The Lawlor-and-McDonald-controlled Judiciary Committee in Connecticut just passed a same-sex marriage bill -- without religious liberty protections! For the second time in a month, Lawlor and McDonald have used their Judiciary Committee roles to attack religious liberty and people of faith in Connecticut.
Last month, they failed in their efforts to involve the state in matters of internal church governance -- but only after an historic uprising from the people of Connecticut. But now they're back at it again with a bill to enshrine last year's CT Supreme Court ruling into statute, without any substantive protections for churches, religious organizations or people of faith. In the process, they fought off amendments that would have given conscience protections to Justices of the Peace, limited teaching on homosexuality in the schools, and protected religious liberty rights of churches and religious organizations (like Catholic Charities!).
SB899 was approved by the Judiciary Committee this past Monday evening, and now goes to the full Senate, where there will be efforts to add a religious liberty amendment to the bill. NOM has just launched a radio ad campaign in Connecticut focused on protecting our religious liberties. (Click here to listen.)
1. 2. Then make plans to attend the Rally for Religious Liberty in Hartford at 10:00am next Tuesday, April 7th. The rally is being sponsored by the Family Institute of Connecticut, and will meet on the North Steps of the Capitol (overlooking Bushnell Park). Help us have a great turnout on Tuesday!
26 Comments
Equality=Peace
Hate=You
It seems since the church is subsidized by the state they should have fewer protections. Why not give up non-profit status and become a private club ?
So, does a Baptist pastor have to marry a Jew, if they ask? or, worse yet, a Muslim? I never thought of that before! That would be awful! I don't know what is worse, having to marry a gay couple or having to marry Muslims!
I don't think we should have to act like being Muslim is okay in schools, either. That is like saying it's okay to be a terrorist!
Divorce should be illegal, even in the case of rape, incest, abuse, drinking, gambling, porn. If you just get some counseling from your pastor, like I did, everything will be okay. Jesus makes it okay. We pray every day.
My selfish mother divorced my father because he was having affairs, drinking, gambling, using drugs, and it had a terrible effect on me. We got to spend weekends with dad, and if mom had been there, I probably wouldn't have been molested by all those men while dad was high or drunk! I probably wouldn't have had to do all that housework, either.
If my childhood friend hadn't turned gay, he could have gotten me pregnant and we could have been married and moved out.
I never had kids. I fear I am not a real woman because I did not have children, because you are supposed to have children for God, and that is the purpose of marriage. I fear if gays get married, my marriage may be considered less valid or less important.
But I praise Jesus every day and pray he doesn't let gays get married because my marriage is delicate and that would make it fall apart.
I will pray for your mission.
The United States is founded on Religious Liberty, so please keep your religion out of my liberty.
The government should never get into the business of legislating religious beliefs into law. When that starts to happen then questions have to be answered, like, Which religion should be law? Like, should we legislate Christianity into law, or maybe Islam, How about those of Wicca and Neo-Pagan faiths, all of which are recognized by the government as legitimate religions. The United States is a land of many people and many religions. Our founding fathers understood that the only way to ensure that people had the liberty to follow what ever faith they wanted that the government had to stay out of the business of religion.
Marriage has always been a RELIGIOUS belief, not a SECULAR right of passage. If there is a true separation between church and state, then the government has no business dictating what religous people should accept. If the government starts telling people of faith what to believe, they are only a stone's throw away from controlling everyone's lives and thoughts.
The government rarely interfered with church activities until the late 1970s, when Paster Blair of Denver Colorado's Calvary Temple tried to raise money for his "Life Center" senior citizen's home by collecting BOTH donations to Life Center as a charitable organization, AND by selling stock and equity interest in the venture to people in several states. One day BOTH the IRS and the SEC showed up at the same time. Blair was indighted, and argued separation of church and state. When the judge ruled against him, and ordered that the "Investors" be paid back, Blair turned to his congregation, who donated the funds to pay off the investors. Even the investors who wanted to donate their investment had to be paid off first, then donate whatever they wanted, as a separate transaction.
After the Jonestown incident, government got more involved, and pastors were being charged for fraud, extortion, and collusion.
Religious liberty is not the same as immunity from the law. You can't incite people to engage in acts of violence against minorities, and be immune from prosecution on the basis of your status as a preacher.
In many states, it is illegal to discriminate against anyone for actual or perceived sexual preference or sexual identity. In other words, if you get a candidate with exceptionally good qualifications, you can't refuse to hire him, or fire him, or her, because you think they might be gay, or because they are gay. Many companies have formal policies forbidding not only such discrimination, but also any form of harassment.
Keep in mind that the father of modern computing, Alan Turing, was gay. Several of the leaders in the commercialization of the Internet were gay, lesbian, or transgendered. If you were working for a company, and someone had the ability to implement an idea that was worth $billions to your company, would you fire him because he was gay, or because she was a lesbian, or because he was too effeminate, or even because she was once a he?
We don't know why people have these sexual preferences and identities, but we do know that they are pretty much set by the time a child is about 5 years old, and almost nothing changes it. Attempts to "cure" people by forcing or coercing them to be more "normal" has often led to tragic results, including suicide, self-destructive behavior, and all out rebellion against "normal" culture.
What if all Christians were obligated to publicly state their specific sexual preferences, including all of the details, in front of the congregation before they could be Baptized, confirmed, or otherwise allowed to join the community. And suppose that they could be persecuted and humiliated publicly by anyone in the congregation who felt that their particular "kink" was perverse. Essentially that's what happened in the Inquisition.
I just want to say that all three of the comments above me are very eloquent and beautifully articulated. I fully agree. Freedom means freedom for everyone, not just those of the Christian faith. You may teach your children whatever you wish, but if you are worried about confusing them, I would say that its more confusing to hear that Jesus loves everybody, but not the gays. Love is love, pure and simple and while sexual orientation is not a choice, religion is.
I think that the doctor who refused to artificially a lesbian woman because it was against her faith should lose her license. Isn't it illegal to deny services based on something like your personal feelings about who should be a parent? I would hope so. At any rate, would NOM support a Jewish doctor who refused to inseminate a Mormon married woman, because they disagreed with the Mormon "lifestyle" and didn't want to bring more Mormons into the world? This is equally as outrageous and reprehensible as the doctor who refused to inseminate a lesbian. Do you get it yet? NOBODY should be discriminated against regardless of race, creed, religion or sexual orientation, PERIOD! If you would be so kind to release the name of this California doctor, I would be most pleased to report her to the CA state medical board....
Everyone should know that NOM is a front organization for the Mormon Church. I first noticed it when I saw that this website was clearly designed by the same people that designed the Protect Marriage site during the California Prop 8 battle. They didn't even disguise it...
This site tells the full story: http://www.mormongate.com
Hey, Dan, is an artificial insemination a treatment for a medical issue? Of course, the answer is NO. I can understand a medical board having a problem with a physician not treating a heart patient who is gay (or even a person with a skin problem). But you're talking about a problem that could be solved by a MAN, if the woman didn't just like other women.
If mormons want to create a site to support their beliefs without their church name all over it, it is their right. And this cause is NOT just a mormon thing, it never has been. If they did try to "disguise" it you would be calling them liars, wouldn't you? Might it be possible that people who are religious could support a cause that is not entirely to do with their religion? Marriage between a man and a woman is not just a religious issue. I'm glad this isnt a blatantly religious website, it allows people to unite under something other than religion to fight for something the know is right.
God's Law is the Law, He is the Creator of Life, He gave mankind the ability to create Life, by way of a man and a woman, Mr&Mrs. Husband and wife, Father and mother, That is His Commandment, blood related family, from generation to generation. This is God's principal, morals and value. For He Created the sexes, to come together as a one man, one woman unit, to become one, to produce life, children the family. For those two, together to become as one.God put this plan for mankind in place, for a man and a woman to learn to live with the differences of the sexes, at the same time to live with the likeness, as the two can come as close to each other, to be as a whole.This is God's Plan for marriage and family. Children of God, His plan for the survival and salvation of mankind., All of humankind. Life flourishing from generation to generation.
I'm so happy I've found this website. I'll be able to monitor what is going on around the nation, pray for hearts to be changed by the Holy Spirit, and e-mail our elected officials. Thanks for fighting the good fight!
When I hear the nasty comments about Christians, coming from the homosexuals, I really get full of sorrow that humans could be so cruel to a group of people that what to do the right thing and protect children from sexual deviancy and the people that practice it.Because of good parenting skills consisting of protecting youths against practices and information that is damaging or bad for them. It is a slap in the face and a stab in the heart, to parents that work hard at protecting their children with all the love that a dad and mom can consider, as good parenting skills. To really care about their children's emotional and developmental stages. And then have these people whom believe that they can sleep with anyone, and it does not affect children, is absolutely absurd. Many of these homosexuals talk trash and filth, and the fact that the educational institutions are indoctrinating children into homosexual, trans-sexual, bi-sexual and other sexual deviant practices is way over the top. What a waste of money, time and energy, not to mention utterly disgraceful. It's like these types are hooked on sex, on any type or flavor and are pushing it on innocent children, with the mindset to have their lustful and detestable desires, accepted and stamp of approval. Yes I believe fear can be a good thing, like being fearful of sexual deviants. It may just keep you safe from their lunacy and despicable behaviors. As we see Prez Hilton and his filthy mouth and his dead but brain. I am really frighten and many others, this is no way to live life, it like being in a death style, waiting for that vulture to strike down morality.
The simple reason that I am against all discussions of religion when it comes to political issues is the fact that there are MANY religious in this great nation. Who is to be the one to decide which religion will be represented in the laws we pass? Our founding fathers put separation of church and state as well as religious freedoms into our Constitution for a reason. People have a right to practice their religious beliefs in their churches, synagogues, or mosques, and their homes but do NOT have a right to impose those same beliefs on anyone else.
For you marriage equality supporters, you might find hope and encouragement in this great NY Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/opinion/19Rich.html?_r=2&scp=3&sq=frank%20rich,%20gay%20marriage&st=cse
Amen, brother James! (see post 16) Preach to me...
Faithful (regarding post 15), I want you to substitute the "N" word, or "colored people" every time you say "the homosexuals," and see if you are not offended by your own statements. Just as you love that black boyfriend (husband?) of your daughter, you should realize that there were well-intentioned Christian folks around that were against the rights of this young man. Every time you identify us as "those people" you show your true colors as a bigot. As much as I rant against the Mormons (for VERY good reason), I still love them as people. They are not "those' people. Use a little respect and restraint, because you are only proving that you are bigoted. And, do you know what this does? It further polarizes us as people. I'm someone's son. How would you like it if I called your daughter one of "those" people, who sleeps with the "N---gers?" Stop and think for a moment. You are not painting a pleasant picture of Christians...
"As much as I rant against the Mormons (for VERY good reason), I still love them as people. They are not “those’ people."
I'll do my best to try and believe that.
James--"Our founding fathers put separation of church and state as well as religious freedoms into our Constitution for a reason. "
Do you know what that reason was? I'm a student of early American history, (at a highly-liberal university, so this isn't my religious "fanatacism" coming out) and I've studied extensively about that much-debated phrase. The reason why most of the people who began the first long-standing settlements of this country left Europe in the first place was to secure religious freedom. Almost every country in Europe of that time had state churches. That phrase, and the hope behind it, was to keep state out of the churches. Not the other way around.
But Larissa, you can't have "the church" interfering with "the state" without simultaneously having "the state" interfere with "the church."
As soon as the government gives legal sanction to the beliefs of a particular religion, it is automatically imposing those beliefs on practitioners of other religions. This is precisely what the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses sought to avoid.
I don't recall saying that either should interfere with either. I was merely pointing out the purpose of that clause, what it was originally set up to prevent.
As a American-history fan and student, it really bugs me to hear people using phrases that much of the time, they don't really know what they mean. I'm not saying that's the case with James here, but I think we should all know what were talking about.
FIRST OF ALL: This is NOT an issue of civil rights, its a moral and ethical issue based on Liberty; and it is that gay (*#@*%*) judge that is interfering with our right to pursue HAPPINESS. We just want to get away from something that is stinky, disgusting, and immoral. We oppose that gay judge attacking our beautiful women, our values, and making us unhappy with exposure to his disgusting immoral sewage. Now, Just in case Donald Trump decides against Carrie Prejean, this should be our response: Carrie's RIGHT to support the (NOM) and marriage between a man and a woman is based on the Declaration Of Independence (that the USA is founded upon), which states that “We The People” have the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the [[ PURSUIT ]] of [[ HAPPINESS ]]. In litigation thereafter, the U .S. Supreme Court declared in,( Loving v. Virginia (1967) 388 U.S. 1); that, the freedom to marry is recognized as a vital [[ PERSONAL RIGHT ]] essential to the pursuit of happiness. As a result, that gay judge has violated the liberty rights of Carrie Prejean by condemning her pursuit of happiness to marry a MAN. The (NOM) can file suit against that gay judge, who slandered Carrie Prejean, because of her support for traditional marriage and for her pursuit of traditional happiness; because, that gay judges slanderous attack is meant to destroy Carrie's career, and livelihood, because of her LAWFUL pursuit of happiness (Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) 262 US 390). You see, Carrie didn't attack him, he attacked and slandered Carrie because she rejected his pursuit of happiness, and this the way all of you gay rabid dogs are, you exist to give us a problem, where we have none.
Miss California’s crown robbed by a “Queen”.
It would be pretty dumb to put a goat in charge of guarding a cabbage patch, and even more dumb to put a male homosexual in position to judge exceptionally pretty women in a beauty contest. Male homosexuals are known to hate women, especially the beautiful, heterosexual ones who represent love, affection family values and who are adored by Millions, particularly by real men.
Such a dumb thing just happened during the Miss USA contest held in Las Vegas on April 19, 2009. A self proclaimed “Queen of all media” homosexual who was appointed judge, orchestrated a vendetta against California’s beauty delegate - unquestionably to revenge California’s strong stand against same-sex marriages.
The homosexual “judge” had an obvious agenda to promote the practice of same-sex lust when he tried to corner Miss California by a loaded question and attempted to “squeeze out” of her an answer that would fully validate and unwaveringly support same-sex marriages.
Miss California Carrie Prejean, representing Ninety Nine percent of the population at large, - those who respect family values - gave a straight forward, truly intelligent answer describing that, while in the US everybody is allowed to decide their preferences in life she, Carrie Prejean, due to her upbringing, believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
In response to her answer the infuriated “judge” in his vengeful rage voted against her, and as the result, Carrie lost her crown as Miss USA, which was potentially hers.
To add insult to injury, the same “judge”, Perez Hilton - the self proclaimed “Queen of all media” brutally insulted the young 21 yr old Miss California on national television - CNN NEWS, by calling her a “dumb bitch.” and further elaborated to call her the “C**“ word.
We should not be surprised at the violent and irrational behavior of homosexual deviants, since they are suffering from a serious form of mental illness - a potentially violent form of self-induced psychosis which was classified as such in the text book of diseases of the American Psychiatric Association until, - due to political pressure - it was removed from the classification, however in reality it remained a serious mental disorder that society is threatened by but coerced to tolerate.
In conclusion, we can say that although, Perez the homosexual “Queen” wanted to "squeeze" out an endorsement and approval for the practice of perverted same sex lust from a potentially influential, crowned pageant winner, Miss California, representing sanity, family values and the overwhelming majority of the Country, which is about Ninety Nine percent of the population, courageously stood her ground.
Without any question she is the true winner! She is just as beautiful inside as on the outside, a true character of refinement with unwavering moral fortitude. Civilized people everywhere around the World are proud of her.
Perez, the shameless, deeply tortured, and utterly confused character has provided proof again that deviants possess devious black souls, primarily focusing on fabrication of antisocial agendas, aiming to degenerate communities of people, to create moral confusion, disorder, chaos and destruction of our rational value system. In this case his attempt to promote same-sex lust and his brutally vulgar assault on Miss California unquestionably rendered him incompetent as a “judge” and painfully tarnished the Miss USA pageant, our time honored American tradition.
The real truth is that homosexuality really represents a sad war between man and woman. The man wants unrestrained sex of multiple partners for the most part. They want sex that is hard and not involving true romantic interest. Woman generally feel abandoned by the man, and looks to another woman, feeling that they can understand each other and trust each other. The sad part is they want to force themselves into marriage and be granted a right to access children by whatever method and call it parenthood. For the most part men don't want the marriage and children. These men and women, typically were abused, neglected or both as children. Sometimes without the parents knowledge they were sexually assaulted by a homosexual or even a heterosexual. They carry this burden with them and it ends up hurting them emotionally, they feel isolated and different. Many times they have an anger that prevents them from seeing anything else. The man, may hate his mother, and feel that his father was distant and cold. The woman may feel a hate for men, as she may have been violated and no-one protected her . Many deep emotional insecurities and fear, at the same time, a desire to have a relationship and family of their own. But this does hurt the institution of Marriage, As marriage has it's core meaning of one man, one woman, Mr. & Mrs., Husband and wife, father and mother, producing children from generation to generation. The process of nature and the true gift that is granted to mankind, from God.For this is the essential and elemental and fundamental purpose of marriage, for without it we would not be born. We all need the facts of life, The truth will set you free!!!
Praise Jesus!!! Amen!!!
Is this one of of those who believes in "family values" and that marriage is sacred?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090522/ap_on_re_us/us_tampered_soup_children
What makes William Cunningham more worthy of marriage than I? Is it because he's a "man" and he married a "woman?" So he was born more worthy than I? Would you assert that he's better than I and more deserving of the rights and privileges of the civil contract of marriage?
Good heavens...Miss Faithful has had quite enough of the Kool-Aid for one day...somebody cut her off. This blog is hilarious...it's like a competition for these folks to see who can sound the most backwards/knuckle-dragging/hair too tight in a bun crazy...