Tag Archives: Prop 8

Frank Turek lists ten alleged facts about same-sex marriage

The article is here on One News Now. (H/T Owen)

Excerpt:

When one judge overturned the will of more than seven million Californians last week in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, he listed 80 supposed “findings of fact” (FF) as evidence that Proposition 8 violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Many of those 80 findings are not facts at all. They’re lies or distortions.

Here’s my favorite of the 10:

5. “Proposition 8 does not affect the First Amendment rights of those opposed to marriage for same-sex couples.” (FF 62) It’s too bad Judge Walker didn’t look to evidence from Massachusetts for this false fact. If he had he would have seen that court-imposed same-sex marriage has severely affected First Amendment rights. Same-sex marriage may not affect heterosexual marriage behavior quickly, but it certainly affects the free exercise of religion very quickly.

Parents in Massachusetts now have no right to know when their children are being taught about homosexuality in grades as low as kindergarten, neither can they opt their kids out (one parent was even jailed overnight for protesting this). Businesses are now forced to give benefits to same-sex couples regardless of any moral or religious objection the business owner may have. The government also ordered Catholic Charities to give children to homosexuals wanting to adopt. As a result, Catholic Charities closed their adoption agency rather than submit to an immoral order. Unfortunately, children are again the victims of the morality that comes with same-sex marriage.

“But you can’t legislate morality!” some say. Nonsense. Not only do all laws legislate morality, sometimes immorality is imposed by judges against the will of the people and in violation of religious rights. There is no neutral ground here. Either we will have freedom of religion and conscience, or we will be forced to adhere to the whims of judges who declare that their own distorted view of morality supersedes our rights — rights that our founders declared self-evident.

Think I’m overreacting? If this decision survives and nullifies all democratically decided laws in the 45 states that preserve natural marriage, religious rights violations in Massachusetts will go nationwide. In fact, it’s poised to happen already at the federal level. President Obama recently appointed gay activist Chai Feldblum to the EEOC. Speaking of the inevitable conflict between religious rights and so-called gay rights, Feldblum said, “I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.”

Read the other nine here. Some of them I’ve mentioned before.

Related posts

Jennifer Roback Morse and Michele Bachmann respond to Prop 8 decision

Here’s Dr. J of the Ruth Institute, first.

The music is a bit loud, but isn’t it fun to SEE her talking? Indeed!

(Her hair looks fine – I don’t see why she thinks that anyone would say anything bad about it)

And here’s Michele Bachmann.

Press release:

District Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision last week to overturn a California ballot initiative that prohibited same-sex marriage was an example of “judicial activism at its worse,” according to Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas).

Smith and fellow House Republicans Steve King (Iowa) and Michele Bachmann (Minn.) introduced a resolution this morning disapproving of Vaughn’s ruling. The resolution, according to Smith, has 15 co-sponsors in the House. However, it is uncertain whether it will attract the support of Republican leadership in the lower chamber.

In his decision, Walker ruled that moral objection to gay marriage on the part of California voters was not a rational enough reason to uphold Proposition 8. In addition, Walker wrote that the measure violated Equal Protection laws for homosexuals.

The trio of highly conservative lawmakers insisted today that their opposition to the ruling does not stem from the fact that it benefits the gay community, but rather that it highlights a growing trend of activism from behind the bench. Bachmann said she found the ruling “infuriating.”

“Are we now in the position of giving the judge the decision to decide whether or not the American people are rational when they go to the voting booth and make their wishes known?” she asked. “It certainly seems the answer would be in the negative.”

Too bad the video gets cut off at the very end – I think she was going to say Supreme COURT. I’ll bet you all thought she was just a fiscal conservative, right? But no – she’s really thought things through – and that’s why we like her! Because she’s perfect!

Gay federal judge rules traditional marriage unconstitutional in California

Here’s the story from Life Site News.

Excerpt:

A federal judge has ruled that California’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman is unconstitutional, because it excludes same-sex unions.

Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, who presides over the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, declared Proposition 8 had no “rational basis” in a 138-page ruling on the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case released Wednesday afternoon.

[…]The judge dismissed the amendment, saying its restriction of marriage to heterosexual couples was “nothing more than an artifact of a foregone notion that men and women fulfill different roles in civic life.” He also added that it seemed to him proponents of Prop. 8 were defending the amendment on the basis of “moral disapproval,” which he said was “an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians” and enacted in law, “a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples.”

[…]Walker, however, is himself an active homosexual, and some conservative critics of the Prop. 8 case contended that Walker would be too personally invested in the case to deliver an impartial outcome.

[…]Walker also ruled that domestic partnerships did not satisfy the duty on California to let same-sex couples marry each other.

Michelle Malkin reports that pro-marriage activists are appealing:

In court papers filed Tuesday night, lawyers for the Proposition 8 defense team asked Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker for a stay of his ruling if the outcome is to declare the law unconstitutional. The motion indicates that the Proposition 8 lawyers will immediately ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the ruling if Walker rules against them.

Comments to this post will be strictly filtered in accordance with Obama’s law restricting free speech on this topic.

Related posts