Americans for Truth about Homosexuality

This cross-dressing man — who gained worldwide attention as the subject of a “Gay Terrorist” joke email — has a right to dress this way, but should he be allowed to use the woman’s restroom?

Click HERE to listen to Concerned Women for America’s online radio show:

CWA writes: There is a new law in place in Colorado that prohibits discrimination against transgendered people in any and all public accommodations. Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues speaks with Jim Pfaff, President and CEO of Colorado Family Institute and Colorado Family Action, about this new law that would allow people – regardless of their anatomy – to choose which restroom, locker room or similar accommodation they wish to use. While churches and religious organizations are exempt from this new law both public and private schools must comply, as well as small Christian-owned businesses and individuals making property available for rent. Listen | Download June 5, 2008

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel.

California Supreme Court’s Denial of Stay Ignores the Will of the People

Liberty Counsel considers filing petition for stay with the California Court of Appeal

San Francisco, CA, Liberty Counsel, June 4 – Today the California Supreme Court by a 4-3 vote denied the Petition for Stay and for Rehearing in the California marriage cases. The decision was split along the same lines as the original May 15 ruling with Chief Justice George and Justices Kennard, Werdegar and Moreno in the majority. Justices Baxter, Chin and Corrigan dissented. Today’s ruling states that the May 15 “same-sex marriage” decision will become final on June 16, 2008, at 5:00 pm (PT).

Liberty Counsel filed a Petition on behalf of the Campaign for California Families requesting the California Supreme Court to stay its opinion pending the November election. On Monday, the California Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, certified the California Marriage Protection Act (“Amendment”) for the November 2008 ballot. The Amendment to the California Constitution states: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Thus, neither the courts nor any governmental agency will be permitted to validate or recognize any same-sex marriage license.

Read the rest of this article »

New York Governor David Patterson (D)

The following was sent out today by Gary Bauer as his “End of Day” e-mail for the Campaign for Working Families. Click HERE to sign up for Bauer’s excellent publication, which I enjoy reading every day. For a take on the Left’s reaction, here’s the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force’s press release on New York Gov. David Patterson’s imperious, pro-homosexual-”marriage” act. (What an ally for the governor: keep in mind that the loony Task Force in February gave its annual “Leather Leadership Award” to a homosexual sadistic sex activist who specializes in “consensual” sexual “slavery.”) — Peter LaBarbera

Read the rest of this article »

Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins writes in yesterday’s ‘Washington Update’ (May 28); go to FRC’s website this afternoon to view the panel discussion on California’s supreme court marriage decision online:

As local organizations start mobilizing their troops to the front lines of marriage in California, FRC is launching a national effort to educate the public to the damage this ruling may do to democracy, the family, and religious freedom. Together with a broad coalition of pro-family allies, FRC has planned a strategic series of panel discussions on the implications of the California supreme court decision for the nation. Tomorrow, we’ll kick off the event at the National Press Club with legal and policy experts such as Glen Lavy of the Alliance Defense Fund, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, FRC’s own Ken Blackwell, and more. More people must recognize that this epidemic of judicial activism has sweeping consequences for children, businesses, the legal system, and every other facet of society. If you live or work in the nation’s capital, we encourage you to join us at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow at 529 14th Street, NW for “California Same-Sex Marriage: Answering the Assault on Family and Society.” To RSVP, call 1-800-225-4008 or visit our website at www.frc.org. If you cannot attend, please log onto our site Thursday afternoon for video of the panel discussion.

From our friend Randy Thomasson of the Campaign for Children and Families and their SaveCalifornia.com website:

California Homosexual “Marriage” Alert: What to Do Right Now

Campaign for Children and Families, Updated May 26, 2008

People are outraged that the California State Supreme Court has ruled to destroy the institution of marriage and to trample the people’s previous vote on marriage. [In 2000, California citizens voted by 61 percent for a statewide ballot law to preserve the age-old definition in the state as between one man and one woman.--Ed.] They’re asking what they can do.

Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) has a battle plan, and you need to be part of it. This is your generation’s war for marriage, children and the very foundation of society. Please scroll down for specific instructions and the four ACTION STEPS:

1. Write Chief Justice Ron George
2. Call and email Governor Schwarzenegger
3. Call Dr. Mark Horton of the Office of Vital Records
4. IMPORTANT: Call your county clerk in California

Read the rest of this article »

Pro-family attorney Jan LaRue offered the following analysis for Americans For Truth readers on the far-reaching effects of the California Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of “same-sex marriage” (click HERE for a PDF of the court’s decision):

Californians must pass the marriage amendment in November in order to preserve traditional marriage. However, the amendment will not necessarily undo the consequences of the court’s holding that sexual orientation is a suspect class, akin to race, sex and religion, and, therefore, subject to strict scrutiny analysis. This is the first court in the nation to do that.

The lower courts will apply the ruling and rationale, knowing that the Supremes will uphold their rulings. It means that any restriction on “sexual orientation” will be presumed by courts to be unconstitutional unless the court is convinced that there is a compelling governmental interest that justifies the restriction.

It will be devastating for schools, businesses, religious organizations, individuals, the state national guard, freedom of speech and religion, association, etc. It can hardly be overstated.

Jan LaRue is a member of the California and U.S. Supreme Court bars and a member of the Board of Advisors of the Culture and Media Institute. She served as Chief Counsel at Concerned Women for America, Director of Legal Studies at Family Research Council, and Senior Counsel for the National Law Center for Children and Families.

Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), writes in a May 16 NOM email:

California’s four judges ruled that there is a fundamental human right to same-sex marriage.

Worse, for the very first time a U.S. high court has specifically ruled that “orientation” should be treated exactly the same way that race is in U.S. law.

We warned you this was coming: California’s highest court now says that if you disagree with it about same-sex marriage, you are the moral equivalent of a racist.

That’s right, those of us who see marriage as a sacred union of husband and wife are just like bigots who opposed interracial marriage. The California Supreme Court just declared the 4.6 million Californians who voted for Prop 22 no better than racists.

As I told my wife, “I can’t believe it but they really said it: my Christian faith is a form of bigotry.”

I don’t know about you, but to me them’s fighting words!

Indeed. Of course, homosexual activists have been pushing the same misguided analogy between racism and opposition to homosexuality for years. They do have a problem, however, with the rise of African Americans to the forefront of nationwide efforts to prevent marriage from being radically and “queerly” redefined. The California Supreme Court decision is available at: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF

Dissenting justices called the ruling a ‘startling’ act of ‘legal jujitsu’ that “’oversteps judicial power’

California Supreme Court

By Jan LaRue, Esq.
Culture and Media Institute, May 15, 2008

I was a Californian for 40 years, so I have to ask my former fellow citizens: Are you going to sit by and do nothing while four black-robed despots take away your right to govern yourselves?

By one vote, the California Supreme Court today rejected the expressed will of Californians to limit marriage to a man and a woman.

In 2000, a 61.4 percent majority of Californians passed Proposition 22, which limited marriage to a man and a woman and precluded California’s recognition of same-sex “marriages” consummated elsewhere. In a decision derided by a dissenting California justice as “legal jujitsu,” the Supreme Court majority held that the ban on same-sex marriage is an infringement of the fundamental state constitutional right to marry.

California is now the second state after Massachusetts where homosexuals will be allowed to “marry.” But unlike Massachusetts, California has no law that prohibits homosexual couples living in states that don’t recognize same-sex “marriage” from marrying in the Golden State. The California Supreme Court has opened the door to a legal battle royal across the nation. Homosexual couples will flock to California to marry, return to their home states, and file lawsuits to force the recognition of their Land of Fruits and Nuts marriages—and the destruction of the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA].

Read the rest of this article »