Tag Archives: Defense of Marriage Act

College students call traditional marriage supporters “hideous,” “disgusting,” and flat-world morons

Last Wednesday morning, as America awaited the Supreme Court’s decision on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a group of “liberal” Leftwing college students showed just how “tolerant” and respectful of “diversity” they are.

Katherine Timpf reports for Campus Reform, June 26, 2013, that the pro-homosexual marriage students liberally spewed their intolerance and hatred for supporters of traditional marriage.

This female student (see below) calls us “hideous” and “disgusting” and says that she “feel[s] nothing for them at all. I don’t feel bad that they are upset.”

DOMA hideous

Another female student (below) calls supporters of traditional marriage “a meeting of the flat world society” who should get with the times because “It’s 2013.”

DOMA flat world society

Then there’s this self-satisfied student (below, in red t-shirt) who insists homosexual marriage is all about “love,” whereas supporters of traditional marriage are just mean nasty “haters.” I can’t figure out what gender it is. Whether it is a he or a she, he-she can lose some fat!

DOMA haters[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Zv7KKBZ2Gik]

College education is such a mind-broadening experience! [Snark]

If these college students are the future of America, we’re even more doomed than we already are.  🙁

See FOTM’s other posts on the Supreme Court’s DOMA ruling:


Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

The morning after SCOTUS gay marriage ruling

Yesterday, by a narrow 5-4 majority, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the 1996 federal law that defines marriage as strictly that between a man and a woman — not between a man and man, or between a woman and woman.

Today is the morning after.

I’m calmer, having recovered from the shock and bitter disappointment of yesterday, and am better able to scrutinize SCOTUS’s ruling with dispassion.

Briefly, the court’s ruling on United States v. Windsor, Executor of the Estate of Spyer, et al., is more a re-assertion of states’ rights than a ruling against traditional marriage. (You can read the full text of the court’s decision or certiorari in pdf format here. Hereafter, the ruling will be referred to as “Decision.”)

On pages 2-3 of “Decision,” the court reminds us that “By history and tradition the definition and regulation of marriage has been treated as being within the authority and realm of the separate States,” instead of the purview of Congress.

Whereas “Congress has enacted discrete statutes to regulate the meaning of marriage in order to further federal policy,” SCOTUS finds that the Defense of Marriage Act enacted by Congress, “with a directive applicable to over 1,000 federal statues” is too far a reach. Moreover, DOMA “is also directed to a class of persons that the laws of NewYork, and of 11 other States, have sought to protect.”

For those reasons, the Court finds DOMA to be “unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment.” (“Decision,” p. 2)

In effect, the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday returns legislating on marriage back to the 50 states.

This means that, henceforth, the battle for traditional marriage will be a hard-fought state-by-state battle. For those of us who want to preserve traditional marriage, there is no short-cut or quick-fix by looking to Congress for a federal law.

The infographic below from Bloomberg shows that currently, same-sex marriage is banned in 3o states. 13 states plus D.C. allow same-sex-marriage. They are:

  1. California
  2. Connecticut
  3. Delaware
  4. Iowa
  5. Maine
  6. Maryland
  7. Massachusetts
  8. Minnesota
  9. New Hampshire
  10. New York
  11. Rhode Island
  12. Vermont
  13. Washington
  14. Washington D.C.,

marriage in 50 statesClick image to enlarge

To conclude, allow me to give what is certain to be an unpopular opinion.

Years ago, a student in my political ethics class wrote a paper on same-sex marriage, arguing that he was against it because legalizing homosexual marriage will destroy traditional heterosexual marriage.

My wry response to him was that homosexuals don’t have to attack traditional marriage because heterosexuals — with our high rates of divorce, abortion, out-of-wedlock children, and single-mother fatherless families — are already doing a good job.

If heterosexuals strengthen marriage by honoring our marital vows, treating our spouses with respect and kindness, abstaining from out-of-wedlock reproduction, and refraining from killing our unborn, no amount of same-sex marriages can succeed in destroying the traditional institution of marriage.


Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Justice Scalia’s Dissent on Same-Sex Marriage

OK, I don’t know Legal from Beagle

but give me a minute to put things in perspective on DOMA. TD did a post on Lucifer’s scandals at link below. There are about 24 I believe.

Now don’t throw things at your ‘puter as you will only have to fix. Bare with me now, but today, tomorrow, DOMA will have very little effect. It’s not that big of deal. OUCH!! I forgot to mention pls don’t curse me.  😆 What I mean is we have all these other scandals. For now 1% of population will be booking wedding halls and picking out flowers.

On the other hand the SCOTUS ruling has just morally destroyed the future of this country. My poor son. Oh it’s going to do lots of damage, but it will take a while. I’m just trying to rally you guys and gals.

Pls read Scalia’s Scathing Dissent below.


Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy (AP Photos)

Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy (AP Photos)

By Tim Grieve

Updated: June 26, 2013 | 1:33 p.m.
June 26, 2013 | 10:15 a.m.


Dissenting from this morning’s opinion on the Defense of Marriage Act, Justice Antonin Scalia – as expected – holds nothing back.

In a ripping dissent, Scalia says that Justice Anthony Kennedy and his colleagues in the majority have resorted to calling opponents of gay marriage “enemies of the human race.”

But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to con- demn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution. In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to “dis- parage,” “injure,” “degrade,” “demean,” and “humiliate” our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homo- sexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence— indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.

calia says that the court’s holding – while limited to the Defense of Marriage Act – is a sure sign that the majority is willing to declare gay marriage a constitutional right.

It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here—when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it. I promise you this: The only thing that will “confine” the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.

And, he says, the holding will short circuit the debate over gay marriage that should have been carried out in the states.

In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us. The truth is more complicated. It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end proves more than today’s Court can handle. Too bad. A reminder that disagreement over something so fundamental as marriage can still be politically legitimate would have been a fit task for what in earlier times was called the judicial temperament. We might have covered ourselves with honor today, by promising all sides of this debate that it was theirs to settle and that we would respect their resolution. We might have let the People decide.

But that the majority will not do. Some will rejoice in today’s decision, and some will despair at it; that is the nature of a controversy that matters so much to so many. But the Court has cheated both sides, robbing the winners of an honest victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. We owed both of them better. I dissent.



Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Police tear-gas and beat peaceful marchers supporting traditional marriage

The much-prophesied time of the persecution of Christians is here.
As Americans await the Supreme Court’s decision on the constitutionality of the Defense of (Traditional) Marriage Act (DOMA) — and by implication, the constitutionality of same-sex marriage — it is sobering to know that 2½ months ago, 1.4 million Christians peacefully marched in support of traditional marriage in Paris and were met with tear gas and batons.

franceprotest“Manif pour tous (March For All),” Paris, France, January 13, 2013.

Manif pour tousThe elderly and young were among the marchers.

Angela Lu reports for WorldMag, March 26, 2013, that as the 1.4 million “Manif pour tous (March for all)” protesters approached the Champs-Elysees avenue and toward the presidential palace, in opposition to a draft bill legalizing same-sex marriage and gay adoption, French police tear gassed and beat the protesters with batons. The crowd included children, elderly people, and priests, many bused in from French provinces that continue to hold onto their Christian roots.

France protest1French police use pepper spray against participants in a pro-traditional marriage rally in Paris. Photo: Michel Spingler/AP

One LifeSiteNews correspondent, Jeanne Smits, who witnessed the protest said a 14-year-old boy needed respiratory assistance after the tear gas attack. The leader of the mainstream Christian Democratic Party also fell victim to the choking gas. Police allegedly threw a 17-year-old protestor down the stairs at the entrance of a subway station after gassing him.
While polls last August showed that same-sex marriage had two-thirds support among the French, the number is now down to a narrow majority. The opposition comes from the Catholic church in France, other religious leaders, including Jews and Muslims, and people in traditional small towns.
Meanwhile, in the United States, on March 26, 2013 (last Tuesday), more than 10,000 pro-marriage citizens from across the country and from every walk of life rallied and marched peacefully to the Supreme Court with two simple messages: “Respect Our Votes!” and “Kids Deserve a Mom and a Dad!”
But did you see or hear about this in the MSM?
ConservativeActionAlerts urges us to do the following:
1. BIGGEST NEED: Pray, pray, pray, for the Supreme Court, especially all 5 conservative Justices, to apply the existing law and uphold both the DOMA and Prop 8 bans.
2. Send an email to George Will (georgewill@washpost.com) saying “You are no longer conservative, but an enemy of Jesus Christ’s definition of marriage in Matthew 19:4-6.” This week George Will (who claims to speak for conservatives?) argued the Supreme Court should homose xualize marriage by striking down DOMA.
3. Sign our free petition to Congress here to defend traditional marriage as Jesus defined it, valid only between one man and one woman. Social share this petition on FB and Tw.
4. Call your two Senators at 202-225-3121 to say “oppose and filibuster S. 598” the bill proposed by Diane Feinstein (D-CA) that would repeal DOMA.

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Prominent Republicans sign off on same-sex marriage

suicidal GOP

More betrayal from the GOP. More reason to stop registering yourself as a Republican.
For the 2012 presidential election, the Republican Party boldly proclaimed its platform as “Renewing American Values.” Among the “American values” the Republican Party vowed to “renew” was “Preserving and Protecting Traditional Marriage”:
“The institution of marriage is the foundation of civil society. Its success as an institution will determine our success as a nation. It has been proven by both experience and endless social science studies that traditional marriage is best for children. Children raised in intact married families are more likely to attend college, are physically and emotionally healthier, are less likely to use drugs or alcohol, engage in crime, or get pregnant outside of marriage. The success of marriage directly impacts the economic well-being of individuals. Furthermore, the future of marriage affects freedom. The lack of family formation not only leads to more government costs, but also to more government control over the lives of its citizens in all aspects. We recognize and honor the courageous efforts of those who bear the many burdens of parenting alone, even as we believe that marriage, the union of one man and one woman must be upheld as the national standard, a goal to stand for, encourage, and promote through laws governing marriage. We embrace the principle that all Americans should be treated with respect and dignity.”
Blah, blah, blah.
All lies.
Right after Mitt Romney “lost” (see “22 signs of Democrat Voter Fraud in 2012 Election”) the presidential election to the POS, noises began within the GOP and among so-called conservative pundits (like Sean Hannity) that, to win, the Republican Party should try to become “more appealing” to certain demographic groups, such as women and Hispanics.
In other words, transform the GOP into a paler version of the Democratic Party by pandering to those groups and to hell with principles, values and beliefs! As if Democrat voters would actually be fooled and so switch to a paler imitation of the Democratic Party.
Now we can attach names to some of those voices.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg reports for the New York Times, Feb. 26, 2013 that “dozens of prominent Republicans — including top advisers to former President George W. Bush, four former governors and two members of Congress — have signed a legal brief arguing that gay people have a constitutional right to marry, a position that amounts to a direct challenge to Speaker John A. Boehner and reflects the civil war in the party since the November election.”
The document will be submitted this week to the Supreme Court in support of a suit seeking to strike down Proposition 8, a California ballot initiative barring same-sex marriage, and all similar bans. The court will hear back-to-back arguments next month in that case and another pivotal gay rights case that challenges the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act.
Legal analysts said the brief had the potential to sway conservative justices as much for the prominent names attached to it as for its legal arguments. The list of signers includes a string of Republican officials and influential thinkers — 75 as of Monday evening — who are not ordinarily associated with gay rights advocacy, including some who are speaking out for the first time and others who have changed their previous positions.
Ken Mehlman, the former chairman of the Republican National Committee, who came out as gay several years ago, has spent months in quiet conversations with fellow Republicans to gather signatures for the brief. He is on the board of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which brought the suit against Prop. 8.
Among the 75 RINO signatories of the brief are:

  • Jon M. Huntsman Jr., the former Utah governor, who favored civil unions but opposed same-sex marriage during his 2012 presidential bid.
  • Christine Todd Whitman, former governor of New Jersey.
  • William Weld and Jane Swift, both former governors of Massachusetts.
  • Meg Whitman, who supported Proposition 8 when she ran for California governor.
  • Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Richard Hanna of New York.
  • Stephen J. Hadley, a Bush national security adviser.
  • Carlos Gutierrez, a commerce secretary to Mr. Bush.
  • James B. Comey, a top Bush Justice Department official.
  • David A. Stockman, President Ronald Reagan’s first budget director.
  • Deborah Pryce, a former member of the House Republican leadership from Ohio who is retired from Congress.
  • Steve Schmidt, who was a senior adviser to the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona.

Some high-profile Republicans who support same-sex marriage — including Laura Bush, the former first lady; Dick Cheney, the former vice president; and Colin L. Powell, a former secretary of state — were not on the list as of Monday.
The presence of so many well-known former officials suggests that once Republicans are out of public life they feel freer to speak out against the party’s official platform, which calls for amending the Constitution to define marriage as “the union of one man and one woman.”
“The ground on this is obviously changing, but it is changing more rapidly than people think,” said John Feehery, a Republican strategist and former House leadership aide who did not sign the brief. “I think that Republicans in the future are going to be a little bit more careful about focusing on these issues that tend to divide the party.”
If the above doesn’t convince you that you’re wasting your time and $ with the GOP, take a look at my post of November 15, 2012, Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud.
So what’s next on the fickle Republican elite’s agenda?
How about abortion?
Why not? After all, those single women whose votes the GOP so covets are pro-abortion, and the party has to change to become more appealing to women! — and to Hell with the sanctity of human, albeit yet unborn, life,

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0 0