The beginning of the end of military chaplains?

At first, I wasn't going to post this video, then I saw important info at 2:41 and 3:49.

DOMA: very ligitimate.

Anyone who won't acknowledge that a child needs a mother and a father is evil.

True marriage and DOMA.

Ignore gender in a marriage!?! Are you crazy?

Misconduct in New York Senate creates gay "marriage."

Politicians are so homophobic (afraid of the gay community) now, that they will break the law to show how gay-friendly they are. This is how same-sex "marriage" became legal in the empire state.

“...King explained that turmoil on the Senate floor erupted after senators discovered that they were barred from explaining their votes. Same-sex “marriage” proponent and Democrat Senator Kevin Parker, who disclosed what happened at the Senate to the Gazette, was one of them.

“I go to the door, and I tried to leave, and they had us locked in. I tried to leave, and they had us locked on to the floor,” Parker told the Gazette. After he made it out of the chamber, he continued, “One sergeant of arms physically grabbed me....”

Story here.

Informative DOMA video.

DOMA in a coma.

According to Article 2, section 3, clause 4 of the Constitution, the President must support DOMA.

Now, the phrase, "Anti-gay," can get the President of the United States to ignore the law. Is this the official start of the end of sexual sanity in the United States? Homosexuality is not an immutable circumstance like race or gender; I cover that fact in this blog.

DOMA was created to prevent one state's homofascism from affecting another state.

"The bans on incestuous and polygamous marriages are ancient and deeprooted, and, as the majority suggests, they are supported by strong considerations of social policy," Baxter warned. "Our society abhors such relationships, and the notion that our laws could not forever prohibit them seems preposterous. Yet here, the majority overturns, in abrupt fashion, an initiative statute confirming the equally deeprooted assumption that marriage is a union of partners of the opposite sex. The majority does so by relying on its own assessment of contemporary community values, and by inserting in our Constitution an expanded definition of the right to marry that contravenes express statutory law.

"Who can say that, in 10, 15 or 20 years, an activist court might not rely on the majority's analysis to conclude, on the basis of a perceived evolution in community values, that the laws prohibiting polygamous and incestuous marriages were no longer constitutionally justified?" Baxter wrote.

That argument, in fact, is being made now in a court case in Canada, where the acknowledgement of "marriage rights" for same-sex duos is being cited as a reason to strike polygamy laws.

Those arguing officially on behalf of marriage are from ProtectMarriage.com, which was the group behind Proposition 8 when voters adopted it in 2008.

The ADF said the case has the potential to create "years of chaos and confusion in the legal battle to preserve marriage. It could impact marriage laws in up to 45 other states – including the … states where voters overwhelmingly adopted state constitutional amendments…"

The ADF report said also at stake in the issue is:

The common sense idea that every child should have a right to be raised in a home with both a mom and a dad

Whether America will be forced to accept the bizarre, court-invented claim that men and women are interchangeable

Whether Americans will be forced to surrender their freedom to set public policy to a small group of wealthy activists who wish to impose their will on a state or an entire nation

Whether marriage will remain a unique institution that promotes the important interests of children and society…

Whether voters may freely consider their own moral and religious views about marriage … or be forced by violence and intimidation to remain silent

Whether voters may collectively decide through the democratic process that marriage between one man and woman should be protected..."



I'm surprised that Fox news allowed the phrase, "anti-gay" in their headline. Story here.