Considering the fact that this judge has chosen to be gay it should come as no surprise that he made this ruling. I had no doubt in my mind. I will say that I do not believe in homosexuality. I think it is morally wrong and just about every major religion carries that same doctrine. There are people of all races, economic groups and religions who do not believe in gay marriage. With that said I do fully support civil unions and all the rights and privileges of marriage without the word marriage except in the case of one man and one woman. Our country has done pretty well (with some hiccups) since its founding without gay marriage. This in no way means that I don’t believe gay people should be shunned, not offered jobs, or not offered various other privileges that regular Americans get.
As a little bit of background many states in the United States have had debates of weather or not a marriage should be defined as one man and one woman. This is the way that marriage has traditionally been in various cultures. This became more so with the rise of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. While I am not an expert on Judaism or Islam as a Christian I think I know a thing or two about it. The bible says “man shall not lie with a man as he does with a woman”. All Christian religions condemn homosexual behavior. It is worth noting that you love the sinner but hate the sin. With that I firmly believe it is wrong to hate people because they chose to be gay. My hope is they will accept Christ and see the error of their ways.
The issue has only grown over time. There was a time when there was horrible hate crimes against gays this continues at times to this day. I believe part of it is because of gay people and their supporters pushing their agenda on general public. There are many who will say “what gay agenda”. Well considering the ACLU (a know organization with communist and anti-American leanings) assisted a deviant girl named Constance McMillen from Mississippi who insisted on going to a prom with another girl and wearing a tuxedo. In hearing the facts of the case it is very obvious the girl just was trying to get her 15 minutes of fame and further the gay agenda and did not care that it could hurt all of the normal kids at the prom. I personally don’t know how anyone at that age could even think they are gay. I do realize that some young people might be gay, but you should on encroach on the majority of people, who might support you until you caused their prom to be cancelled, to make a point.
A lot of this ties into the federal law in the Defense of Marriage Act known as DOMA. This was a law approved by congress with a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives and 85-14 in the Senate. This law basically said that states that believe in traditional values like Mississippi do not have to recognize same sex marriages from states where morality can often be bankrupt like Massachusetts.
There had been various marches and complaints from the deviant community and it resulted in some laws. There were some states like Massachusetts that allow gay marriage by no input from the citizens, voters, and taxpayers in the state. Maine had tried to allow gay marriage without a say from the voters, but the law was put in a referendum on a ballot and the voters stood up for decency and rejected it. The other states that allow this abomination against traditional family values include Connecticut Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington D.C. You should notice that all of these are all pathetically liberal areas and many people in those states could use a day or two in Sunday school.
A good majority of the issue of forcing the gay agenda on America involves the state of California. The state previously had a ban on gay marriage, but then the gay radicals (many of them in San Francisco, which is also a Sanctuary city for illegal invaders to our country and probably the most morally bankrupt city in the USA next to Washington D.C.) sought to have it overturned. The California State Supreme Court ruled that it was a violation to stand up for traditional family values and sided with the deviant community allowing gay marriage. This was short lived as good God fearing people of the country arranged Proposition 8 as a ballot initiative in 2008. The same state that elected Barack Obama by 60% of the vote also voted for Proposition 8. The cry that it’s all conservatives and bible thumpers thus is wrong, because Obama is not popular with either group. It is about doing what is right. The gay community (often wondering why people get fed up and there is violence against them which I don’t condone) thus thought the voters had no right to their say. Unless of course the voters approved gay marriage. I am sure then the will of the voters would be respected in that case which is hypocritical. I could live with it if the voters approved of gay marriage because of the controversial issue, but I don’t think that it should be forced on the public by activist judges like the openly gay Judge who just overturned Proposition 8 or liberal state and federal legislatures.
Still the gay community had to push it and there was a case filed in disregard of the will of the voters called Perry v. Schwartzenegger in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California. This was brought by two couples who were not able to marry because of the decency of the voters of California. As mentioned the case was tried before openly gay judge (I am sure he did not have an agenda) Vaughn R. Walker. There were various witnesses called on things such as the history of marriage, comparing homosexuals not being able to marry to slavery. There was also discussion on the association of homosexuals being child predators.
The main law that was being argued was that the 14th Amendment makes Proposition 8 invalid because of the due process clause and equal protection clause. The other side used the 10th amendment as their argument (among other things) to argue that the states can regulate anything that the Federal Government is not authorized to. There are a couple schools of thought on this, first off when the Constitution was written and 14th Amendment was forced through without the vote of legal citizens of southern states there really was not a gay agenda. There was nothing like this in this country. If there was it was kept out of the limelight as I personally think it should be along with many others. I see the argument of both points here, but tradition, morality and common sense dictate that a marriage is a union of one man and one woman. If bigamy were allowed or sex with animals and any type of sexual freedom then the argument might hold.
The activist judge Walker raised some issues during the trial. In reality the trial was a waste of time because I think everyone knew how he would decide. The man (depending on your definition of what a man is) basically made in an issue to further promote the gay agenda. Judge “twinkle toes” walker gave eighty findings. He said the individuals do not generally choose to be gay. I completely disagree with this. It is a choice as many deviants have been cured of that affliction by the love of Christ. Judge Walker stated that there was no evidence that that people can change their orientation. I doubt that. The judge needs to read the bible about the crucifixion of Jesus. Two thieves and murderers were beside him. One mocked Jesus. The other thief told the first that “Have you no fear of God.,,, We are under the same punishment as this man for we deserve it but he has done nothing wrong”. He then says to Christ “remember me when you come into your kingdom” to which Christ replied “I tell you the truth. Today you will be will be with me in paradise”. People can change. He held that marrying someone of the opposite sex was not a “realistic option”. I agree 100% with him there. No one is saying that they should have to marry someone of the opposite sex. Judge Walker ruled that domestic partnerships lack the “social meaning” associated with marriage. Well no duh they don’t. It’s not the same thing this should be enough for him to realize people don’t accept a gay agenda. They should have been grateful with civil unions yet they keep pushing it. Gay marriage will never be accepted by Christ and you can’t force it on the people. He further mentions that gays have suffered much discrimination. This is true, but he neglects to mention that that it is because people do not accept gays that by forcing the agenda even more people might not accept them.
I think the biggest thing alarming in Judge Walker’s opinion is that religious beliefs that homosexuality is sinful or inferior to normal relationships harm gays and lesbians. Well sin does have a price. What are laws after all but norms of society that we made into laws. This happened from the earliest times in civilization when people became families, families became tribes, tribes become clans, and clans become nations. He slammed three major world religions with that one statement in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. While our country does allow freedom of religion Judge Walker did not reflect on the fact that as a country we were formed by a majority of Christians. I am also sure that most scholars would be aware that freedom of religion was meant as freedom of Christian religions. I am sure that our founders had no intention of things getting the way they were had they know what the future would hold. This is one of the biggest reasons that have with this is the fact that he wants to make it so it’s wrong to be a good Christian. Next thing you know churches will have to perform gay marriages or allow gay adoptions with religiously affiliated adoption services. This again slams against the grain of what we traditionally do in this country.
This also could hold a backlash against deviants as many are upset although it seems the pro gay side is much more aggressive towards the pro marriage side. I have seen videos of deviants spitting on clergy members when they were being completely nice to the other side and even prayed for them. Opponents of Proposition 8 went as far as trying to get lists out to cause violence and career retribution against people who donated to the Proposition 8 campaign. That borders on terrorism. The supporters of marriage were not anywhere near as aggressive with the deviants. Some have had issues but those are mostly fringe elements. While I think actions like violence against gays is wrong I can see how the when we give an inch they push for a mile could cause more people to get upset.
There are some things that are unfounded that go on. There are many people who are concerned about the children and the impact of gays on them. I do think its wrong to try to indoctrinate that being gay is ok or maybe even the right thing to do or “cool” thing to do. There was a lot of flack made when Massachusetts forced gay marriage on the state in revisions in education like a book about two prices marrying each other. This outraged many parents and they could not opt their child out of it. I personally was disgusted by that. I don’t think anyone needs to teach my kids about morality except the parents. I do not want the school system to allow my child to go further towards the gates of hell. Another issue involving children is that gays are often perceived as pedophiles. Now there is an interesting thing here. Being gay does not mean someone is or will be a pedophile. The wildcard in this is that a large amount of pedophiles are gay. Not sure why that is but there have been countless studies showing a disproportionate nature of it.
I think this ruling opens a can of worms no one wants to. People on the gay agenda side tend to say “you don’t chose who you love”. Well if that is the case should we allow two women to marry one man if they all agree to it and love each other in a bi-sexual or heterosexual way? The argument of “due process”, “equal protection”, and right to the pursuit of happiness can all be applied to the argument of a bigamist. The reason it is not allowed is because of social and society’s norms as well as morality based on Jewish and Christian teachings. There are many Muslim nations that do allow bigamy as a note. The same could also be said of a 50 year old man wanting to marry a 16 year old. If you love who you love age should not really matter should it. That is pretty sick and this is the slope to hell that the sick society we live in is headed. Also there is something I find ridiculously amusing about the gay rights advocates. It seems a vast majority of the people in favor of pushing a gay agenda on the public against their own will like Teddy Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama are flaming liberals who support totally unrestricted, taxpayer funded abortion on demand in any circumstances. The thing about it is that for people who claim to be committed to fairness, equal opportunity and civil rights would not see the right to be born as the most basic civil right of all. I do know gay people who are pro-life so that is not true of everyone, but it seems to be more often than not.
Thank you for reading
God Bless You and God bless America
May God have Mercy on Judge Walker’s soul.
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich had this to say on Judge Walker’s ruling and hit it pretty much on the head about the downward slope our country is heading in and the type of justices that Obama is putting on the Court.
Judge Walker’s ruling overturning Prop 8 is an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife. In every state of the union from California to Maine to Georgia, where the people have had a chance to vote they’ve affirmed that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Congress now has the responsibility to act immediately to reaffirm marriage as a union of one man and one woman as our national policy.
“Today’s notorious decision also underscores the importance of the Senate vote tomorrow on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court because judges who oppose the American people are a growing threat to our society.”
Sources and further reading
CBS Evening News with Katie Curic August 4, 2010.