“Polite just doesn’t cut it,” says Maine Christian Advocate 

Mike Heath — and Brian Camenker of Mass Resistance — are right on here: appeasement of a sort did not work in Massachusetts. Compromises within the pro-family camp are paving the way for the continued success of the homosexual activist movement. The “gay” lobby, sensing weakness — with even some Christian evangelicals now accepting “civil unions” as a viable compromise — is emboldened to push even harder for its goal of full “same-sex marriage” and an array of “sexual orientation” laws that will effectively criminalize opposition to their lifestyle. — Peter LaBarbera

http://business.mainetoday.com/newsdirect/release.html?id=4503

The Massachusetts Legislature deep-sixed a pro-marriage referendum proposal today.  Notwithstanding the fact that pro-family forces compromised hoping to ease the concerns of social moderates in the Bay State, the government of pro-homosexual Governor Deval Patrick (D) unbelievably decided to deny the people an opportunity to vote.   In Maine, the Legislature cannot stop a referendum of the people.   If the people want a vote in Maine , they get one. Not so in Massachusetts .

Reflecting on the development in Massachusetts, Christian Civic League of Maine executive director Mike Heath said it is only a matter of time before Maine politicians eliminate the institution of marriage.  Heath said he doesn’t believe Maine can stop them unless the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland decides to strongly oppose it.   

“I don’t want to be overly pessimistic here,” said the 45-year old Executive Director.  “But, I’ve been fighting these guys for almost twenty years.   Polite just doesn’t cut it.”

 Doesn’t e-Harmony.com and its Christian founder have a fundamental right to promote traditional marriages between a man and a woman — and not cater to unnatural “unions”? Will this and all private American companies be forced to promote the homosexual agenda? Above are happy normal couples brought together by e-Harmony’s online dating service.

TAKE A MINUTE TO SUPPORT e-HARMONY.com and respectfully ask that they support real marriage by not leaving open the possibility of providing “matches” for homosexuals. Write them via their Contact page or call their corporate offices in Pasadena, California, at 626-795-4814 (hit #9 when you get the machine). Their snail-mail address is e-Harmony.com, P.O. Box 60157, Pasadena, CA 91116.
Also, call or write your U.S. Representative and Senators (202-224-3121; http://www.congress.org/) and urge them to oppose H.R. 2015, the “Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), the pro-homosexual/pro-trannsexual employment bill — which will only embolden “gay” harassment lawsuits against tradition-minded companies.

Below is a Reuters news story describing the homosexual activist lobby’s latest attack on the freedom to be moral. There are plenty of places offering “match” services for homosexual couples — just try any (liberal) “City Paper,” where all sorts of disordered unions can be arranged. But no, e-Harmony must bend to the tiny minority of homosexual militants who have no regard for others’ liberties — including your freedom to live out your religious beliefs as you see fit.

We hope eHarmony.com, a private business run by a born-again Christian, Dr. Neil Clark Warren, does not cave in to this outrageous demand by lesbian Linda Carlson. (It appears that by keeping open the possibility of including “gay” matches, eHarmony is moving away from Warren’s assertion to ex-homosexual Christian activist Steve Bennett that he would never consider such a thing; also, see Warren’s 2005 NPR interview HERE.)

If eHarmony capitulates, it will only encourage other lawsuits. Who’s next? Christian-owned day care centers? Summer camps run by orthodox Jews? The message coming from the liberal, pro-homosexual activists here is simple: you can have your beliefs in your church or synagogue or home (for now…) but don’t you dare try to live them out in the public square.

They are telling us: retreat into your church closet. All of America — our schools, corporations, and our laws — must now affirm homosexuality.

It’s become all too clear: no special interest group threatens our basic freedoms like the homosexual and gender confusion (“transgender”) lobbies. They are the new legal bullies on the block, and can only be stopped if good people lose their apathy and their fear of being Politically Incorrect — and say “No” to this oppressive, unhealthy agenda. Call (626-795-4814) or write eHarmony today!

May 31, 2007
 
eHarmony sued in California for excluding gays
 
By Jill Serjeant

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – The popular online dating service eHarmony was sued on Thursday for refusing to offer its services to gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

A lawsuit alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of Linda Carlson, who was denied access to eHarmony because she is gay.

Lawyers bringing the action said they believed it was the first lawsuit of its kind against eHarmony, which has long rankled the gay community with its failure to offer a “men seeking men” or “women seeking women” option.

They were seeking to make it a class action lawsuit on behalf of gays and lesbians excluded from the dating service.

eHarmony was founded in 2000 by evangelical Christian Dr. Neil Clark Warren and had strong early ties with the influential religious conservative group Focus on the Family.

Today’s USA Today reported the birth yesterday of Samuel David Cheney, with the following caption under the White House photo at right above (click HERE to enlarge):

“U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and wife Lynne Cheney hold their sixth grandchild, Samuel David Cheney, born Wednesday in Washington. His parents are the Cheneys’ daughter Mary, and her partner, Heather Poe.”

There should be no touch of sadness when a healthy baby boy is born into a home with two parents, but in this case, we’re afraid, there is.

While we celebrate new life, we cannot celebrate homosexual parenting –– which involves intentionally denying a child either a mom or a dad. In this case, young Samuel David –– who, as a Cheney, will surely enjoy privileges and comforts greater than most children born in 2007 –– will be missing an irreplaceable one: a father, to have as a loving guide, male authority, friend and role model as he grows from boy into man.

The pro-“gay” media have an odd way of reporting stories like this, as if both Mary Cheney and Heather Poe were involved in the baby’s conception. To do otherwise, I suppose, would call unwanted attention to the unnaturalness of the enterprise known as “gay parenting.” And yet, the truth remains: two homosexuals cannot create a baby. Heterosexuality — i.e., the people derided in the early days of “gay liberation” as “breeders” — must be involved.

The USA Today reports that Vice President Dick Cheney has “bristled at questions on the topic.” But he and Mrs. Cheney, an ardent foe of political correctness, and a conservative, should know that there is nothing wrong with asking critical questions about something so patently wrong –– and against Nature, common sense, and God’s wonderful design of the family itself –– as parenting that is fatherless or motherless by design.

We will keep on asking those tough questions, all the while praying for this boy, and that both Mary Cheney and Heather Poe will join Charlene Cothran and the many women who have come out of homosexuality, which surely is not God’s plan for their lives. — Peter LaBarbera

The following is excerpted from the “A rapper plea: ‘Where homophobia ends, true freedoms begin,’” appearing May 23 in the Lansing, Michigan weekly newspaper City Pulse: 

Homosexual activists rallied at the state Capitol Tuesday to protest a Michigan Court of Appeals ruling in February that public employers may not recognize homosexual relationships for the purpose of providing taxpayer-financed spousal benefits…
 
“Sean Kosofsky, director of policy for the (homosexual) Triangle Foundation, exhorted the crowd: ‘Are you tired of a polluted political atmosphere caused by the toxic diatribes of Gary Glenn and the American Family Association?’  The crowd replied with a resounding ‘yes.’
 
…Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association of Michigan and co-author of the 2004 (Marriage Protection Amendment), feels that the outcome lives up to its original intent. ‘The issue is about government recognition,’ he said in an interview last week. ‘And government recognition includes taxpayer-provided benefits.’  …Glenn cited an October 2004 Detroit Free Press poll taken before the proposal’s passage.  At the time, 53 percent of those polled approved of the proposal, and 54 percent opposed allowing government and university employers to provide benefits to same-sex couples.  According to Glenn, this proves that voter intent was parallel with the authors’ intent and that voters saw the proposal as a way to prohibit such benefits.”

The following is excerpted from LifeSiteNews.com, a must “go-to” site for pro-family advocates and citizens no matter what country you live in. Needless to say, you would have heard a lot more about this huge Italian rally had it been an “anti-Bush” protest against the war, or maybe a pro-“gay marriage” protest. The people “get it” regarding marriage and family; the secular media are obsessed with political correctness. One wonders how the political/cultural equation over homosexuality would be different if the media’s coverage were anything close to being fair rather than overwhelmingly pro-“gay”-activist as it is in most of the West today.— Peter LaBarbera  

1.5 Million Italians Turn Out in Massive Rome Protest Against Homosexual Civil Unions
Oraganizers Were Expecting Only 100,000

By Gudrun Schultz, LifeSiteNews.com

ROME, Italy, May 14, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Italians from across the country poured into Rome May 12 to join in a demonstration against a law that would give legal recognition to homosexual couples–reports showed up to 1.7 million people overflowed the St. John Lateran piazza. Organizers initially expected to draw about 100,000.

The proposed legislation would give homosexual couples–and unmarried heterosexual couples–similar rights to those of married couples, stopping just short of legalizing homosexual marriage.

“Living together is not family,” protester Anna Manara told the Associated Press.
“A commitment such as marriage cements the bond, while other models make it easier to be together and therefore end up making it less valuable.”

While the pro-family demonstration was backed by the Vatican and Italy’s Catholic bishops, it was organized by lay people independently of the Church. The “mind-blowing” success of the event is an outstanding example of the power held by ordinary citizens when sufficiently mobilized in support of traditional values, said Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, a priest in Rome who is the moderator of the Catholic Online Forum (see blogsite: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2007/05/winners-and-losers).

“The importance of this event is not merely that when left to their own devices the Italian people will support traditional values in great numbers, giving the lie to the script presented by the intellectuals in the press. It also means in concrete terms that the traditional values laity can organize and achieve results.”

“The success of “Family Day” also highlights a now deeply entrenched trend not only in Italy, but in the West: the marginalization of the Church from the public square,” Fr. Zuhlsdorf said. “Nearly everywhere the Church’s is being denied its right to speak freely. Committed Catholic and other religious politicians and public figures are pressured never to make reference to their religious convictions. The constant mantra is that religion should be a purely private matter than has no influence on public policy. Be religious, fine. But you may never act outwardly on your interior opinions.”

We are cheered by the following e-notice from the Family Institute of Connecticut Action, but this victory is bittersweet. That’s because, as you will learn from the link to the Hartford Courant in this story, Connecticut’s legislature passed “civil unions” (“gay marriage” by another name) in 2005. (Connecticut was “the first state in the nation to pass a civil union or same-sex marriage law voluntarily through the legislature and without judicial intervention,” Wikipedia notes.)

When the pro-family movement is reduced (in blue states) to proclaiming as a “massive victory” the mere stalling of a legislative vote for actual “same-sex marriage” — legislation that would have been laughed off just a few years ago — you know the hour is late in the struggle to preserve sexual sanity in this nation. Does that mean we give up? No, but it’s best that we view the present reality clearly.

Christians, conservatives, and traditionalists, let’s be honest with ourselves and the public: preserving “the word” marriage is only a minor — and many would say symbolic — victory, and no victory at all if we lose all else in the “culture war” over homosexuality. This small battle in Connecticut may have been “won,” but the war was almost lost two years ago when the Democrat-controlled legislature voted for a bill — which a Republican governor then signed into law — to give government approval to relationships based on homosexual perversion. — Peter LaBarbera

Family Institute of Connecticut Action writes: 

Massive Victory For Marriage!

 

Earlier today the Family Institute of Connecticut asked you, our supporters, to call your legislators and ask them to oppose holding a vote on same-sex “marriage.” That battle has now been won:

 

Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, and Rep. Mike Lawlor, D-East Haven, said Friday afternoon they do not intend to push for a vote on same-sex marriage this legislative session, saying the bill does not have enough votes to win…

 

Opponents of the bill were cheered by Lawlor and McDonald’s decision. “The Family Institute of Connecticut is thrilled that the legislature has heeded the majority of voters in the state who do not want to see marriage radically redefined,” said Peter Wolfgang, the institute’s public policy director.

 

This is a massive victory for marriage protection and it happened because of you: the pro-family citizens of Connecticut who heeded FIC’s call to make your voices heard at our state capitol. Thanks to you, our Feb. 21st lobby day was a tremendous success, turning out twice as many people as our opponents on a day picked by them. Thanks to you, FIC provided the outstanding testimony of Maggie Gallagher, Dawn Stefanowicz, Brian Brown-and over 40 pro-family activists like you-for the most successful public hearing on same-sex “marriage” we have ever had. And thanks to your phone calls and e-mails-whose effectiveness was grudgingly acknowledged even by our opponents-we have today’s massive victory for marriage protection.

 

Today’s victory came about because of your hard work. But our opponents have vowed to try again, which is why we need your support to continue to defend marriage from their attacks.

 

Our May 23rd Rally and Lobby Day for Marriage will go forward-beginning at 10 a.m. on the steps of the state capitol in Hartford. We need as many pro-family state residents as possible to attend.

 

And, even for this year, a radical redefinition of marriage is still possible. The state Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments Monday in a case brought by activists seeking a judicial imposition of same-sex “marriage.” FIC and other pro-family groups have filed friend-of-the-court briefs. And FIC’s Peter Wolfgang will be appearing with pro same-sex “marriage” Rep. Mike Lawlor the following morning (May 15th at 9:00 a.m.) to discuss the case on WNPR’s “Where We Live” program.

 

Congratulations to all of you who stood with us and helped bring about today’s marvelous victory for families and children. May there be many more.

 

Your support for marriage protection made the difference! But the battle is far from over and your help is urgently needed. Please click here to double your donation to our matching grant campaign.

The following is reprinted with permission from the Howard Center’s “Family in America” newsletter (“New Research,” December 2006; emphasis added). The Howard Center is a wonderful organization, based in Rockford, Illinois, that is home to esteemed family scholar Allan Carlson — who founded the World Congress of Families, an annual event designed to build worldwide, intellectual support for the “natural family.” This year’s Congress convenes Friday in Warsaw, Poland; check out its website to read about the battle between old-line, anti-family European Unions forces and Eastern European nations like Poland that are fighting to preserve marriage and a “culture of life” (which does NOT include teaching homosexuality as normal to children). 

We encourage you to sign up for Howard Center’s e-publication and request a sample printed copy of the “Family in America” newsletter, which is loaded with important, scholarly research on family issues. (You can call Howard Center at 815-964-5819 or e-mail info@profam.org.)

Common sense dictates that unnatural homosexual unions are more volatile than traditional marriages, and the research backs that up. Here are the Demography study’s two key findings on “gay” unions in Norway and Sweden:

1. Few homosexuals choose to “marry” or register their union with the government;
2. Homosexual unions end in divorce much more often than heterosexual marriages.

Homosexual Unions: Rare and Fragile 

Progressive activists in the United States have argued strenuously in recent years that giving homosexuals the legal right to marry will improve life for homosexual couples and will consequently benefit society as a whole.  A new study of same-sex marriage in Scandinavia, however, casts serious doubt on such assertions.  For, as it turns out, relatively few homosexual couples avail themselves of this revolutionary right. And a surprisingly high percentage of those who do so end up in divorce court.

To analyze the demographics of homosexual [“marriages,”] a team of German and Norwegian scholars recently examined data collected in Norway and Sweden since these bellwether countries discarded centuries of legal tradition by authorizing homosexual unions (in 1993 in Norway and in 1995 in Sweden).  Both countries have thus now enacted laws granting homosexuals “the legal right to registered partnerships, a civil status that [the researchers believe], in practice does not deviate much from the concept of marriage.”  The legal equivalence of homosexual unions to heterosexual marriage indeed largely explains why the researchers use “the terms registered partnerships and same-sex marriage interchangeably.”   Similarly, the researchers “use the term divorce to refer to [homosexual] partnership dissolution because the divorce procedures of the marriage act [in both countries] apply to registered [homosexual] [“marriages”] as well.”

As the German and Norwegian scholars survey the available data for homosexual unions, they cannot avoid one obvious reality: “the incidence of same-sex [‘marriage’] in Norway and Sweden is not particularly impressive.”  Between 1993 and 2001, while Norway recorded 196,000 heterosexual marriages, the country witnessed the legal registration of only 1,293 homosexual partnerships.  Similarly, while Sweden recorded 280,000 heterosexual marriages between 1995-2002, the country saw the formation of only 1,526 registered homosexual partnerships.  The researchers accordingly calculate “a ratio of around 7 same-sex [‘marriages’] to every 1,000 new opposite-sex marriages” in Norway and a comparable “ratio of 5 new partnerships to every 1,000 new opposite-sex marriages” in Sweden.  The researchers remark that the numbers of same-sex [“marriages”] have run “considerably lower” than might have been expected by those relying on recent surveys of sexual behavior.  These surveys have indicated that “well over 1%” of women and between 1 and 3% of men have had a same-sex partner during the last year, with between 4 and 9% of men and approximately 4% of women reporting that they have had a same-sex partner at some time during their lives.  (The authors of the new study are too well informed to rehash the now discredited absurdity—promulgated by Alfred Kinsey—that fully ten percent of the adult male population is homosexual.) [Note: see Judith Reisman’s website for more good information on Kinsey and his fraudulent research.–Peter L.]

The data for same-sex unions in Norway and Sweden indicate, however, not only that such unions are relatively rare, but also that they are remarkably fragile, ending in divorce significantly more often than do the heterosexual marriages of peers.  The statistics indeed reveal “that the divorce risk for partnerships of men is 50% higher than the corresponding risk for heterosexual marriages and that the divorce risk for partnerships of women is about double (2.67) that for men (1.50).”  

 Apparently crusading for abortion “rights” (or should we say infanticide) is not enough of a challenge for New York’s maverick Democrat governor, Eliot Spitzer. Now he wants to pave the way for the embrace of full “same-sex marriage,” claiming this will “strengthen New York’s families.” We predicted that once liberals capitulated on giving government benefits to “same-sex couples” (read: domesticated homosexuality) beginning with “domestic partners” legislation, it would be only a matter of time before they embraced full “gay marriage.”

We hope we’re wrong, but we fear that Spitzer is the future of Democratic politics. (Are Republicans far behind with pro-homosexual politicians like Gov. Schwarzenegger?) Socially liberal politicians know that they have to talk about religion to con the gullible masses, but when it comes to applying the compassion and restraint of Christianity to moral issues like abortion and homosexuality, they want no part of it. The Democratic Party has sold out to the homosexual and radical feminist lobbies. If Republicans join them, the formation of a third, morality-based “culture of life” party is inevitable.– Peter LaBarbera

The following is reprinted from Family Research Council’s “Washington Update,” May 9:

In New York, Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D) has done more to trample family values in the last five months than most state leaders have done in five years. Sounding more and more like a mouthpiece for Planned Parenthood and the Human Rights Campaign, Spitzer has already rolled out bills that would end abortion regulations and legalize same-sex “marriage.” On April 27, he upheld a campaign promise and became the first governor to initiate a change in the definition of marriage. Just one week later, Spitzer is thumbing his nose at the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision by moving to protect late-term abortions in the state. His Reproductive Health and Privacy Protection Act also directs more taxpayer dollars to “reproductive health services” (i.e. abortion clinics), promotes contraception, and enshrines abortion on request. Incidentally, Spitzer was the only governor in the United States not to issue a proclamation supporting this year’s National Day of Prayer. Only after intense public pressure did Spitzer agree, joining the other 49 governors at the 11th hour. A staffer justified the delay by saying Spitzer “always intended to sign it” but cited the volume of office paperwork. Perhaps Spitzer should spend less time on producing “paperwork” that devalues human life and marriage.

 

In this link to an article in the New York Sun, Gov. Spitzer claims that homosexual “marriage” “will only strengthen New York’s families.”