Colombia’s Constitutional Court has issued a decision [late last week] declaring that homosexual couples constitute a “family,” but stopping short of giving them a right to “marry” each other.
In a decision issued yesterday evening, the Court decreed that the issue of “matrimony” between two people of the same sex is a matter for the National Congress to decide, and gave legislators two years to take up the issue.
... The jurists decreed that if the Congress does not pass legislation on the matter within that period, “the next day, same-sex couples will be able to go to a notary and legalize their union.”
... Although the Constitution expressly states that marriage is a union of a man and a woman, the president of the Court denied the relevance of that clause in the Constitution, claiming that it “does not mean that couples of the same sex are excluded from doing the same.”
The leaders of Colombia’s major Christian denominations have issued a joint statement asking the nation’s Constitutional Court to protect the institution of marriage and reject a petition to create homosexual marriage as a constitutional “right.”
The statement, which was signed by representatives of the Catholic Church, Evangelical Protestant churches, Methodists, and Anglicans, states that “the bond between two men or two women cannot constitute a true marriage or a true family, and much less can the right to adopt minors be attributed to it.”
“Anthropologically and psychologically the integral complementarity of the couple is of a man and a woman, with the purpose of a union in love, of the fruit of love in children and the creation of a family, ” the prelates add.
“We respectfully invite the magistrates of the Constitutional Court to decide this important matter keeping in mind the profound social implications of its decision, the good of Colombian families and the ethical values of the country.”
Via CitizenLink, "Lawmakers in the Empire State redefined marriage, now we're learning who is losing their freedom of religion. Jason McGuire, executive director of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, shares how Christian families are responding to the changes."
The video begins with a short video of Tom Minnery explaining his DOMA testimony, then moves on to the New York situation:
Rep. Allen West has been uninvited from a Florida bussiness group's meeting after gay activists threatened to boycott the businesses who had invited him:
Bowing to pressure from gay activists who threatened a business boycott, the Wilton Manors Business Association is cancelling an appearance by U.S. Rep. Allen West at its next meeting.
West, a Republican from Plantation, represents a district that includes lots of Wilton Manors.
But the planned appearance outraged some activists in the city’s large gay and lesbian community.
Last week, Michael Rajner, legislative director of the Florida Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Democratic Caucus, said gay activists would boycott businesses if the business association didn’t rescind the invite.
... Steen said she was disappointed at the outcry, but said cancelling was the right thing to do to avoid the turmoil for Ellich and the possible fallout for members of the Wilton Manors Business Association. “Businesses, they’re struggling as it is.” --Sun Sentinel
John Woods of Catholic New York recently attended a panel discussion in New York City featuring the three authors of the essay What is Marriage?, including Prof. Robert George. The author says he came away with a lot to think about:
I decided to attend an evening panel presentation titled “What Is Marriage?” that was offered July 19 in the Youth Center of the Basilica of St. Patrick’s Old Cathedral in Manhattan. The event was organized by the archdiocese’s Young Adult Outreach under the leadership of its director, Patrick Langrell. He also served as moderator of the discussion, which included an extensive question-and-answer period with audience members.
The lead panelist, Robert George, the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, is regarded as one of the foremost Christian scholars in the United States. Joining him on the panel were Sherif Girgis, a doctoral candidate in philosophy at Princeton University, and Ryan Anderson, a doctoral candidate in political science at the University of Notre Dame.
... [Prof. George] went on to say that when it comes to promoting the case for the conjugal view of marriage, its supporters “should not be playing defense.” That’s easier said than done in a popular culture and media landscape where those who make a case for marriage in its time-honored, traditional sense are often branded as bigots, homophobes and haters, he explained.
Turning the tables on those who express support for same-sex marriage, Anderson offered these questions: What principle of reason would limit such partnerships to two people? Or to a relationship that is sexually exclusive? Or permanent? “Our argument,” Anderson concluded, “is that once you eliminate sexual complementarity in the bodily union that is uniquely formed between a man and a woman then you no longer have any rational basis for including those three norms.”
Buffalo News Political Columnist Bob McCarthy on what State Sen. Mike Giarnaris, head of Democratic Senate Campaign Committee is predicting for Mark Grisanti's Buffalo seat:
State Sen. Mike Gianaris of Queens is crowing over the latest campaign finance reports showing more than $1 million for his Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, making it “very well positioned to take back the majority.” But Republicans take issue, claiming the Dems have only $36,000 on hand, while they boast $2 million.
This is for sure — Democrats and Republicans alike are focused on Republican Sen. Mark Grisanti. He was lambasted by Erie County GOP Chairman Nick Langworthy and Conservative Chairman Ralph Lorigo for his crucial vote on legalizing same-sex marriage in New York, and afterward did not dismiss the idea of running as a Democrat in 2012.
“One thing I can say with extreme confidence,” Gianaris says, “a Democrat will hold that seat come Jan. 1, 2013.”
By NOM Staff|Posted in New York, Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on NY Democrat Leader Predicting Takeover of Sen. Grisanti Seat and Senate
A Democrat, pro-SSM challenger emerges in NY's 41st Senate District:
Hudson Valley Democrat Terry Gipson says the National Organization for Marriage's efforts to unseat longtime incumbent Republican Sen. Stephen Saland will not play a role in his campaign to win in the 41st Senate District next year.
Saland, R-Poughkeepsie, is among seven state lawmakers who have been targeted by the group, which claims it will spend $2 million to oust Senators "betrayed voters" by voting in favor of same-sex marriage legislation.
... Thirty-two years. Do you want to give him two more?" asked Gipson. "It's not humanly possible to be in office that long and stay in touch. You get comfortable." --Legislative Gazette
Last week the brilliant and witty James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal critiqued NOM and the Let The People Vote rallies as "deceptive advertising."
Our Chairman Maggie Gallagher responded -- and Taranto was kind enough to publish her response so his readers could hear from both sides:
The National Organization for Marriage is part of a coalition of groups working on this campaign. We are not naive enough to believe that we will get sitting legislators to change their views on same-sex marriage. Our objective is to replace those legislators with ones who will support putting the issue before New York voters. We are just beginning our organizational effort and already have rallied over 10,000 New Yorkers to attend events Sunday.
The question is whether the thousands of African American and Hispanic voters who attended (and those thousands more whom we will recruit) can help unseat Sens. Shirley Huntley, James Addabbo and Carl Kruger. That will be answered in the 2012 elections. Similarly, the 2012 elections will tell us whether the thousands of conservative and GOP members we're organizing can replace Sens. Mark Grisanti, James Alesi, Roy McDonald and Stephan Saland.
We also need to make changes in the makeup of the Assembly. Is it really difficult? Absolutely. Can it be done? The New Hampshire Legislature enacted same-sex marriage in 2009. Who would have predicted then that it would become such a big issue in the 2010 elections, where Republicans gained a supermajority in both houses? Now gay marriage may be repealed in New Hampshire next year.
To compare this Let the People Vote effort to the likelihood of repealing Roe v. Wade is seriously misplaced. 80% of New York voters want the right to vote on marriage, just as voters in 31 other states have been able to do. Some cultural elites said the abortion debate was over when the Roedecision came down, and it was time to move on. But people of faith did not rest, and now a majority in this country are pro-life. With marriage, 62% of Americans already support the belief that marriage is between one man and one woman, as do a majority of New Yorkers, and an overwhelming majority of New Yorkers want to be able to vote on the issue. Those numbers do not suggest it is time for surrender. Its time to come together and fight for the survival of marriage no matter the procedural obstacles we face. That's what we at NOM and our allies intend to do.
PolitickerNY reports on a Democrat New York Assemblyman who supports investigating the process which led to the passing of gay marriage in New York:
In an interview with the major Jewish news organization, Vos is Neias, Democratic congressional candidate David Weprin agreed with the outlet’s assertion that that some violations may have taken place in the State Senate and that the matter deserved some type of investigation.
Weprin, who voted for the bill as a member of the Assembly, said:
“I am too particularly concerned about procedural violations, if they were done. The violations that you refer to actually occurred in the other house, in the State Senate, not in the State Assembly. And I think there should be investigations and I think the process should be looked into I think from all sides point of view, people have to feel that there was a fair process, that the vote took place without coercion. Similar to when you’re in a court of law, you have to state that you’re taking a position or any kind of plea in any kind of criminal case without any threat of coercion or any undue influence. So there is no question I would be open to any kind of, you know, investigation, looking into procedural issues.”
California’s Supreme Court announced on Thursday that a new hearing date, Sept. 6, had been added to the calendar in the ongoing legal challenge to the state’s voter-approved marriage amendment.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals— where the Prop 8 case is on appeal — asked the state’s high court to determine, whether under California law, marriage amendment proponents “have the authority to assert the State’s interest,” since California’s governor and attorney general refuse to do so.
“The coalition of national organizations like Focus on the Family, and state organizations like all of the family policy councils, will not be deterred on the issue of marriage,” [Ron Prentice, chairman of ProtectMarriage.com's executive committee] added, “because it involves God’s heart, society’s future and a child’s protection.” --CitizenLink
The critical point in this story is how Vermont law does not offer individuals any religious protections when it comes to questions such as this one:
On July 19, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the Wildflower Inn, a 24-room facility in Vermont, for refusing to host a wedding reception for a lesbian couple from Brooklyn, N.Y. The couple is asking for $1, as an injunction against the inn’s “discriminatory practices.”
Vermont, which legalized same-sex marriage in 2009, also has a Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act, which keeps inns, motels and hotels with five or more rooms from turning patrons away based on their sexual orientation.
... The state law contains an exemption for religious organizations — but offers no protections for religious individuals.
“No one’s focusing on the willingness of these owners to hire or rent rooms to homosexuals,” noted Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for CitizenLink. “To me, this is a case of the activists wanting to make sure no Christian gets any consideration at anytime, anywhere, for their religious beliefs.” --CitizenLink
While New York's gay couples are lining up to get hitched, straight ones are increasingly untying the knot.
Divorce filings are up 12 percent since the state last October adopted no-fault separations, which allows couples to split without having to prove why.
"It's still going to the dentist," said lawyer Raoul Felder. "But now you go to a painless dentist. There's a certain percentage of people who do it now that wouldn't have before."
There were 37,015 divorce filings statewide from October 2010 through this May, compared to 33,160 in the year-ago period, according to court data.
Patrick Craine at LifeSiteNewsdraws attention to the fall-out among Catholic schools in the Toronto area as new government policies begin to be implemented:
The Coptic Orthodox Churches in Toronto are threatening to withdraw 4,000 families from the Toronto Catholic District School Board if it does not amend its controversial equity policy to protect Catholic teaching in the schools. According to one expert in Ontario education, if the threat were carried out, the board could lose upwards of $40,000,000 in annual public funding, and over 150 teachers.
... The equity policy, passed earlier this year as part of the Ontario government’s sweeping equity and inclusive education strategy, has sparked an unprecedented mobilization of parents who fear that it will give homosexual activists a foothold in order to further subvert already weak Catholic sexual teaching in the schools.
Michigan is going on the offensive when it comes to rebuilding a healthy marriage culture:
Strengthening Michigan’s families, while transcending partisan politics.
That’s the emphasis of five marriage- and family-related bills introduced in the Michigan Senate last month.
The five bills “provide incentives for premarital education, require divorce effects programs for divorcing couples with minor children, create parenting plans and eliminate legal barriers to clergy engaging in marriage and family counseling.”
Brad Snavely, executive director of the Michigan Family Forum (MFF), said, “The decline of the family has played a significant role in virtually every major social problem facing our state.”
While there are many issues worthy of the Legislature’s time and attention next session, he said addressing the fragmentation of the family must be a priority if legislators are serious about securing a bright future for Michiganders. --CitizenLink
At the Western Conservative Summit in Denver last week, GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum continues to push on the same-sex marriage question and explains some of its history.
As we mentioned in our newsletter last week, Gov. Rick Perry's clarification shows that this debate matters deeply in the presidential race.
