2010 Census will recognize same-sex marriage

The LGBT community is anxiously awaiting the 2010 U.S. Census. The Census has had a difficult time the past twenty years deciding how to recognize the relationship of same-sex couples living together.

In 1990, if same-sex couples identified themselves as married, the data readers would alter the sex of one of the persons in the couple. In 2000, if same-sex couples identified themselves as married, the data readers would change their status to unmarried.

The 2010 Census will make no such alterations and will report the relationship of all same-sex couples as they report it. The LGBT community is encouraging all couples to report their relationships as they view them. This means if they view themselves as husband and wife, whether or not legally married, they are encouraged to report themselves as such.

Why is this of concern?

First of all, many conservative groups are claiming it is a violation of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which establishes that marriage is between a man and a woman under federal law. By recognizing non-legal same-sex marriages, the 2010 Census will violate this federal law.

More importantly, however, the Census will validate non-legal same-sex marriages by giving them federal recognition and greater visibility. This validation translates into more federal funding and more political power for the LGBT community, which translates into a greater threat for traditional marriage.

US Heath Care Bill Language Revealed To Public

The most recent version of the US health care bill was unveiled by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday.  The massive bill is 1,990 pages and will cost $1.05 trillion in the first ten years alone.

Click here to read the bill.

Here is what you can do to stop this bill:

Go to tea parties – click here to find a listing of tea parties in your area.

Educate your friends, family, and neighbors on the issue – click hear for a list of talking points.

Call your representatives in congress and let them know they must stand for the voice of the people and vote against the heath care bill – click here to find your representatives’ & senators‘ contact information.

United Families Announces New VP For International Policy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: MICHAEL N. DUFF

Phone: 480.632.5450
Toll Free: 877.435.7834

Fax: 480.892.4417

ufi@unitedfamilies.org

PO Box 2630
Gilbert, AZ 85299

Gilbert, AZ – Michael N. Duff, President of United Families International (UFI) has announced the appointment of A. Scott Loveless, PhD. as Vice President for International Policy.  The appointment takes effect immediately.  “I am pleased to add Dr. Loveless and his extensive experience in education, the law, and international family policy to the UFI team.  Our expanding international policy programs will be enhanced under Scott’s leadership,” Duff said.

“Dr. Loveless brings to UFI the years of experience, the scientific expertise, and the commitment to the family necessary to elevate our international efforts to a whole new level,” said Duff. “He will make UFI an even more effective proponent of the family at the UN and in the international arena as a whole.”

“I am thrilled to join the UFI team and help expand their courageous efforts to defend the family here and abroad,” said Dr. Loveless. “I hope my skills will complement their effectiveness in supporting the family worldwide.”

UFI is committed to protecting family, marriage, and life at all levels of international affairs, particularly the UN. UFI focuses their efforts on educating UN ambassadors and delegates about family policy issues, by providing legal analysis and scholarly research defending the family and sending representatives to support pro-family delegates in their efforts. UFI’s UN Negotiating Guide is the most widely used tool at the United Nations for defending the family in UN documents.

“The consequences of international law for societies and families are very real,” Loveless concluded. “I am anxious to begin working to ensure these consequences are positive ones.”

Dr. Loveless comes to UFI after serving as the Executive Director of the World Family Policy Center at the J. Reuben Clark Law School at Brigham Young University. He served as an attorney with the U.S. Department of the Interior, but left this work to pursue a Ph.D. in Family Studies (BYU 2000). His dissertation focused on the human-relational effects of personal philosophies of happiness on the marriage relationship. He has continued to write and publish on related themes, most recently in the 3-volume set, The Family in the New Millenium.

He currently resides in Provo, Utah with his wife of 35 years, Cheri. They are the parents of 3 sons, 5 daughters, and 8 grandchildren.

###

Google supports domestic partnerships for same-sex couples

On Tuesday, two lead execs for Google’s Seattle and Kirkland offices sent an editorial to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer urging the approval of Referendum 71. Referendum 71 is a ballot initiative to maintain a Washington state law that would extend domestic partnership rights nearly equivalent to that of marriage to all same-sex couples.

Here is the text of the editorial:

To the Editor:

Google has a reputation for actively participating in policy debates surrounding information access, technology and energy. However, we do not generally take positions on social, legal or political issues that arise beyond our normal, day-to-day business. With that said, there are issues that are so important and so clear cut that we feel compelled to lend our voice. Supporting Referendum 71 is one of those issues.

To be clear, we respect the strongly-held beliefs that people have on both sides of this argument. Nevertheless, we see this debate as one that comes down to equality, plain and simple. If we believe in equal protection under the law we must, in our view, support a man or woman’s right to enjoy the legal benefits of domestic partnerships — no matter who they love.

For the residents of Washington who want for themselves or their children the right to engage in domestic partnerships, we urge the voters of this state to APPROVE Referendum 71.

Brian Bershad – Engineering and Site Director, Google Seattle

Scott Silver – Engineering and Site Director, Google Kirkland

Google is just the latest among many major US companies to support the referendum, including Microsoft, Nike, Puget Sound Energy, RealNetworks, and Vulcan.

If you want to help counter the negative efforts of these big businesses, you can help protect marriage by donating at Protect Marriage Washington.

Switzerland considers changing position on assisted suicide

The Swiss government is considering altering its position on assisted suicide due to an influx of so-called ‘death tourism.’ The Swiss cabinet is currently considering two different proposals on the issue—one for tighter regulation and one for an outright ban of the procedure which has been legal since 1940.

Swiss authorities are concerned both with increasing numbers of foreigners coming to Switzerland to die and also mounting evidence that more and more patients seeking assisted suicide are not terminally ill. Apparently, around 400 assisted suicides are reported every year, 132 of which are performed on foreigners.

The Swiss government is anxious to ensure that assisted suicide is the very last option for patients and the country as a whole gives human life the highest value. “Suicide must only be a last resort,” said the Swiss justice prime ministry. “The government believes that protection of human life must be uppermost.”

Now the government must figure out if it can promote the sanctity of life while maintaining a procedure the directly undermines it. The two proposals are open for public comment until March 1, at which point they will be sent to parliament for drafting.

South Australia working to legalize euthanasia

South Australia is frightfully close to passing a bill that would legalize voluntary euthanasia. According to the bill’s sponsor, Mark Parnell, passage of the bill is not a matter of if, but when.

The legislation is closer to passage than any previous bill on euthanasia. It passed  a second reading in the Upper House today with a vote of 11-10 and now will move on to the committee stage of the debate. If passed, it will move to the Lower House for a conscience vote to determine if the bill is to become law.

Unfortunately, it appears that most citizens of South Australia are in favor of legalizing voluntary euthanasia. According to a survey by Death with Dignity (a source that may cast some doubt on the results), 87% of South Australians support voluntary euthanasia, while only six percent oppose it. Similar but somewhat lower numbers are found throughout the rest of the country.

If passed, the bill would expand current medical treatment laws to include a five-person board of medical and palliative care experts who would provide approval for all voluntary euthanasia procedures. The board looks uncomfortable similar to the feared ‘death panels’ much discussed in the US.

The American People Have Said They Don’t Want It… Why Is the Government Still Pushing Obamacare?

Scare Tactics on Parade:

“Health authorities say almost a hundred children have died from the flu and 46 states now have widespread flu activity.  More than 5,000 people have reportedly died from swine flu since it emerged this year and developed into a global epidemic. In Houston, Texas, there were two swine flu deaths… What do we say to that child’s parents?  I can only imagine that there might have been some difficulty in that child receiving that flu shot.  So many are in that predicament, so many do not have access to doctors and clinics and health insurance or a vigorous, robust public option”

—Sheila Jackson Lee, Congresswoman

On Thursday– This week on “Voice of the Nation” we will be discussing the healthcare scare being pushed through congress.  Polls show that the American people do not support government run healthcare.  Why is it that after a summer of discussion, concern and voicing our objections to the healthcare policies being put forward by this congress that the concerns of the people are not being heard?

Join us as we speak with Cheryl Flake, wife of Congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona. With personal experiences involving their son, Cheryl believes that if they didn’t live here in the US with the great medical care and advancements available here, her son would be severely handicapped.

Guest: Cheryl Flake – Cheryl is the wife of Congressman Jeff Flake who represents the 6^th district of Arizona.  She has worked on Capitol Hill for Senator Heinz, and has taught private piano and voice for 14 years.  Besides being a dedicated mother to her five beautiful children, Cheryl also serves on her elementary school’s PTO board and is active in Mesa Republican Women, church and community.

TUNE IN HERE

Pro-abortion groups outraged by latest Law & Order episode

There was a lot of hype leading up to last Friday’s Law & Order episode addressing the issue of abortion. The episode, which deals with the murder of a late-term abortion doctor, didn’t seem of much interest until after reading the responses of pro-abortion parties outraged that a network show would present the other side of the abortion debate.

They are upset, first of all, that the show would air an episode that so closely mirrors the real-life events of the murder of lionized abortionist Dr. George Tiller. But even more so, they are angered by the discussions between series regulars Detectives Lupo and Bernard who rather than deciding emphatically that an abortion is a matter of choice, leave open the possibility that the choice of abortion may involve the life of a child.

Pro-abortionists were even further angered by the episode addressing the connection between late-term abortion and infanticide. They argue that the depiction of the murdered doctor stabbing the baby of a failed abortion was false and medically inaccurate. However, there are several documented cases of infanticide following failed abortions in recent years. The LifeSite.com report on the episode sites examples:

In one case that drives close to home, an abortionist working for George Tiller, Shelley Sella, was accused of stabbing a born-alive infant in the ribcage until the baby died. In addition, former nurse turned pro-life activist Jill Stanek has also related that while working at a hospital in Illinois, numerous babies born alive after failed abortions were simply left to die in the “soiled utility room.”

I’m not sure if the Law & Order episode, in which a pro-life perspective is packaged around the murder of an abortion provider, is the publicity the pro-life movement would hope for. However, perhaps the vehement opposition of pro-abortionists indicates that the episode is an indicator of a greater threat: a public trend towards valuing life.

Update: Obama signs sexual orientation and gender identity hate-crime bill

President Obama signed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes bill into law during a White House ceremony earlier today. The law inserts sexual orientation and gender identity into existing federal hate-crime legislation and expands existing federal legislation, which only allowed the federal government to prosecute hate-crimes that affected federally-protected activities, to now permit the federal government to prosecute individuals previously tried by state courts.

Not only is this new law a threat to the free speech of any who oppose homosexual behavior, but it is also a dangerous expansion of the power of the federal courts, allowing them to retry individuals previously acquitted or found guilty of ordinary crimes by state courts. It threatens both protections against double jeopardy and the power of independent state courts. Read more about the legal repercussions of the new law here.

Supreme Court Justices are trying to manufacture new rights

Or so Justice Antonin Scalia claimed at an appearance Monday at The University of Arizona College of Law. According to an article by Howard Fischer, Scalia argued that the more liberal Justices are “trying to manufacture new constitutional rights that were never intended by the drafters.”

The brief summary of Scalia’s appearance in the Phoenix East Valley Tribune is actually a really interesting and short read. It perfectly punctuates the difference between more conservative judges who take a literalist approach to the constitution and more liberal justices who take what Scalia called an “originalism” approach.

Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, who accompanied Scalia, explained this more liberal approach: “You don’t look to the details. You look to the value.” Which means, judges identify the values they believe the writers of the constitution intended to encapsulate in the document and then apply those values to current circumstances according to their interpretation.

Scalia warned against taking such a liberal approach to interpreting the document, arguing that loose interpretation could just as easily constrain rights as provide them.

“It goes both ways,” he said.

“The only thing you can be sure of is the Constitution will mean whatever the American people want it to mean today,” Scalia continued. ”And that’s not what a constitution is for. The whole purpose of a constitution is to constrain the desires of the current society.”

It is this loose interpretation of the constitution that allows pro-abortion and anti-family groups to side-step the legislative process and force their agenda upon the nation.

You can read more about Scalia’s defense of constitutional restraint here.