According to the Christian Legal Center, a German couple was jailed after withdrawing their children from a mandatory sexual education class.
“Heinrich and Irene Wiens, who are actively involved in the Christian Baptist Church, did not allow their children to attend an interactive play entitled Mein Köper Gehört Mir (“My Body Is Mine") and four days of mandatory sex education classes; because they felt that the material would be inappropriate for their children. Instead, the couple taught their children at home in accordance with their own Christian values on sexuality whilst the lessons were being conducted.
The couple were fined 2,340 Euros for withdrawing their children from the classes but refused to pay the fine on legal and moral grounds. They were then sentenced to six weeks imprisonment each.”
Keith Berner in the Washington Post has a lot to say about Maryland. He tells Del. Tiffany Alston she was wrong to listen to her own constituents, whom he proceeds to vilify as motivated by "hatred and vitriol":
"So, why is it right to follow the hatred and vitriol of constituents when they demand discrimination against one of the last minority groups in this country whom it is still “ok” to hate? Bigotry is bigotry and must be opposed whenever it rears its ugly head... Those homophobic African Americans who fought to defeat gay marriage should be ashamed of themselves."
Both parties must say “I do” to begin a marriage, but can just one party say “I don’t anymore” to end a marriage?
New York – the 50th and final state to allow no-fault divorce - the struggle over this issue continues in the courts.
The statute in question: Signed into law on the 15th of August 2010, New York’s Domestic Relations Law §170 permits divorce where "[t]he relationship between husband and wife has broken down irretrievably for a period of at least six months, provided that one party has so stated under oath."
The case: Mrs. Strack swore under oath that her marriage had broken down irretrievably. Mr. Strack would like a trial by jury to prove that she is correct. So far the courts (Essex County’s Supreme Court under Justice Muller) have concluded he is entitled to a trial, but this decision is pending appeal.
What the left wants: Many find that the unilateral statement under oath is irrefutable. In other words, divorce would now be a unilateral decision and the abandoned spouse would have no basis to defend himself in court. The legislature also evidently expected this to be the case.
How this case affects marriage: If no-fault divorce was designed to simply eradicate the blame-game from divorce between mutually consenting parties, Justice Muller’s decision does not challenge it. What Justice Muller does challenge is the idea that marriage is “irretrievably broken” the moment that one party feels like it is.
Once again, the Left has elevated the wild freedom of choice of one individual over all other concerns. The Left obsesses over escape routes. The trapped individual is their sole concern. Abandoning all care for dependents: spouses or children, the individual has been allowed to flee at any cost. Dependents are not given the right of consent, or even a fair trial to determine whether the bonds between them have been irretrievably broken.
Have we forgotten the ages when divorce laws were meant to protect women from their fleeing husbands? In those days, marriage was essential to social and economic well-being. Only now when marriage seems like a fun (but unnecessary) adventure have we become careless about defending those who don’t want their marriage to end without a fair trial. Perhaps we should start asking: what is it that these spouses find necessary about their marriage? Why do they want to keep it in spite of the trials?
Perhaps we depend on marriage for more than pleasant interactions with our spouse.
Thanks to Beverly Willet for informing us about the case.
Chanting "Let us vote. Let us vote," about 500 [our friends on the ground say it was 700] supporters of a constitutional amendment to ban same-gender marriage rallied Tuesday at the Iowa Capitol.
The hourlong rally drew an enthusiastic crowd from throughout the state decked out in red shirts and jackets, the color used by LUV Iowa, a group backing the amendment. Some toted signs, such as "Man + Woman = Marriage" and "God is not a Liar." They shouted, "Amen," in agreement with the event's speakers.
... "What happens in Iowa, the rest of the nation watches," Roy Moore, former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court said.
Many thanks to each of you who wrote, picked up the phone, sent an email, went down to Annapolis, and/or reached down and gave generously to support NOM's work in Maryland and across the country.
Here's how the Baptist Press put it: “It was a huge victory for traditionalists. Just two weeks ago, the bill seemed destined to become law.”
So many, many good people made a difference (thanks to Bishop Jackson, Derek McCoy and the Maryland Family Council, Family Research Council, and many others).
The Baptist Press goes on:
The difference apparently was the opposition from predominantly black churches, as well as from the Maryland Catholic Conference. Democrats hold a 98-43 advantage over Republicans in the House, but a third (34) of the Democrats belong to the legislative black caucus. ...
"The black churches -- since I've been here -- have never asked us for anything, that I can recall. They are asking now, 'Don't use the word marriage,'" Del. Cheryl Glenn, a member of the black caucus, said during floor debate. ...
Del. Emmett Burns, a member of the black caucus and an outspoken opponent of the bill, said he was called the "n-word" for his stance. He also said he was offended by comparisons between the civil rights movement and the "gay marriage" movement.
"Show me your Selma, Alabama," he said during debate. "[The bill] violates natural law. It always denies a child either a father or a mother. It promotes the homosexual lifestyle. It turns a moral wrong into a civil right. ... "
The National Organization for Marriage -- which helped defeat "gay marriage" laws in California and Maine -- pledge $1 million to support Democratic legislators who voted for the bill. The money would also help defeat Republican legislators who vote for it.
"We want to be sure those courageous Democrats who cast their vote of conscience in favor of marriage will have a strong supporter if the radical gay activists come after them in their next primary election," Brian Brown, president of the organization, said.
Here's something else worth noticing from Maryland and Rhode Island: In both states, gay-marriage advocates would rather lose gay marriage than provide religious liberty protections.
The ACLU in Rhode Island has flatly said it would not support any kind of expanded conscience protection in Rhode Island.
The same thing happened in Maryland, by the way: no willingness to amend the bill to protect religious liberty.
What does that tell you? It tells you that for the leaders of the gay marriage movement the negative effects on religious liberty are not a side effect of gay marriage--they are the point.
Gay marriage is not about pluralism, not about live and let live, and not just about helping Adam and Steve live their life the way they want.
The leaders of the gay marriage movement WANT to use the law to reshape society so Christians and other traditional faith communities get treated like racists by our own government.
Well, not while you and I have anything to say about it, right?
We're still digesting that great Maryland victory for marriage and boy, so is the other side.
The name-calling has begun!
“Maryland Gay Marriage Debacle Reveals Cowards and Civil Rights Myopia” charged one Washington Post columnist.
Infighting has broken out between national gay leaders and local gay-rights groups in Maryland, with some of the latter calling the decision not to insist on a vote in the Maryland House “a strategic blunder of monstrous proportions.”
“Gill and HRC decided it was detrimental to the larger movement to have the vote go down,” one source said. In an email “HRC's Rouse warned of serious political consequences if a vote on the marriage bill were to be taken. “I plead with you to please delay this vote,” he said. “It would be devastating to suffer a huge loss. There will be vitriol and pain that may take years to soothe.”
But some local pro-SSM activists say the failure to vote this year will doom gay marriage in Maryland for years to come.
“What I fear is next year there’s just not going to be the stomach to do this again,” said one activist, noting the emotional toll the debate took on delegates. “Do you think they will have the stomach to do that again next year without any reasonable expectation of a different outcome because they're still pitching the same ideas to the same audience?”
Let's pray they are right that Maryland politicians will have no stomach for this fight next year--but here at NOM we are keeping our powder dry just in case.
All eyes are now on Rhode Island, where House Speaker Gordon Fox is claiming he has the votes to pass a gay marriage bill through the House. Right. This is the same politician who promised to quickly pass a gay marriage bill through the House in February, and then suddenly pulled the bill after a massive outpouring of opposition. Now, he's waiting for the Senate to act first, he said.
Last Thursday the Rhode Island Senate had hearings. But here's a subtle point: Instead of posting a “hearing and consideration” for the gay marriage bill, the Senate judiciary committee held just a hearing. “That’s a message to the House, this bill is going nowhere,” predicts our own NOM-Rhode Island executive director Christopher Plante.
The senate hearings were jammed and our folks outnumbered theirs by at least two-to-one, thanks to an extraordinary, underreported event: the huge turnout of the Hispanic church.
At least 200 Hispanic evangelicals showed up, under the leadership of the Hispanic Pastoral Association of Rhode Island.
Standing on the second floor balcony overlooking the rotunda, Chris Plante ran into one of the leading Hispanic pastors. Chris reports, “I thanked him for coming and bringing so many people; he stopped me and said ‘No, it's a privilege to be here. We have a strong commitment to marriage and family values.'”
The Hispanic Pastoral Association of Rhode Island also brought 5,500 signatures on a petition asking legislators to vote “no” on gay marriage.
“What really turned the tide for us in the Senate hearings was the Hispanic church,” reports Chris. “They really changed the dynamic of the gay marriage debate last week, coming out in large numbers; they even held their own rally.”
Here's the video of the prayer rally they held:
The press may not have noticed, but the legislators sure did.
We got this note from Father Healey, who is Bishop Tobin's man in the Rhode Island legislature, after the hearing:
“Chairman McCaffrey called me this morning and said he was impressed with our turn-out. He noted that Senator Jabour was very happy to see so many Hispanics against it. “
No-one could ever recall such a strong, unified Hispanic church presence before. This is really a new and historic development for Rhode Island.
Hearing about it from Chris, I was reminded of the young mother who came to NOM's Summer for Marriage rally in Albany (the one who was hassled as she tried to nurse her baby).
Take a look at that video again, and see the determination on the face of that young mother:
The true rainbow coalition is ours: people of every race, creed and color coming together in love to stand up for God's truth about marriage.
Speaker Gordon Fox now claims he has the votes to pass gay marriage. He doesn't yet. But it's very, very close in the House.
A committee vote [on the proposed state marriage amendment] will come next week, then the full Senate would weigh in. It has passed that chamber numerous times in the past.
If it passes again, no other action is necessary this session because it already passed the House.
The legislature must approve the measure again in 2013 or 2014 before reaching the ballot for Hoosiers to make the final decision in 2014. (Journal Gazette)
Last month the same proposal passed the Indiana House of Representatives 70-26, with over 40 co-sponsors including the Speaker of the House. Should the bill pass the Senate, Hoosiers could eventually have their say in 2014.
This cri de' coeur from the gay paper, the Washington Blade, undoubtedly expresses the views of many gay activists, after their devastating defeat in Maryland. Go after Alston, Stukes, Carter and Arora, he urges:
"...our allies sold us out. They are weak and afraid and driven by self-preservation. Lawmakers who campaigned on support for marriage equality and co-sponsored the bill pulled out and opposed it. The betrayals of Dels. Sam Arora (D-Montgomery County), Jill Carter (D-Baltimore), Tiffany Alston (D-Prince George’s) and Melvin Stukes (D-Baltimore) must not be forgotten. No LGBT money, votes or support for those backstabbing traitors." (source: www.washingtonblade.com)
Wow. Carter and Arora ended up saying they would vote for gay marriage, but go after them anyway. And of the 4 delegates he targets, three are African-American.
We've been accused of playing the race card before. But what is the Washington Blade urging?
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was tight-lipped on Monday about any reaction from President Obama on the recent failure of same-sex marriage legislation to advance in Maryland or whether the president would soon make an announcement in support of marriage equality.
Under questioning from the Washington Blade, Carney said he had no new information on the president’s position on marriage since the president’s announcement in December that he’s “wrestling” with the issue. (source: www.washingtonblade.com)
J. E. Dyer contributes to multiple blogs and she also writes a weekly column for Patheos. This from HotAir:
This interpretation of the law [in the case of the Johns] is idiotic on its face. But it was handed down by the British High Court. The next obvious step is ruling that parents must endorse homosexuality to their own children.
Think not? This extended treatment of the court’s ruling shows that it contains every precept that would be necessary to intervene between parents and their natural children.
... I am 100% certain that when the Sexual Orientation Regulations were being debated early in the decade (they were implemented in 2003), opponents theorized that things just like this could happen – and advocates of the regulations swore that that was ridiculous: such ideas were the wild imaginings of fevered minds. As always, the naysayers who warned of special-interest encroachment on individual liberty were correct.
Paul Diamond is the Barrister (lawyer) to the Johns and in a new article pushes back against the claim that children must be protected from Christianity:
This liberal tyranny must be rejected by the British people. The law is now prejudiced, irrational and partial; it punishes individuals for ‘thought crime’ and the State endorses an inverse morality. Many British people despair of the law enforcement agencies and have (rightly) little confidence that they will achieve justice in the courts. There is no reason in law or otherwise why sexual orientation rights should prevail over religious rights. There is something deeply wrong with the ethical and legal compass of Britain.
Mr. Diamond was also interviewed at length by World Net Daily recently:
An attorney for a Christian couple who faced religious discrimination in their request to provide foster care says there's no point in appealing a stunning decision that accused them of "infecting"children with their beliefs, because the nation's legal system is skewed against Christianity.
But Paul Diamond, who served as barrister to the Johns family in the dispute in the United Kingdom over the nation's mandatory promotion of homosexuality to fosterchildren, said there is a solution: The people need to reverse the nation's surge toward treating homosexuals as a privileged class.
... "The laws are currently being used to eradicate Judeo-Christian morality and usher in secular values. The secular movement is but a variant of the Utopian ambitions that have inspired man from the beginning of time. However, the end game of such programs is always the same. To repeatedly promote a failed ideology is base ignorance or at its worst criminal. Coerced morality or coerced immorality (depending on one's perspective) is not the hallmark of a free society," Diamond wrote.
Catholic priest and pro-life activist Luiz Carlos Lodi da Cruz is warning that Brazilians who object to homosexual behavior and reject the homosexualist political agenda in Brazil could soon be targeted by a new whistleblower system installed by Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff.
Beginning in late February, the Brazilian government has begun to take complaints of “homophobia” on its Dial 100 emergency line, which was created to facilitate the reporting of human rights abuses. The system was announced along with a new government program with the slogan, “Make Brazil a country free of homophobia,” which includes a special logo.
According to the Christian Legal Center, a German couple was jailed after withdrawing their children from a mandatory sexual education class.
From the Des Moines Register
Many thanks to each of you who wrote, picked up the phone, sent an email, went down to Annapolis, and/or reached down and gave generously to support NOM's work in Maryland and across the country.
This interpretation of the law [in the case of the Johns] is idiotic on its face. But it was handed down by the British High Court. The next obvious step is ruling that parents must endorse homosexuality to their own children.
