Wednesday, May 24, 2006
GA Judge Vetos 76% of Voters on Marriage
A liberal activist judge has struck down a constitutional amendment in Georgia which made homosexual marriage illegal! She felt that she knew better than the voters how they should vote and threw out their ballots.
The constitutional amendment, passed overwhelmingly by 76% of the voters in Georgia, is now null and void.
The homosexuals are determined to win this battle. They know they will never win if the people have an opportunity to vote. So they are turning to liberal activist judges to force their will on the people. They intend to force homosexual marriage down the throats of Americans. They feel our children must be indoctrinated beginning in kindergarten that homosexuality is normal behavior.
On June 6 the U.S. Senate will vote on the Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA) which defines marriage as being only between one man and one woman. Because of a power grab by activist judges like the one in Georgia, the MPA is the only way that the sacred institution of marriage will remain between one man and one woman.
Please call your two U.S. Senators today and tell them to vote for the MPA. If your Senator's lines are busy, please keep trying. They need to hear from you personally.
The liberal senators who want to legalize homosexual marriage will give you the political run-around. Don't be fooled. Just remember this: If your senator does not vote for the MPA he or she is voting for homosexual marriage. Regardless of the political jargon you get from a liberal senator; that is the bottom line.
Use the link below to locate the main district office number for your two U.S. Senators along with talking points for your calls. Tell them to vote for the Marriage Protection Amendment. Print out their phone numbers and distribute in your church and Sunday school. Ask others to call!
The time to act is now. We must not let a handful of activist, liberal, pro-homosexual marriage judges force homosexual marriage on us and our children.
The constitutional amendment, passed overwhelmingly by 76% of the voters in Georgia, is now null and void.
The homosexuals are determined to win this battle. They know they will never win if the people have an opportunity to vote. So they are turning to liberal activist judges to force their will on the people. They intend to force homosexual marriage down the throats of Americans. They feel our children must be indoctrinated beginning in kindergarten that homosexuality is normal behavior.
On June 6 the U.S. Senate will vote on the Marriage Protection Amendment (MPA) which defines marriage as being only between one man and one woman. Because of a power grab by activist judges like the one in Georgia, the MPA is the only way that the sacred institution of marriage will remain between one man and one woman.
Please call your two U.S. Senators today and tell them to vote for the MPA. If your Senator's lines are busy, please keep trying. They need to hear from you personally.
The liberal senators who want to legalize homosexual marriage will give you the political run-around. Don't be fooled. Just remember this: If your senator does not vote for the MPA he or she is voting for homosexual marriage. Regardless of the political jargon you get from a liberal senator; that is the bottom line.
Use the link below to locate the main district office number for your two U.S. Senators along with talking points for your calls. Tell them to vote for the Marriage Protection Amendment. Print out their phone numbers and distribute in your church and Sunday school. Ask others to call!
The time to act is now. We must not let a handful of activist, liberal, pro-homosexual marriage judges force homosexual marriage on us and our children.
Thoughtful Readers Speak:
<< Home
RIGHTFAITH: Where everything favors the stewardship of patrimony. All content is believed to be correct but may be amended based upon new information. The content of this page may be republished with proper citation without the expressed consent of the author. This site is not, in any manner whatsoever, associated with the religious philosophism from the Indian penninsula. All comments or emails to the author become the property of the author and may be published or deleted without notice or reason provided. Copyrighted 2005.
Your post raises some issues I've been meaning to address, and since they're here, I thought this'd be a good place to start talking about them.
Judges are meant to uphold constitutional principles. I would argue that constitutions, quite generally, are meant to grant and protect a set of certain rights to its citizens. But it can't pick and choose: every adult can vote, for example; everyone can practice religion freely (as long as it doesn't impede the rights of others---we're not allowed to sacrifice other people, even in the name of religion). So, how do you justify allowing some people some rights while denying other people those same rights? Let me remind you that constitutions are secular law, not holy writ. The MPA, therefore, is totally unconsitutional.
Secondly, be thankful for the separation of power. The judges are there stop a mob rule and save us from ourselves. The framers of our government were wise not to let those who make the law be those who enforce it. It'd be a scary, rapidly changing place if we let the people at large choose what goes on. Third-party review is always a good thing. I bet you've even had someone proofread one of your papers before.
Thirdly, aren't you conflating two very different things here? The "sacred institution" you're talking about is something that happens within a church. The government will never tell you that you have to marry anyone within your church. It can't. That's the beauty of our Constitution. And the MPA aims to limit what other churches can do. What a bad precedent to establish! What's to keep future legislation from shutting down things, say all marriages of any kind, you find sacred? Besides, secular marriage is another story: that's mostly a matter of taxes. But if a gay couple were to get married, would you (and why would you) feel your heterosexual marriage was invalidated? On the face of it, this post smacks of (so far) unjustified fear.
Lastly, I don't think that the judges' ruling supposes that homosexuality is "normal." There's still only a one-in-ten chance that the person you're talking with is gay. And getting married doesn't have anything to do with kindergarten aged children directly as far as I can see. (Children of any age raised by homosexual parents are no more likely to be gay than those in a completely heterosexual family.) It's still a parent's responsibility to raise his child. There're alcohol and guns and gangs and teen pregnancies all around us; you can't avoid the reality of life. But you can talk to your kids about these issues so that when they run into a less than savory situation, they'll be prepared to handle it in a healthy way.
Judges are meant to uphold constitutional principles. I would argue that constitutions, quite generally, are meant to grant and protect a set of certain rights to its citizens. But it can't pick and choose: every adult can vote, for example; everyone can practice religion freely (as long as it doesn't impede the rights of others---we're not allowed to sacrifice other people, even in the name of religion). So, how do you justify allowing some people some rights while denying other people those same rights? Let me remind you that constitutions are secular law, not holy writ. The MPA, therefore, is totally unconsitutional.
Secondly, be thankful for the separation of power. The judges are there stop a mob rule and save us from ourselves. The framers of our government were wise not to let those who make the law be those who enforce it. It'd be a scary, rapidly changing place if we let the people at large choose what goes on. Third-party review is always a good thing. I bet you've even had someone proofread one of your papers before.
Thirdly, aren't you conflating two very different things here? The "sacred institution" you're talking about is something that happens within a church. The government will never tell you that you have to marry anyone within your church. It can't. That's the beauty of our Constitution. And the MPA aims to limit what other churches can do. What a bad precedent to establish! What's to keep future legislation from shutting down things, say all marriages of any kind, you find sacred? Besides, secular marriage is another story: that's mostly a matter of taxes. But if a gay couple were to get married, would you (and why would you) feel your heterosexual marriage was invalidated? On the face of it, this post smacks of (so far) unjustified fear.
Lastly, I don't think that the judges' ruling supposes that homosexuality is "normal." There's still only a one-in-ten chance that the person you're talking with is gay. And getting married doesn't have anything to do with kindergarten aged children directly as far as I can see. (Children of any age raised by homosexual parents are no more likely to be gay than those in a completely heterosexual family.) It's still a parent's responsibility to raise his child. There're alcohol and guns and gangs and teen pregnancies all around us; you can't avoid the reality of life. But you can talk to your kids about these issues so that when they run into a less than savory situation, they'll be prepared to handle it in a healthy way.
# posted by 
: 12:21 AM
: 12:21 AM
It's people like you that make my job easier. Seriously, why are you threatened by who these people have sex with?
http://www.agnosticreader.com/
http://www.agnosticreader.com/
# posted by : 8:59 PM
: 8:59 PM
I'm a bit disappointed that you have refused my previous comment. If you are not comfortable answering my questions publically on your blog, perhaps you could respond to me personally in an email.
I saved a copy of what I asked you and could easily resend it if you like.
My email address is mooks75@gmail.com. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Post a Comment
I saved a copy of what I asked you and could easily resend it if you like.
My email address is mooks75@gmail.com. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
# posted by : 2:25 PM
: 2:25 PM<< Home
