Liberals love shaking their tiny fists at God, but some day they’ll have to face Him. We wonder what’s coming next from the creative leftists at Ben & Jerry’s — pending, of course, Vermont’s further slide into moral chaos:

Lime Against Nature
Bisexual Butter Pecan
Strawberry for Swingers
Man-Boy Munch ‘n Crunch
Catamite Carmel
Two Moms Macadamia
Rumpy Road
Polyamory Peach
Neapolitan Nancy-Boy
Fabulous Fudge Nut
Transgender Twirl
Berry Berry Promiscuous
Chunky Chickenhawk
Apple Adultery Delight

Oh, the possibilities are about as varied as the colors of the rainbow! American Family Association’s One News Now reports:

___________________________

An Ice Cream Company Is Celebrating Homosexual “Marriage” in Vermont

By Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow – 9/1/2009
Same-gender marriage is now legal in The Green Mountain State, and Ben & Jerry’s has announced that it will temporarily change its “Chubby Hubby” ice cream to “Hubby Hubby” in honor of homosexual marriage. Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality tells OneNewsNow that companies like Ben & Jerry’s neglect to talk about the dangers of the lifestyle.

“Besides the health aspects, there’s also the fact that homosexual behavior is opposed by God, and that’s something that we should take seriously,” he contends. “All homosexual behavior is sinful, and regardless of what liberals say or what Ben & Jerry’s puts on a tub of ice cream, that remains the case.”

The public can react by not buying the ice cream products, LaBarbera suggests — but adds that Ben & Jerry’s is probably impervious to conservative criticism at this point.

“The left is really making a fool of itself when it comes to homosexuality. They talk about transparency, but they don’t want to tell anybody about the health risks of homosexual behavior,” he points out. “They claim to follow God and to be Christian, and yet they celebrate all the things that God opposes … abortion, homosexuality. This is just par for the course.”

Behold in the YouTube video below the polar opposite of wisdom. It is sad and troubling, on so many levels: a 17-year-old boy, James Neiley, argues for same-sex “marriage” in a hearing prior to the Vermont Senate voting to legalize the same. Young, effeminate James is right about one thing: the cultural battle over the homosexual campaign to revolutionize “marriage” is, indeed, ultimately about whether homosexual behavior and relationships are OK and deserve government recognition and the rewards we used to reserve for actual marriage. But he’s wrong about everything else — including the idea that legalized “gay marriage” will ultimately validate his choice to embrace a homosexual identity. Before Vermont liberals, maybe, but not before a holy God, because Neiley is on a very dangerous eternal path. There is a way that seems right to a man but in the end it leads to death (Proverbs 14:12).

As a Christian, I believe that every homosexual “coming out” is a tragedy — balanced off, as it were, by the wonderful testimonies of men and women who have “come out” of homosexuality. My heart aches over this mere child who has convinced himself of a very big adult lie — that he is intrinsically “gay.” Now the homosexual activists and fellow travelers cheer as James’ self-deception becomes a platform to promote corollary lies, of which “same-sex marriage” is but one. He even talks about having children! We will write some more about this video but in the meantime please pray for this confused teenager — that he will find and receive godly counsel and escape the clutches of a sin movement that endangers body and soul. Send us your note to him for us to publish; write americansfortruth@comcast.net:

Homosexual “marriage” corrupts children: a lesbian couple celebrates Iowa’s pro-homosexual-”marriage” ruling, with “their daughter, Bre, 6,” as the Des MoinesRegister reports comments. (Two women cannot produce a child — disproving the nonsensical claim that homosexual “marriage” is “equal” to the real thing.) Liberal media like the Register have become shills for the “same-sex marriage” revolution. They ignore the potential harm it will bring to innocent children: how can one assert that young Bre will not be deeply affected emotionally, psychologically and spiritually by growing up in an intentionally fatherless home where deviance like this is modeled as the norm? Go HERE to see the Register’s photo gallery and click on graphic above to enlarge.  

This article excerpted below by my good friend (and former boss) Bob Knight was published today on Townhall.com. Today (April 7, 2009) is another tragic marker of America’s decline into a “post-Christian” nation. A northeastern state, Vermont, has voted in homosexual “marriage” — through an override of the governor’s veto, no less.  This profane legislative act cannot be blamed on reckless judges or “unelected courts.” No, this instead is reckless, godless liberalism in action — as wrongheaded as justifying the convenience killing of innocent, unborn life in the name of personal “choice.”

Most Americans have gotten too comfortable with same-sex perversion (we at AFTAH reject the activist concept of innocuous, innate “sexual orientation”) and extramarital sex. But liberals especially have lost their fear of God — and children, like the one above who (through no choice of her own) is part of an Iowa lesbian couple’s celebration, will pay the price. It’s asking too much of God to “bless America” when America is blessing the counter-Biblical idea of state-sanctioned, homosexually-redefined “marriage.”  — Peter LaBarbera, www.aftah.com

_______________________________

Robert Knight writes:

Iowa Court, Vermont Legislators Ban Common Sense

By Robert Knight
Tuesday, April 07, 2009

To a disturbing number of judges, most of the media, and now the Vermont legislature, marriage was created only to shut out homosexuals. That’s it. There’s no other reason for its presence in the law.

How else to interpret the vote today (April 7) in the Senate and House to override Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas’s veto and to legalize same-sex “marriage?”  Or the rulings in Massachusetts, California, Connecticut and Iowa that find nothing unique about men and women bonding for life? Or headlines like this from the April 4 Wall Street Journal:

“Iowa Supreme Court Overturns Gay-Marriage Ban”

The Iowa law, as with most states, does not mention same-sex relationships. It establishes requirements, beginning with a male-female couple. Characterizing this ruling as overturning a “ban” defines the institution negatively – by what it is not.

In its unanimous opinion in Varnum v. Brien, the Iowa Supreme Court says that real marriage is merely a form of “prejudice” (using that word 21 times) and hints that homosexuals might be better parents than the mother-father variety. The seven justices cite junk science from gay-dominated guilds (the American Psychological Assn., etc.) to float the idea that kids are no better off in a normal home:

“Almost every professional group that has studied the issue indicates children are not harmed when raised by same-sex couples, but to the contrary, benefit from them. …we acknowledge the existence of reasoned opinions that dual-gender parenting is the optimal environment for children. These opinions, while thoughtful and sincere, were largely unsupported by reliable scientific studies.”

Say what? They have it exactly backwards. It’s the “gay parenting” studies that are deeply flawed, as Drs. Robert Lerner and Althea Nagai demonstrate thoroughly in their devastating book No Basis: What the studies Don’t tell us about same-sex parenting. Meanwhile, oceans of data from every conceivable authority show the advantages of the mother-and-father, intact family.

The Iowa court, like the others before it, and the hippy dippy Vermont lawbreakers ask us to believe, absurdly, that men and women have no meaningful differences. Even homosexuals think the sexes are quite different, preferring one over the other.

The creation of counterfeit “marriage” is a finger in the eye of God, who created marriage as the first human institution. Jesus reminded the Pharisees:

“Have you not read that He which made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, for this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife and they shall be one flesh?” (Mark 19:4,5, Gen. 2:24)

But in America’s kookier courts and trendy New England, the Bible – the founding document of Western legal thought – is ruled irrelevant, and marriage is a speed bump on the road to sexual liberation.

The Iowa judges say that keeping marriage male and female “does not substantially further any important governmental objective.”

Really? Society would survive without a single homosexual relationship, but it would collapse without marriage. The law recognizes that marriage is unique and irreplaceable.  Lots of homosexuals are wonderful, caring people, and some have close relationships, but that does not make them “married” any more than a brother and sister can be “married.”

Rep. Barney Frank often asks the straw man question, “How does my gay relationship hurt your marriage?”

On an individual basis, it doesn’t. But creating a falsehood in the law transforms morality into a form of bigotry. The implications are enormous, according to gay columnist Michelangelo Signorile, who said in 1994 that gays should “fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.”

Does that sound like merely adding another harmless category?

Go here to read the rest of Robert Knight’s article on Townhall.com

Washington, D.C. — The Virginia Supreme Court temporarily avoided locking horns with the state of Vermont today. The Commonwealth’s highest court did not rule on the merits of a case which would have determined whether Virginia will respect the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Virginia’s Marriage Affirmation Act (MAA), and Virginia’s own constitution, or whether it will allow the state of Vermont to redefine marriage and family in the Commonwealth.

The Vermont Supreme Court had granted Janet Jenkins, the former lesbian partner of Lisa Miller, parental rights over Miller’s daughter Isabella, even though Jenkins has no relationship to the little girl and is neither an adoptive nor a biological parent.

In 2006, Virginia decisively passed (with 57 percent of the vote) a constitutional amendment designed to protect families against this exact type of attack. That amendment specifies that Virginia “shall not create or recognize” “civil unions” or “same-sex marriages” from other states, nor can it recognize rulings which stem from such “unions” (like Vermont’s custody ruling).

Today, the Virginia Supreme Court determined that since the MAA and Virginia’s constitutional amendment were not before the court of appeals in this specific proceeding, it could not rule on those issues at this time.

Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), said, “Although we had hoped for a more definitive ruling today on the key issues in question, we’re optimistic that ultimately the state of Virginia will defend its laws, its constitution and the federal DOMA and tell Vermont to keep its ‘civil unions’ to itself. As these issues make their way back through the system, we’re confident that ultimately God’s natural design for marriage and family will prevail.”

Jan Robey, State Director for CWA of Virginia, said, “Aside from the legal ramifications of this ruling, I am most concerned with a 6-year-old girl who is being exploited by ‘gay’ activists. What is the motivation behind this agenda? It has not been in the best interest of Isabella. What is best for Isabella is that she be raised in a Christian home by her biological mother.”

For Information Contact: Natalie Bell: (202) 488-7000
media.cwfa.org