The case against sodomy: How to use reason and natural law to argue against homosexual acts and ‘gay marriage’
Explaining Why Homosexual Behavior Is Wrong: Robert Reilly, author of ‘Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything,’ will speak at AFTAH’s annual dinner-banquet Saturday, October 17th at Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, IL. Sign up online HERE. Tickets are $20/person or $200 for a Table of 10. Send a check with “AFTAH Banquet” on the memo line to: AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. For a printable PDF color flier of the event, click HERE.
What: Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s (AFTAH) annual dinner-banquet fund-raiser
Who: Keynote speaker: Robert Reilly, author, ‘Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything’ [order it HERE or on Amazon]. Reilly served as a Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan and was the Director of the Voice of America.
When: Saturday, October 17, 2015, 6:00 PM Central; doors open at 5:30.
Where: Christian Liberty Academy, 502 W. Euclid Ave., Arlington Heights, IL 60004. Map HERE.
Cost: Only $20 per person. Sponsor a Table of 10 for just $200. Or sponsor 5 attendees for $100. Send check made out to “AFTAH” to: AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522. Or sign up online using our safe credit card form (check the box for Banquet Registration or to sign up to sponsor a Table of 10).
PDF Flier: For a printable PDF color flier on the Oct. 17 event, click HERE.
Second AFTAH Banquet in Wash., DC on Nov. 21: Americans For Truth will be hosting Robert Reilly for a second dinner-banquet in the Washington, D.C. area on Saturday, Nov. 21. Stay tuned for more details.
Crafting a Principled Strategy: At a recent speaking appearance in Chicago, Reilly explained how the dominant pro-family movement strategy of the last decade of focusing on a positive defense of natural marriage and consciously avoiding discussing homosexuality is “the losing strategy. That is how we lost.” Reilly continued:
“The entire issue is based on the morality or immorality of sodomy. And once you’re no longer willing to address that issue or if you concede that issue, you have lost, and you’ll get rolled on the religious freedom issue as well.”
Amen. It is such clear and principled thinking that sets Reilly apart from many pro-family leaders. We live in bizarre times in which even some who profess to be “conservatives” are making the radical case for “marriage” based on the sexual perversion (and sin) of homosexuality. Shame on them for debasing conservatism and Christianity all at once. But I am greatly encouraged that Reilly’s well-reasoned approach is beginning to gain ground as we endeavor to rebuild the foundation for an aggressive defense of Truth on this vexing issue. We greatly look forward to Bob’s presentation October 17: please mark your calendars and tell your friends! This article below appeared in many online publications, including CNS News. – Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Email: email@example.com; Phone: 312-324-3787
Below is an excellent column by Robert Reilly that lays out the compromise in the pro-family legal strategy that helped pave the way for the imposition of homosexual “marriage” by the courts, culminating in the Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling:
Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Goes Against the ‘Laws of Nature and Nature’s God’
By Robert R. Reilly | June 9, 2015 |
Why have the pro-natural family forces been losing in court? Intentionally or not, Judge Richard Posner explained the reason in a 7th Circuit Court ruling (Sept. 4, 2014), in which he decided against the Indiana and Wisconsin laws restricting marriage to a man and a woman:
“The state [Wisconsin] does not mention Justice Alito’s invocation [in the Windsor case] of a moral case against same-sex marriage, when he states in his dissent that ‘others explain the basis for the institution in more philosophical terms. They argue that marriage is essentially the solemnizing of a comprehensive, exclusive, permanent union that is intrinsically ordered to producing new life, even if it does not always do so.’ [U.S. v. Windsor, 133 S.Ct. 2675, 2718 (2013).] That is a moral argument for limiting marriage to heterosexuals. The state does not mention the argument because as we said, it mounts no moral arguments against same-sex marriage.” Baskin v. Bogan, 766 F.3d 648, 669 (7thCir. 2014) (emphasis added).
While Justice Alito recognizes that there is a moral argument for limiting marriage to heterosexuals, it was not only the State of Wisconsin that failed to make such a case. Neither have the States of Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, or Tennessee in Obergefell, the decisive case now before the U.S. Supreme Court. I believe that this is one of the key reasons that the pro-natural family position has been losing in most of the cases thus far.
SCOTUS Lacks Moral Authority: AFTAH president Peter LaBarbera (at right) and AFTAH’s Washington, D.C. spokesman Brian Fitzpatrick (at left) hold truthful banner outside the Supreme Court April 28 during the Court’s hearing of oral arguments on homosexual “marriage” cases. To read the Court’s 5-4 decision nationalizing so-called “gay marriage” as a supposed fundamental right, go HERE. Click to enlarge.
Put down June 26, 2015 as a very tragic day in the history of the United States of America–the day our highest court defied the will of millions of voters in many states to impose counterfeit, homosexuality-based “marriage” on the entire country.
Obergefell v. Hodges: Illegitimate, Unlawful, and a Fraud on the American People
by Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson; June 26, 2015
There is simply no other way to say it.
The Supreme Court’s decision today redefining marriage to include couples of the same sex is wholly illegitimate and unlawful. A nullity. Worthy only to be disobeyed.
Anyone who says otherwise — that the rule of law requires recognition of same-sex marriage — is committing a fraud. And any State official — like Governor Robert Bentley of Alabama — who says that his oath of office requires unconditional obedience to the Supreme Court’s mandate to issue same-sex couples licenses to “marry” is mistaking his oath to the Constitution as if it were an oath of absolute obedience to five justices who happen to be sitting on the nation’s highest court.
As Chief Justice Roberts in dissent has described the action taken today:
“Five lawyers have closed debate and enacted their own vision of marriage as a matter of constitutional law. Stealing this issue from the people ….”
And just who are these lawyers? Justice Scalia reminds us that they are all educated at either Harvard or Yale, from the east- and west- coasts, not from the vast middle of the country, and not a single one an evangelical Christian or a Protestant, and then observes:
“The strikingly unrepresentative character of the body voting on today’s upheaval would be irrelevant if they were functioning as judges, answering the legal question whether the American people had ever ratified a constitutional provision that was understood to proscribe the traditional definition of marriage.”
Indeed, from the outset of his bare majority decision, Justice Kennedy did not even act like a judge. Rather, he wrote as if he were an existentialist philosopher seeking the meaning of life, as if the “liberty” protected in the Constitution was a personal quest “to define and express [one’s personal] identity.”
But the Constitution is not some philosophical work written by Jean Paul Sartre. Rather, it is a political and legal document designed by America’s founders to secure the unchanging God-given rights to life, liberty, and property which are deeply rooted in the 18th century soil of the nation. Justice Kennedy showed no regard for these fixed principles, opting for an evolutionary approach to law — asserting that the existential definition of marriage changes with changing times.
Abusing Authority? Current U.S. Supreme Court: Standing in back (left to right): Justices: Sonia Sotomayor; Stephen Breyer; Samuel Alito; and Elena Kagan. Front row, sitting (left to right): Justices: Clarence Thomas; Antonin Scalia; Chief Justice John Roberts; Anthony Kennedy; and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Click to enlarge.
“The High Court often acts as if it has been entrusted with the raw power to decide for us the most important public policy issues facing the nation.” — William Olson & Herb Titus
The article below is the first in a series on the courts and homosexual “marriage”; the destructive effect of judicially-imposed counterfeit “marriage” on the nation; and how we as citizens can fight back against this immoral legal/cultural juggernaut. We have taken the liberty of putting quotation marks around the word same-sex “marriage” even when the authors do not–as part of our ongoing struggle to preserve the real meaning of words against “progressive” semantic distortions. Yes, it’s a pain in the rear but it’s the right thing to do.
Kudos to attorneys and pro-family advocates Bill Olson and Herb Titus for conceiving of this project and giving so much of their time and energy toward these in-depth articles together. Thanks also to the U.S. Justice Foundation for financing this project. Should you want to help support this important work, contributions may be made to the U.S. Justice Foundation. — Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera
Reconsidering the U.S. Supreme Court’s Authority to Mandate Same-Sex ‘Marriage’
(Part one of a series)
By William J. Olson and Herbert W. Titus
On April 28, 2015, nine unelected lawyers drawn from three elite law schools (Harvard, Yale, and Columbia) listened to 90-minutes of oral argument about same-sex marriage and then retreated behind a wall of red velvet drapes to confer secretly about whether the U.S. Constitution requires that the U.S. Supreme Court impose same-sex “marriage” on the entire nation.
Consider for a moment the process by which that decision will be reached. When the Court decided to hear the Obergefell consolidated cases from the Sixth Circuit, that decision was reached in secret. The Justices consult only with their colleagues and their law clerks, also drawn from elite law schools. When a decision in the case is issued, presumably before the end of the current term toward the end of June, the Court will address only those issues argued by parties and the amici curiae that it cares to address. Its opinion will contain only those reasons for its decision that the Court chooses to reveal. The majority decision may be agreed to by as few as five of these nine justices unaccountable to no one but themselves. And then, the Court will expect the American people to set aside their individual and collective judgment and passively abide by whatever decision is reached — based on a doctrine no where found in the U.S. Constitution–“judicial supremacy.”
Although the Supreme Court’s only constitutional responsibility is to resolve “cases” and “controversies” brought before it, the High Court often acts as if it has been entrusted with the raw power to decide for us the most important public policy issues facing the nation. While the Court would have us believe that those decisions are mandated by faithful adherence to the constitutional text, the truth lies elsewhere. In his autobiography, Justice William O. Douglas provided a glimpse behind the curtain as to how the Supreme Court really works. In his autobiography, he explained that Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes had once explained to him: “[a]t the constitutional level where we work, ninety percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.”
SCOTUS decision could negate a vote of 76% of Texas voters; Dr. Hotze: Gov. Abbott has been “AWOL” on defending Texas Marriage Amendment
Will Gov. Abbott act to defend marriage in Texas? Dr. Steve Hotze of Conservative Republicans of Texas presents letter signed by Texas pro-life and pro-family leaders to an aide to Gov. Greg. Abbott. The letter calls on the governor to call a special legislative session to defend Texas’ popular marriage-protection amendment–which could be negated by a Supreme Court ruling “nationalizing” homosexuality-based “marriage.”
The following is taken from an e-mail sent out June 4 by Dr. Steve Hotze, president of Conservative Republicans of Texas calling for a special legislative session to defend real (traditional) marriage in Texas from being redefined by the U.S. Supreme Court. The actual pro-family coalition letter is at the bottom of this post:
Urge Governor Abbott to Call a Special Legislative Session to
Defend State Sovereignty and the Texas Marriage Amendment
Sign Petition Below
June 4, 2015
Governor Greg Abbott must call a Special Legislative Session to defend the Texas Marriage Amendment and assert our state sovereignty!
During the recent Legislative Session, Republicans in the Texas House and Senate were blocked by the pro-homosexual Democrats from voting on legislation that would have defended the Texas Marriage Amendment. That proposed legislation, HB 4105, The Preservation of State Sovereignty and Marriage Act, had overwhelming support of Texas Republican State Legislators. In fact, 92 of 150 state representatives coauthored HB 4105. The Democrats were able to filibuster and throw up roadblocks to prevent this bill from being voted upon.
AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera with Dr. Steve Hotze, President of Conservative Republicans of Texas, in front of the Texas State Capitol building in Austin. Click to enlarge.
Republicans in the Texas House had to settle for a Legal Memorandum supporting traditional marriage and the Republicans in the Senate were only able to pass a resolution supporting traditional marriage, SR 1028. Unfortunately, neither of these has the force of law.
Your voice needs to be heard! You can still help make sure that this legislation is passed. You need to act today! You are a part of the 76% that voted for the Texas Marriage Amendment.
Governor Abbott needs to hear from you now because he has been AWOL as Governor on defending the Texas Marriage Amendment. He refused to sponsor or speak at either one of the Defense of Texas Marriage Amendment Rallies. In fact Daniel Hodge, Governor Abbott’s Chief of Staff, tried to intimidate me into cancelling the Defense of the Texas Marriage Amendment Rally at the state convention. The first rally was held at the Republican State Convention on June 5, 2014 and the second one was held at the Texas State Capitol on March 23, 2015 which featured Chief Justice Roy Moore of Alabama. In contrast to Abbott, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz spoke at the state convention rally. Lt. Governor Dan Patrick and Attorney General Ken Paxton spoke at both rallies.
Encourage Governor Abbott to call a Special Legislative Session to defend the Texas Marriage Amendment and to advance state rights and state sovereignty which are guaranteed by the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
LGBT Lobby and liberals in a panic as Texas conservatives go on offense against the homosexual/gender-confusion agenda
Dr. Steven Hotze
(c) State or local funds may not be used for an activity that includes the licensing or support of a same-sex marriage. (d) A state or local governmental employee may not recognize, grant, or enforce a same-sex marriage license. (e) State or local funds may not be used to enforce an order requiring the issuance or recognition of a same-sex marriage license. — Language from Texas bill HB 4105, the “Preservation of State Sovereignty and Marriage Act”
Folks, don’t you love how conservative Texans are not afraid of Big Gay Inc, or the Supreme Court, for that matter? I was just informed by my friend Dr. Steven Hotze, president of Conservative Republicans of Texas that he expects HB 4105 [see text of bill here] to pass out of the Texas House today (Wednesday). Then it will go on to the Senate. If passed there, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is expected to sign it into law.
LGBT activists and pro-homosexuality liberals (that’s redundant these days) are freaking out over HB 4105 and other Texas bills designed to thwart the homosexual/gender-confusion agenda. (See MSNBC hyperventilating HERE.) They simply are not used to conservatives playing offense! The following e-alert was sent out today by Dr. Hotze. By the way, I had the opportunity to meet with Dr. Hotze in D.C., as we were both speakers at Janet Porter’s“Restrain the Judges” press conference in front of the Supreme Court [watch the video HERE]. He is an awesome culture warrior with a big heart for God’s Truth. Thank God conservatives are starting to challenge judicial supremacy. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera
Dr. Hotze writes:
TAKE ACTION: There are 90 Republican state representatives who have authored and co-authored HB 4105. Call your state senator as well and ask him to vote for HB 4105 after it passes the House and is sent to the Senate. Call Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick at 512-463-0001 and email him at firstname.lastname@example.org; and let him know that you want him to pass HB 4105 when it arrives in the Senate this week. Lt. Governor Patrick needs to hear from you that you want this bill passed this session. The session ends May 31st so time is of the essence. Take action today!
HB 4105 Preservation of State Sovereignty and Marriage Act Set for Vote in Texas House Today
May 12, 2015
Dear Fellow Conservative,
Greetings in Christ!
HB 4105, the Preservation of State Sovereignty and Marriage Act, is on the House Calendar for today, Tuesday, May 12, 2015. However, due to the backlog of bills, it may not be voted on until late this evening or maybe evenWednesday or Thursday. The deadline for passing this bill on the second reading is this Thursday at midnight. You must keep the pressure on the Texas legislators to pass HB 4105. Click here to call your state representative and click on their name to send him an email: https://www.txdirectory.com/online/txhouse/
The Texas Marriage Amendment passed with an overwhelming 76% of the electorate in the general election in 2005. The Texas Marriage Amendment of the Texas Constitution, Article 1, Section 32, provides that: “Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.”
Please read the latest blockbuster story about HB 4105 in today’s Washington Post: [click HERE]
AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera speaks at the “Restrain the Judges” press event at the Supreme Court–the day before the Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on two aspects of the homosexual “marriage” debate. Click to enlarge.
WASHINGTON, D.C.–AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera delivered the following remarks at the “Restrain the Judges” press conference held in front of the U.S. Supreme Court Monday, April 27, 2015. The event, featuring short speeches by 13 pro-family leaders led by Janet Porter of Faith2Action, was held the day before oral arguments at the Court dealing with: 1) whether states should be required to legalize homosexual “marriage”; and 2) whether states must recognize out-of-state homosexual “marriages.”
A nation cannot simultaneously honor God and codify sexual sin as a “civil right.”
We stand here today in front of a court that legalized the slaughter of the unborn—abortion—in all 50 states as a supposed constitutional “choice.”
This same court is now poised to nationalize a historical anomaly—so-called “marriage” based on a sexual perversion—as a “constitutional right.”
No man-made law has the moral authority to overturn–and even criminalize–God’s transcendent law. In a nation formed by those fleeing religious persecution, freedom of conscience and faith must be sacrosanct.
But apparently, the “T” in “LGBT” stands for “Tyranny.” In the name of a false “gay” equality, United States citizens are losing their freedom to act on moral and spiritual truths. Some now face massive fines for doing so.
In the name of a false “gay” equality, millions of American voters who stood up for marriage as one man, one woman, were disenfranchised by a few judges.
In the name of a false “gay” equality, schoolchildren are being indoctrinated in concepts of sexuality, gender and “rights” that defy Nature and Nature’s God. Because in states with legalized homosexual “marriage,” you have to teach homosexual sex-ed because all lifestyles are “equal” and you cannot “discriminate” against “gay” relationships.
In the name of a false equality, young people are losing their right of sexual self-determination—and parents are losing their parental rights—as a movement that began in the name of “Tolerance” moves to stifle dissent.
And in the name of a false ‘gay” equality, God’s holy Word, the Bible, is being rewritten to accommodate sin.
There is no “animus” whatsoever in our fervent hope and prayer that America’s highest court will show restraint and not enshrine a godless legal system that crushes liberty in the high-sounding name of “equality” and “civil rights.”
No Justice: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is hardly impartial on the issue of homosexuality-based “marriage’ (just as she isn’t on abortion). According to AFA, Ginsburg has “officiated” at five counterfeit same-sex “weddings.” Justice Elena Kagan has also performed sodomy-based “marriage” rituals. AFA says both “activist” justices should recuse themselves from SCOTUS cases on the issue.
American Family Association) Press Release
Friday, January 16, 2015
Kagan and Ginsburg: Recuse Yourselves!
American Family Association Says Supreme Court Justices Should Step Down on SCOTUS Marriage Cases
[Note: AFTAH has added quote marks around the word “marriage”–as in same-sex “marriage”–in all non-quotation references to the term in the original release–to preserve the natural, age-old understanding of the word.]
TUPELO, Miss.—The issue of same-sex “marriage” in America has divided the country this past year, with state, district and federal courts issuing ruling after ruling.
In light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s announcement that it will hear the issue, American Family Association (AFA, www.afa.net) says Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg should recuse themselves from making any same-sex “marriage” decisions because they have both conducted same-sex marriage ceremonies.
“Both of these justices’ personal and private actions that actively endorse gay marriage clearly indicate how they would vote on same-sex marriage cases before the Supreme Court,” said AFA President Tim Wildmon. “Congress has directed that federal judicial officers must disqualify themselves from hearing cases in specified circumstances. Both Kagan and Ginsburg have not only been partial to same-sex marriage but they have also proven themselves to be activists in favor of it. In order to ensure the Court’s integrity and impartiality, both should recuse themselves from same-sex marriage cases. Congress has an obligation to Americans to see that members of the Supreme Court are held to the highest standards of integrity. The law demands it, and the people deserve it.”
AFA sent an Action Alert to its one million-plus supporters, asking them to write a letter to their members of Congress, urging them to remind members of the nation’s highest court of their charge to maintain impartiality. Title 28, Part I, Chapter 21, Section 455 of the U.S. Code titled “Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge,” states that “Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
Kagan performed a September 21, 2014, same-sex “marriage” ceremony for her former law clerk and his partner in Maryland. And Ginsburg performed a same-sex “marriage” ceremony at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington D.C., in August 2013.
OneNewsNow.com, AFA’s news service, also reported that Ginsburg has officiated at least five same-sex “marriage” ceremonies.
This interview with America’s Survival President Cliff Kincaid aired on AS’s Roku channel April 24, 2014. In discussing homosexuality and pedophilia, Kincaid references a video by homosexual Walter Lee Hampton complaining about seeing so many homosexual men in thir 30’s, 40’s and even 50’s in sexual relationships with minor boys [go HERE to view]. At about 17:45 the discussion shifts to LaBarbera recounting his run-in with Canada’s homosexuality-affirming “hate” politics, culminating in his arrest for protesting peacefully with Bill Whatcott at University of Regina, in Satchatchewan. [Go HERE to watch this on YouTube.] America’s Survival writes:
Pedophiles Exposed! Peter LaBarbera on Gay Media Power
The mother of the alleged victim of a powerful Hollywood pedophile ring says she tried for years to interest the media in the story. Michael Egan’s mother Bonnie Mound said, “I wrote every news channel, every magazine, every talk show host, everybody, from Oprah to ‘20/20‘ to ‘60 Minutes‘…. Nobody wanted to do anything because of the high-profile people involved.” Although Egan attorney Jeff Herman said the suits are not about homosexuality, but rather pedophilia and child abuse, Peter LaBarbera of the group Americans for Truth notes that the founder of the modern gay rights movement, Harry Hay, was a communist who supported the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). LaBarbera was recently arrested and jailed in Canada for distributing pro-family values literature on the campus of the University of Regina in Saskatchewan, Canada.