There is a new resistance movement and we must take our place within its ranks. We must become rebels of love.
On February 28, 2013, the Department of Justice of the Obama Administration filed what is called a Friend of the Court or Amicus Brief in the case styled Hollingsworth v Perry.It should have come as no surprise to those who have been actually watching Barack Obama and his administration - and not simply buying into the sophistry which they offer with such regularity.
WASHINGTON,DC (Catholic Online) - On February 28, 2013, the Department of Justice of the Obama Administration filed what is called a Friend of the Court or Amicus Brief in the case styled Hollingsworth v Perry. The entire brief can be read here. I understand the use of such briefs. I have filed many in various capacities over the years. In this instance, the President is neither a friend of the Court or the Culture.
The basic claim the President based his renunciation of the Institution of marriage upon can be reduced to this one sentence out of the brief. "Proposition 8's denial of marriage to same-sex couples, particularly where California at the same time grants same-sex partners all the substantive rights of marriage, violates equal protection. The Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection embodies a defining constitutional ideal that "all persons similarly situated should be treated alike."
For those who actually thought that this was all about equal access to benefits - and were sucked into the civil union or civil partnership camp - the revolutionary strategy was hatched a long time ago. I wrote concerning a unique twist on the plan in 2010 in England here. The Human Rights Campaign is the leading Activist organization in the United States pursuing the strategy.
They stated on their web site in 2010, "Only marriage can provide families with true equality. However, domestic partnerships and other forms of relationship recognition, though limited, provide important and tangible protections." The idea was simple. Set up the current case at the US Supreme Court by forcing a conflict between the States. Then use Equal Protection Clause argument.
If you examine their cases, and their legislative lobbying you discover quickly that the Civil Union strategy was only a stepping stone and subterfuge. It was a stop along the way to the goal of eliminating the special status given to true marriage and the family and society founded upon it. They intended to replace marriage with a counterfeit using the same word and then build a new social order. That is why I call it a Cultural Revolution.
It should have come as no surprise to those who have been actually watching Barack Obama and his administration - and not simply buying into the sophistry which they offer with such regularity. Although it is Federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) has been unilaterally rejected by the Justice Department of the United States under the Obama administration.
They simply refused to enforce this law because they consider themselves to be the source of the law - rather than the elected servants of the rule of law. The Act has also been assaulted in the Courts by homosexual equivalency activists in a strategic effort to move this case to the United States Supreme Court.
This should also have come as no surprise to court watchers who recognize the strategic use of Courts and legislatures by the leaders of what is best called the Homosexual Equivalency movement. The leaders of this movement insist that homosexual sexual practices are morally equivalent to the sexual expression of marital love between a man and a woman. They also now insist that the State and Federal Government treat homosexual relationships as legally equivalent to marriage.
Supporters of the homosexual equivalency movement use the catch phrase marriage equality now, in an Orwellian act of verbal engineering. By the term they intend to make what can never be a marriage - a homosexual or lesbian partnership - to be a marriage, by a pronouncement of a Court or a legislature. They also then accuse those who defend true marriage of being against marriage because we will not redefine it to include homosexual or lesbian partnerships.
If they are successful in their next move they will soon place the police power of the State behind a newly contrived right for people to decide whether they are men or women, in spite of the truth. It is called the gender identity movement. It could conceivably result in any changeable grouping of cohabitating relationships - where the people engage in sexual acts with one another and want to be called a marriage - being given the status of a marriage.
The Cultural Revolutionaries have a President of the United States leading the effort. President Obama is behaving like a new Caesar. Whenever a secular leader insists that we obey his dictates rather than the Natural Law, he is demanding to be worshipped. He has made himself the arbiter of the Moral Law, ...
On February 28, 2013, the Department of Justice of the Obama Administration filed what is called a Friend of the Court or Amicus Brief in the case styled Hollingsworth v Perry.It should have come as no surprise to those who have been actually watching Barack Obama and his administration - and not simply buying into the sophistry which they offer with such regularity.
WASHINGTON,DC (Catholic Online) - On February 28, 2013, the Department of Justice of the Obama Administration filed what is called a Friend of the Court or Amicus Brief in the case styled Hollingsworth v Perry. The entire brief can be read here. I understand the use of such briefs. I have filed many in various capacities over the years. In this instance, the President is neither a friend of the Court or the Culture.
The basic claim the President based his renunciation of the Institution of marriage upon can be reduced to this one sentence out of the brief. "Proposition 8's denial of marriage to same-sex couples, particularly where California at the same time grants same-sex partners all the substantive rights of marriage, violates equal protection. The Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection embodies a defining constitutional ideal that "all persons similarly situated should be treated alike."
For those who actually thought that this was all about equal access to benefits - and were sucked into the civil union or civil partnership camp - the revolutionary strategy was hatched a long time ago. I wrote concerning a unique twist on the plan in 2010 in England here. The Human Rights Campaign is the leading Activist organization in the United States pursuing the strategy.
They stated on their web site in 2010, "Only marriage can provide families with true equality. However, domestic partnerships and other forms of relationship recognition, though limited, provide important and tangible protections." The idea was simple. Set up the current case at the US Supreme Court by forcing a conflict between the States. Then use Equal Protection Clause argument.
If you examine their cases, and their legislative lobbying you discover quickly that the Civil Union strategy was only a stepping stone and subterfuge. It was a stop along the way to the goal of eliminating the special status given to true marriage and the family and society founded upon it. They intended to replace marriage with a counterfeit using the same word and then build a new social order. That is why I call it a Cultural Revolution.
It should have come as no surprise to those who have been actually watching Barack Obama and his administration - and not simply buying into the sophistry which they offer with such regularity. Although it is Federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) has been unilaterally rejected by the Justice Department of the United States under the Obama administration.
They simply refused to enforce this law because they consider themselves to be the source of the law - rather than the elected servants of the rule of law. The Act has also been assaulted in the Courts by homosexual equivalency activists in a strategic effort to move this case to the United States Supreme Court.
This should also have come as no surprise to court watchers who recognize the strategic use of Courts and legislatures by the leaders of what is best called the Homosexual Equivalency movement. The leaders of this movement insist that homosexual sexual practices are morally equivalent to the sexual expression of marital love between a man and a woman. They also now insist that the State and Federal Government treat homosexual relationships as legally equivalent to marriage.
Supporters of the homosexual equivalency movement use the catch phrase marriage equality now, in an Orwellian act of verbal engineering. By the term they intend to make what can never be a marriage - a homosexual or lesbian partnership - to be a marriage, by a pronouncement of a Court or a legislature. They also then accuse those who defend true marriage of being against marriage because we will not redefine it to include homosexual or lesbian partnerships.
If they are successful in their next move they will soon place the police power of the State behind a newly contrived right for people to decide whether they are men or women, in spite of the truth. It is called the gender identity movement. It could conceivably result in any changeable grouping of cohabitating relationships - where the people engage in sexual acts with one another and want to be called a marriage - being given the status of a marriage.
The Cultural Revolutionaries have a President of the United States leading the effort. President Obama is behaving like a new Caesar. Whenever a secular leader insists that we obey his dictates rather than the Natural Law, he is demanding to be worshipped. He has made himself the arbiter of the Moral Law, ...