Posted on 11/18/2003 7:28:05 AM PST by Always Right
Now that the Mass. Supreme Court has acted to force the legislature to adopt gay marriage, the time is now for Republicans to act to save this most basic institution of this country. We need a US Constitutional Amendment to save us from activist courts who assult religion and basic family values. The public will be outraged over this and the GOP must capitolize on it. The GOP must put the Democrats in a bind. Oppose the Amendment and lose their base, or support it and expose themselves as the radicals they are.
Now is the time to act. Put this issue at the forefront for the next election. Don't just make it an issue, make it a real topic with real Amendments that are gonna be passed.
I think he's been told he's dieing. A gut feeling.
Yep, and Howard Dean will Captain the Democrats right to the eye of that storm. This is setting up pretty well, despite the hundreds of millions in soft money Soro's is throwing against Bush.
On Sunday, Sept. 7, Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., addressed the audience at Thomas Road Baptist Church, the Lynchburg, Va., church I have pastored since its founding in 1956. I wish every Christian in America could have heard this courageous lady explain why she has sponsored the Federal Marriage Amendment, the proposed constitutional amendment designed to preserve the sanctity of marriage as a union solely between one man and one woman.
In the present socio-political climate, it is not widely popular to be promoting this traditional idea, but Mrs. Musgrave is boldly spearheading the effort to permanently safeguard marriage from activist judges and politically correct lawmakers.
Presently, more than 80 cosponsors have signed onto the bill. She said that Christian activists will play a large role in seeing the bill passed.
"Many people think Christians should be quiet in the public square; they think that Christians should not have a voice in the public square," Mrs. Musgrave said. "But I don't agree with that. I think it is very important that we have our voice heard in that square."
Of course, changing the Constitution will by no means be an easy thing. An amendment must be approved by two-thirds of the House and the Senate and ratified by 38 states. In our favor is the fact that 36 states have already enacted laws banning homosexual marriage. Furthermore, in 1996, when Congress passed a federal ban on homosexual marriages, 85 percent of the Senate and 79 percent of the House voted for the ban.
Mrs. Musgrave, who has been married to her husband Steve for 35 years – they met at Bible camp as teen-agers – noted that, even in traditionally liberal states like Hawaii and California, ballot initiatives for homosexual marriage have been voted down by the people. This, she believes, is a positive indication that her Federal Marriage Initiative will ultimately be passed.
Mrs. Musgrave said that while marriage has become trivial to many Americans (our 50 percent divorce rate serves as evidence), it is important for those who revere the sanctity of marriage to protect it.
"Just because the institution of marriage is not held in the respect that we should give it does not mean that we should do away with the definition of marriage," said the 54-year-old mother of four and grandmother of five.
Mrs. Musgrave added that it is the role of the Christian community to protect marriage, specifically within the church setting.
"We need to ask God's protection over our marriages," she said. Mrs. Musgrave also encouraged older Christians to set a "good example for young people," adding that those with years of successful marriage "need to counsel young people and help them choose their mates wisely."
In closing, Rep. Musgrave asked Christians nationwide to help her ensure that marriage remains safe.
I agree that the only way to put marriage out of reach of fanatical judges and militant lawmakers is to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman, period.
Polls indicate that 80 percent of Americans believe in the traditional definition of marriage, but the aggressive forces against it are actively working to redefine marriage and the family. We absolutely must work together to keep the sanctity of marriage out of their reach, forever.
Once again, I urge my friends to sign our petition to preserve traditional marriage. We already have hundreds of thousands of signatures, but are seeking 1 million Americans who will support the Federal Marriage Amendment. The petition, with your name affixed, will be forwarded specifically to your U.S. representative and two U.S. senators, as well as to the entire Congress and to President Bush.
Rep. Musgrave has expressed great thanks to those who have already signed the petition. For those who have yet to sign the petition, I urge you to join us in the effort to preserve marriage in America.
http://www.onemanonewoman.com/ .
I understand your sentiment, but unless we find a way to replace activist judges, the Constitution is a worthless document.
A 'niche cultural issue'? Wow, is that some serious spin.
It's a large niche, but even so we shouldn't modify the Constitution.
The only thing that will solve the problem You are wanting to fix is MORALS.
BOSTON (AP) — Justice Margaret Marshall was elevated to chief justice of Massachusetts' highest court Wednesday, becoming the first woman to head the nation's oldest appellate court.
Ms. Marshall, a former chief counsel at Harvard University, overcame charges of anti-Catholic bias to win a 6-3 confirmation vote by the Governor's Council, which votes on nominations by the governor.
"1 follow in the footsteps of giants," Ms. Marshall said. "1 do so with humility, and with a deep commitment to the rule of law."
Ms. Marshall, 55, a native of South Africa,
was appointed an associate justice of the Supreme Judicial Court in 1996. She was at Harvard at the time and had previously been in private practice.
Her nomination to head the 307-year-old court was marred when Cardinal Bernard Law raised concerns that she harbored anti-Catholic bias.
Law, who heads the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston, wrote last month to Gov. Paul Cellucci and said Ms. Marshall was "open to serious charges of anti-Catholicism."
He cited an incident in which Ms. Marshall, while at Harvard, chastised a professor who had used university stationery for a personal note with an anti-abortion message.
Catholic groups also feared she could not be impartial on abortion cases because she once served on an abortion clinic's board of trustees. Ms. Marshall denied her personal views would affect her role as jurist.
Law later retracted his complaint after speaking with Ms. Marshall, who is Protestant. "She gave me her assurance that she was not anti-Catholic," he said, "and I have absolutely no reason to not accept her word on that."
Is Justice Margaret Marshall a U.S Citizens?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.