to express his political beliefs without being punished.



HT: Email From Karen England of Yes on Proposition 8.com

Crazed Homosexual Activists Attack Woman & Trample Cross

The anchors of the news show got one thing wrong. They claimed that there was a "lot of hate on both sides."

Nope!

A lot of hate from the rabid, homosexual activists - yes.

If you look closely at one point in the video, the 80-yr.-old woman can be seen mouthing the words to those who were attacking her, "I love you." Of course, it was so noisy because of the rabid hate being spewed by the demonstrators, no one could hear her words.

Crazie Lefties Attack Old Lady At "No on 8" Protest

She is certainly a brave woman to show up there and try to minister the love of Jesus Christ and what He did for ALL sinners at the cross.

We are witnessing Biblical prophecy right before our very eyes!

Jesus told us to watch for the signs of his return. In Scripture, he said that the world would be, "as in the Days of Noah, and, as in the Days of Lot."



HT: SFSU College Republicans

More Evidence of Gay Tolerance /sarc off

It's sad, ironic and true. There is absolutely NO TOLERANCE from the homosexual activists towards those who wish to preserve the original definition of marriage.

NO RIGHTS were taken away from them! The wrong ruling of four rogue judges who took it upon themselves to overturn 4.1 million votes when Proposition 22 was passed years ago, have now been corrected by voters...AGAIN!

I ask...WHERE'S THE TOLERANCE FROM THE OTHER SIDE??? They are all about tolerance when things are going their way. However, when voters decide an issue - the gays curse at us and threaten to burn down Christian churches!

Awful...

Absolutely despicable!!

I have no respect for them anymore. I'm done.

P.S. BTW, I noticed a hand-made "No on Prop 8" sign posted on a telephone pole a few blocks down from my street. It said, "Don't be like Hitler - vote no on Prop. 8."

Yep...a real tolerant bunch...aren't they? /sarc off - again.

*******
Additional articles:



Headlines - Thursday, November 6, 2008

Cal. AG to defend marriage from redefinition while defending its redefinition
November 6, 2008

Statement by Andrew Pugno, General Counsel of ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8
November 6, 2008

New legislatures expected to take up marriage redefinition bills in 5 states November 6, 2008

Fighting Over Voter-Approved Marriage Amendment Puts “Squeeze on California’s Chief Justice”
November 6, 2008

Margin of Prop. 8 victory requires vigilance and ongoing efforts by churches and pro-family groups
November 6, 2008

Pretense of tolerance is over: Prop. 8 opponents attempt to defy voters
November 5, 2008

“Lawsuit Against Gay Marriage Ban Irks Christians”
November 6, 2008

Back to court … again: Californians voted for traditional marriage Tuesday, but opponents file lawsuits
November 6, 2008

“Contempt for the will of the people”: Same-sex marriage proponents won’t concede election, ask court to nullify Proposition 8
November 6, 2008

Jordan Lorence: Marriage battle is not over, its just heating up
November 6, 2008

Mike Johnson on Don Kroah Show: State Marriage Amendment victories

Restoring Marriage in California!

Praise God for the victory of restoring marriage in California as being as He intends, and has stated in His Word: the union of one man and one woman!

Fox News has reported that California voters passed Proposition 8, overturning a state Supreme Court decision that granted gay couples the right to wed months ago.

Of course, the war of good against evil continues.

Within moments of the announcement that YES on Proposition 8 passed here in California, The San Francisco City Attorney's office says he plans to challenge the validity of the ballot measure that would change the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

Although the presidential election results lead me to mourn for this nation, I praise God that He is still on the throne of heaven. Through prayer, fasting and work, thousands of the faithful in Jesus Christ had their pleadings and prayers to restore marriage here in California answered!

This decision will stave off what would have been a tsunami of liberal judge rulings across our nation to force same-sex marriage upon an electorate that does not want the definition of marriage changed by judicial fiat!

Praise Jesus!

Christine

P.S. - Just a note to anyone who happens to visit here and is mourning this decision. You will not have your right to have a CIVIL UNION with your same-sex partner as a result of this decision. It will just have to be called something else - not marriage.

Those who tried to call our position "hate" - listen up. This was NOT done to hurt you or your partners. I have attended many church functions that spelled out the necessity of preserving biblical marriage.

Christians who believe and follow God's Word rose up in droves to say, "homosexual activists and your supporters (including radical liberal rogue judges) - you have gone to far."

I am asking each of you for tolerance and respect towards those who have voted to restore the traditional, thousands-of-years-old, definition and meaning of marriage here in California. Tolerance is not a one-way street - although the homosexual lobby wants to make it seem that way.

One last point. Those who voted YES ON PROPOSITION 8 are not "bigots." The Christians who follow God's Word know this. It is time that the public realizes this, too.

To those who refuse to show tolerance and respect for the decision rendered by voters here in California - and wish to continue their vitriole of labeling us "bigots" - here is what BIGOT means for me:

Bible
Is
God's
Only
Truth

More Evidence For YES ON PROP 8!

Neil over at Eternity Matters has a post up that shows how VERY IMPORTANT it is for California to VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8 on Election Day, Tuesday, November 4, 2008!!

Gay Pledge Cards Given to Kindergartners

Neil writes:

As I mentioned in We told you so, even while the GLBT lobby is on their best behavior pending the vote on Proposition 8, we see more and more examples of their supporters doing the opposite of what they claimed would happen: Aggressive indoctrination of youth as young as kindergarten.

During a celebration of National Ally Week, Tara Miller, a teacher at the Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, Calif., passed out cards produced by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network to her class of kindergartners.

The cards asked signers to be “an ally” and to pledge to “not use anti-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) language or slurs; intervene, when I feel I can, in situations where others are using anti-LGBT language or harassing other students and actively support safer schools efforts.”

More here.

My comment at Neil's blog:

The battle over this issue is getting SO NASTY! Signs stolen from yards, cars damaged because they have a YES ON PROPOSITION 8 sticker on them. I could go on and on.

What bothers me the most, though, is the unashamed LYING from the “No on Prop 8″ people! There is a commercial where a superintendent of schools claims that “marriage” isn’t taught in public schools! THAT is a bold faced LIE! It is written directly in the Education code! If gay “marriage” stays legal in CA, then it WILL be taught in schools! There is no doubt about it!

I have to search for it, but there is an entire curriculum drawn up already which will be used to further indoctrinate children. Plus, they want to change all the textbooks to include gay “history” in EVERY SUBJECT! After church today, I will look for the info and share it here.

Please keep the YES ON PROPOSITION 8 ballot measure in your prayers! We need God to move throughout CA to bring hearts more in line with what He designed for marriage - the union of one man and one woman!


HT's:
Eternity Matters

Fox News