Ever wonder what things would be like if same-sex marriage were legalized?

Ann Bailey

Ever wonder what things would be like if same-sex marriage were legalized throughout the U.S.?   Gallaudet University’s recent suspension of their chief diversity officer gives us a clue.  Why was Angela McCaskill – the first deaf African American Woman to earn a Ph.D. from Gallaudet -suspended from her job?  She signed a ballot petition giving Maryland citizens the opportunity, in November, to vote on recently passed legislation legalizing same-sex marriage.  She and about 80,000 other Marylanders signed the petition.

Dr. McCaskill thought it was a good idea to let the people of Maryland decide the definition of marriage.  Now the university is “making her pay.”  So much for the tolerance and diversity crowd!  Once again we see that for gay advocates and people on the left of the political spectrum, tolerance runs only one way.  The University’s President, T. Alan Hurwitz, confirms this observation by stating:  “Dr. McCaskill has participated in a legislative initiative that some feel is inappropriate for an individual serving as Chief Diversity Officer.”  Wow…. And he said that with a straight face!

If these open-minded, diverse, and tolerant individuals behave this way when same-sex marriage is not the law of the land – or the state – one can only imagine what their attitude (and their actions!) will be were they ever to have the force of law behind them.

That brings me to some other examples of what might occur if same-sex marriage became the law of the land.  These examples come to us from Canada where same sex marriage was legalized in 2005. The state of Minnesota has a constitutional amendment defining marriage on their ballot for November and the group Minnesota for Marriage have put together an interesting video on consequences of same-sex marriage in Canada.  You might say “Well, Canada has different laws than the U.S. and that won’t happen here.”

All I can say to that is “it already is.”

 

 

 

Laws Put Religious Freedom in Jeopardy

Diane Robertson

Washington State has become the seventh U.S. state to legalize same-sex “marriage.” This new law is considered an anti-discrimination law. Many of these laws, like Washington State’s, will include a religious clause. These clauses are there to exempt churches and clergymen from being sued for discrimination if the church or clergy member, for example, refuses to perform a marriage of same sex couples. Many people believe that these clauses protect any religious-based conscientious objections to same-sex “marriages.”

This simply is not the case.  In response to questions about the New York State’s religious protection clause, Alliance Defense Fund attorney Austin R. Nimocks stated:

It does not protect individuals. It does not protect private business owners. It does not protect, for example, a bed and breakfast owner who is using their own private personal property in the type of intimate setting that a bed and breakfast is. It does not protect licensed professionals. For example, it does not protect counselors. It also does not protect lawyers — you may have a family law attorney who does not want to do a same-sex divorce because of their deeply held religious beliefs. It does not protect fertility doctors who may have a strict belief and only want to help [heterosexual] married couples because they believe a kid deserves both a mom and a dad.

Individual citizens are offered no protection under religious clauses in nondiscrimination laws.  An individual’s religious beliefs are just not protected where same-sex “marriage” and civil unions are legal, and in other places with nondiscrimination laws.

In 2005 in Massachusetts,  when David Parker, a parent of a kindergartner, strongly insisted on being notified when teachers were discussing homosexuality with his son, the school had him arrested and he spent the night in jail. In 2008, the federal court of appeals upheld a lower court’s dismissal of the lawsuit filed by Parker to have children opted out of homosexual curriculum.

In 2007 in Georgia, a licensed counselor, Marcia Walden, referred a person seeking same-sex relationship counseling to a colleague. Rather than attempt to provide a service that would conflict with her religious beliefs, Walden acting in the best interest of the client referred her to another counselor. The client filed a complaint and Walden was dismissed from her job. Walden lost and the case has been appealed.

In 1999, in California, two doctors at the North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group referred a lesbian patient to a doctor at an outside clinic for fertility treatments because of their religious beliefs. After a successful pregnancy preformed through the other doctor this patient sued the doctors at the North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group for discrimination. In 2008, the doctors lost the case and it has been appealed.

In 2006 in New Mexico, Elane, a freelance photographer, refused to shoot a gay wedding between two women and was later sued by Vanessa Willock for discrimination against a person’s sexual orientation.  Elane lost the lawsuit and is now appealing.

These lawsuits are happening all over the United States. In most cases United States citizens, who believe their religious convictions should allow them to refuse services or protect their children, are losing.

At the international level, similar attacks on religious freedom, freedom of conscience, and freedom of expression continue.

In many instances, clergy members are not even protected.   You probably remember the case of Swedish Pastor Ake Green and Canadian Pastor Stephen Boissoin.  Although these men were eventually acquitted of their supposed crime of speaking out against homosexual behavior, thousands of dollars in legal fees and years in litigation have a dampening effect on free speech and upon religious freedoms.  These cases clearly send the message “if you speak out or defend religious positions, there will be a heavy price to pay.”

When Chai Feldblum, Pres. Obama’s appointee to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, was asked about conflicts between Religious Freedom and so-called “sexual liberty,” her response was indicative of how liberal courts around the world seem to view this issue:

“I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.”

As Marc Stern, general counsel for American Jewish Congress has stated:  “When you have a change that is as dramatic as has happened in the last 10 to 15 years with regards to attitudes toward homosexuality, it’s inevitable it’s going to reverberate in dozens of places in the law that you’re never going to be able to foresee.”

Action Items:

1.  Understand that “religious exemption clauses” that might be written into same-sex marriage laws or into other types of anti-discrimination laws relating to sexual orientation, offer little, if any, protection to individuals, businesses, or non-religious organizations.  Don’t be fooled.

2.  Thoroughly examine any type of proposed legislation surrounding issues of domestic partnership, civil unions, same-sex “marriage” laws, hate crime law, employment law, or any type of “anti-discrimination” policy.  Be advised that individual religious perspective is usually not protected.

3.  Stand firm in defense of traditional marriage.  Actively oppose legalization of same-sex “marriage” and other forms of alternative relationships.

4.  Stand firm in defense of religious freedom and the opportunity for conscientious objection.

5.  Get involved in the appointment and retention of members of the judiciary.  Know the stance of those individuals who are being appointed or elected to judicial positions.

 

The Summer Soldier and the Sunshine Patriot

Rachel Allison

Do you remember the term “sunshine soldier and summer patriot?”

The term was found in Thomas Paine’s series of pamphlets published  during the American Revolution.  He wrote them because the colonists needed hope…they needed inspiration.  For any of you who have read the Pulitzer prize winning“1776” by David McCullough you will understand more fully the dire situation the colonists were facing.

“These are the times that try men’s souls” wrote Paine. “The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”

Mr. Paine was describing those men, who, when the snow started falling, and a bad situation became harsh, left their ranks to return to their hearths, leaving the battles for others to wage.

This morning the thought, “It was the best of times; it was the worst of times” (“A Tale of Two Cities” by Dickens) has come to my mind repeatedly.

I am so grateful for a warm home, food, grocery stores within walking distance, clean running water at the turn of a handle, a reliable car, modern technology that allows me to have world news and instant access to communication. What comfort and convenience! It is the best of times! It would be easy to relax on a couch with a good book and ignore the world around me.

And yet…we read and see another reality portrayed as the headlines inform us of …”murders,” “desertion,” “abortion promoted,” “same-sex marriage legalized,” “child abuse rampant,” “fraud discovered,” “lies uncovered,” “pornography,” “rape,” “drug addiction”…and we see that these can also be considered “the worst of times.”

I believe that 2012 for us is as critical as our Founding Father’s 1776. And Paine’s words ring in our ears, “These are the times that try men’s souls.” His pamphlets clarified the issues at stake in the war being waged.

We at United Families, are doing our “darnedest” to clarify the battles being fought in our society. Future generations will look at us…you and me, as having been “winter warriors” or “sunshine soldiers.” Just like the men and women of 1776, who, during MANY of the battles, saw no way out…we also, at times, see “no way to win.”  And yet we are winning.  We are given hope when we read that more and more of the rising generation see abortion for what it is…the killing of unborn babies. It has been a battle that started before the Supreme Court heard Roe vs. Wade in 1973.  A long battle, and it’s not over, but the pro-life contingent is expanding.

How long will it take for society to recognize the absolute importance and truth that marriage is between a man and a woman? Thirty years?  Hopefully if the “winter warriors,” you and I, get involved in the battle we can shorten the war.  It may be fierce, but in Paine’s words:

“Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”

Paine’s writings helped the colonists understand that the British were trying to assume powers that only God should have. Paine saw the British political and military maneuvers in America as “impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God.”

Are there those today who can be compared with the British Empire of that day?  Some rights and powers belong to God alone.  Two of those powers are the giving and taking of life.  Who are we to assume we know better than God?

Paine states “that God Almighty will not give up a people to military destruction, or leave them unsupported to perish, who have so earnestly and so repeatedly sought to avoid the calamities of war, by every decent method which wisdom could invent”.

Should we not be so worthy of God’s alliance? Obviously, we need to be more involved than just “wishing and hoping.” Every “decent method which wisdom could invent” needs to be in play. Think! Act! Write! Speak up! Get involved!

“The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” And may I add generations to come?

Senate Judiciary Committee votes to strike down DOMA

Voting along partisan lines the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee voted today to end the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  In 1996 the Defense of Marriage Act was approved by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in both house of Congress (85-14 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House).  President Clinton signed the bill into effect in 1996 with this statement:  “I have long opposed governmental recognition of same-gender marriages, and this legislation is consistent with that position.”

The ridiculously named and disrespectful “Respect for Marriage Act” that passed out of committee today flies in the face of the wishes of 31 states that have codified marriage – either in their constitution or in their statutes or in many cases both -as the union of one man and one woman.

Undermining and eventually destroying the Defense of Marriage Act is the stated goal of the current U.S. administration as they have refused to defend DOMA.  They have abdicated their responsibility leaving the House of Representatives to do the job.  Today’s vote shows how members of the senate do not understand the will of the American people.  The repeal of DOMA would open the door to taxpayers being forced to subsidize homosexual couples by providing them with federal benefits.

There is little chance that this “Dis”Respect for Marriage Act will get much traction elsewhere in Congress, but now is the time to contact your Senators and let them know your opinion on what occurred today.  Tell them to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and to not allow any of its provisions to be overturned.

Senate Dems move to repeal DOMA 

The Camel’s Nose in the Tent

Within ten days of the repeal of the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy” which allows openly homosexual individuals to serve in the U.S. military, the Department of Defense announced that same-sex “weddings” will now be allowed on U.S. military bases.  They aren’t calling them weddings, however.  They’re “private ceremonies” and military chaplains will be allowed to officiate whether on or off post.  This not-fooling-anyone kind of word play is an effort on the part of the Obama administration and the Department of Defense to dance around the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and adopted language in a Defense Authorization bill passed last April that banned such events.

This development is just another example of efforts to dismantle DOMA piece by piece and to ignore the rule of law.  Although the military directive states that “a chaplain is not required to participate,” it will only be a matter of time before those chaplains who refuse to validate homosexual behavior or perform their “ceremonies” receive the label of “intolerant” and their military career is compromised.  Don’t think it can happen?  Remember Chai Feldblum’s infamous statement that sexual liberty must always trump religious liberty?

Gay activists definitely agree with Ms. Feldblum and they aren’t done.

The Washington Times is reporting that homosexual activist groups are now pushing to have the military opened up to transgender individuals.  To clarify, that category includes such behaviors as transsexuals, transvestites, cross-dressers – including drag queens – and other “gender-variant” individuals.  For those who say there is no “slippery slope,” perhaps you prefer the metaphor of “letting the camel’s nose inside the tent.”  Whichever your choice, it is clear that gay activists are not going to stop pushing and forcing others to accept and then validate their behavior.

It is important that you contact your congressional leaders and encourage them to immediately enact legislation prohibiting military personnel from performing same-sex ceremonies on U.S. military bases.  Congress does have the authority to “make rules” for the military. 

Our service men have a difficult enough job without adding this new level of chaos to their lives.  Our soldiers are doing their best to protect us; let’s do our part to protect them from the onslaught of homosexual activists and a complicit Commander in Chief.

Legislature of the State of New York vs. truth: The activists can’t win

By Mike Duff

I have been asked many times over the last few weeks to explain the decision of New York’s State legislature and their surprising move to create homosexual marriage.  To say this was surprising may, in and of itself, surprise those that stereotype the citizens of the state.  The public opinion polls showed that a strong majority of New Yorkers oppose homosexual marriage.  Yet the radical homosexual activist industry persuaded lawmakers to destroy the meaning of marriage in their state and to usher in a culture that cannot succeed.

What drives the advocates of homosexual marriage to desire to so radically alter our culture and the institutions which helped it, and the people within, to succeed for centuries?  It cannot simply be, as homosexual advocates claim, that they seek equal opportunity to express and demonstrate a commitment they claim they feel.  There is something else occurring.  It is not about love, happiness, and commitment; it is about cultural change.  It is about turning culture on its head until everyone is forced to accept their alternate reality.

And, it is not enough that well meaning people grant them, via “tolerance,” the opportunity to be deviant in private.  They will not rest until their behavior is endorsed by churches, pushed by governments, promoted by celebrities, and taught in public school rooms.  The ultimate game is to try to create a society where homosexuality is deemed normal and good, simply another acceptable way to live one’s life.

And yet, truth is still unassailable despite the best efforts of homosexual advocates and their political puppets.  They can never ignore the reality that marriage always has been an institution designed to benefit a man and a woman and their children.

Physically, homosexuality forces the body to endure processes it was not designed to handle.  As a result, and as is usually the case when a body is abused by alcohol, drugs, poor diet, etc., bad health develops.  HIV/AIDS aside, homosexuals have, from purely a health standpoint, one of the riskiest life styles on the planet.

They cannot elude the truth regarding the ultimate purpose of sexual activity, reproduction.  Homosexuals cannot produce children.  This non-productivity will ultimately derail any society.

Advocates ignore the truth when pontificating that their potential emotional stability requires the same long-term commitment of marriage.  But the reality is that homosexual relationships are short.  A surprisingly small number ever marry, even when legally available.  Relationships centered on sex, whether homosexual or heterosexual in nature, are not emotionally satisfying.  In fact, social science indicates they are emotionally harmful.

No society can succeed when biology and thousands of years of an essential model of marriage is mocked.  No society can be productive and supportive of its members when the realities of human existence stand in the way of a poorly conceived, deviant cultural model.  No action by a misguided state legislature can ever change this truth.

“A Tale of Two Fathers” New Study

By Ann Bailey

Nearly half (46 percent) of American fathers under the age of 45 say they have at least one child who was born out of wedlock.  Yes, you read that right – almost half.  I was shocked when I read that statistic.  When you consider that the share of children in the U.S. born to unwed mothers went from five percent in 1960 to 41 percent in 2008, I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised.

Here’s a sampling of some of the statistics that made the news in the recently released Pew Research Center study entitled:  “Tale of Two Fathers.”

• Twenty-seven percent of fathers with kids 18 or younger live away from at least one of their children.  That number is twice the rate of the number of fathers who lived apart from their children in the 1960s.
• Black and Hispanic fathers were much more likely to have children out of wedlock, at 72 percent and 59 percent respectively.  This compares with 37 percent of for white men.
• Education is also a factor with 13 percent of fathers with at least a bachelor’s degree having children outside of marriage, 51 percent of those with high school diplomas, and 65 percent of those who didn’t finish high school fathering children outside of marriage.
• In the age bracket of 20-24, three-fourths of those fathers had children outside of marriage, while in the 35-44 age range, that number stands at 36 percent.
• College-educated men tend to marry and get better jobs and are more involved with their children than less educated men.
• On a positive note, of the married fathers who are involved in their children’s lives, the number of hours a week that these fathers are involved with their children has gone up from 2.6 hours in 1960 to 6.5 hours per week today.  But sadly, on average, the number of fathers involved with their children grows smaller with each passing year.

U.S. Pres. Obama has written of not having his father in his life and has stated that it is “a hole in child’s life that no government can fill.”   We absolutely agree and so does the empirical data.  But why then are there so many people, especially on the political left, intent on encouraging sexual relations outside of marriage, encouraging notoriously unstable cohabiting relationships by implementing policies like domestic partnerships, promoting no-fault divorce, and putting in place policies that effectively dismantle marriage.  Why do we continually hear in popular culture and in the media claims that marriage doesn’t matter or that same-sex relationships – “two moms” or “two dads” – work just as well for children as a married mom AND  dad.  There is such a huge disconnect in all of this!

Fathers matter.  Fathers matter…  Children need their father married to their mother and they need them to have a long and successful marriage.  The dire statistics mentioned above need to be reversed.  There are too many children with “holes in their lives” and the government can never create enough social programs to fill the gap.  Let’s promote the importance of fathers every day, not just on that special day in June.

Homosexuality is the story of our mothers and fathers? Don’t think so.

It’s June and it’s also “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride” month in the U.S.  Pres. Obama made it official with this proclamation.  We thought the proclamation’s opening sentence was particularly ironic:

“The story of America’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community is the story of our fathers and sons, our mothers and daughters, and our friends and neighbors who continue the task of making our country a more perfect Union.”

There are not mothers and fathers without heterosexual behavior – male and female coming together.  Be it in the traditional way or even in a Petri dish.   It seems that Pres. Obama’s speech writers like to participate in the fiction of homosexuals bearing children – but we’ll give them credit; it’s a pretty sentence.  Ironic, too, that they used the term “perfect union.”

Pres. Obama goes on to list the ways that he has pandered and catered to homosexual advocates.  He lists in detail his promotion of the gay advocate’s wish list – all of which are to the detriment of religious freedom, traditional marriage and family values.  Read the proclamation here.

June is such a great month; school’s out, the beginning of summer; lots of family time, Father’s Day…

It’s a tragedy for a nation’s attention to instead be intentionally focused towards promoting a behavior that -when followed to its most obvious conclusion – assures that fatherhood (or motherhood) will never come to pass.

UFI Reader Poll: If Coke was involved in pressuring the law firm King and Spaulding to decline to defend DOMA, would you participate in a boycott?

Here’s the question:

“If it is determined that Coca Cola was involved in pressuring the law firm King and Spaulding to decline to defend DOMA, would you participate in a boycott?”

Here’s what UFI readers had to say:

96 Percent                   Yes

 2 Percent                    No

 2 Percent                    Not sure

Looks like UFI readers agree, Coke should be added to everyone’s “I’m boycotting” list.   As one pundit put it:  “Maybe they can change their slogan to ‘Have a Coke and a smile, but not an attorney.”

Individuals familiar with the situation seem to agree:   Coke was involved in pressuring the law firm.

Did Coke Pressure King and Spaulding?

Here’s another

Coke reportedly intervened to pressure King & Spalding to drop DOMA case

 

I Believe in the Family

By Carol Soelberg

I believe in UFI because I believe in the family and UFI is in the business of protecting and preserving the family.  More than 30 years ago, United Families International began to realize that a threat to the family was growing.  Today research and the resulting statistics are staggering.  It was reported in 2006 that 50% of marriages in the U.S. end in divorce; 40% of all U.S. children are born out of wedlock.

To me, the most disturbing is that 43% of all U.S. women will have at least one abortion before their 45th birthday.  In fact an article by John Whitehead called “Without the Family There Is No Freedom” states that “according to the Guttmacher Institute, the most common surgical procedure in the United States is not by-pass surgery or even cosmetic surgery—it is abortion. Indeed, in 2002, approximately 1.29 million women in the U.S. had an abortion, and 49% of all unintended pregnancies today result in abortion.”  Those are staggering numbers.

Much good has come from efforts to expose and educate concerning the seriousness of the threats to the family.  Marriage amendments to protect traditional marriage exist in thirty states with a couple more marriage amendments proposed for the ballot in 2012.  An increased awareness of the destructive emotional and physical side effects of abortion has certainly created a shift in public acceptance of abortion.  Across the country awareness exists that when the family disintegrates, government moves in to take its place.  We are beginning to recognize also that such a replacement comes at great costs!

If we are to succeed in protecting and preserving the family we must work together at all levels of family strengthening.  Policy and programs across the world must be enacted to protect the family but that is not enough.  We must also work within our homes to create more love, loyalty, and long-lasting concern for the individual members of our families. They need and deserve our best!