| Home | About | Issues | Resources | Join Our Email List | Savage Hate | Donate | Contact |
Morella on ENDA: ‘Rational Societies Discriminate between Right and Wrong’
November 12th, 2007Gary Morella sent the following letter to President Bush:
November 8, 2007
Dear Mr. President:
ENDA [Employment Nondiscrimination Act, H.R. 3685] is horrendous legislation that must be vetoed for the sake of the common good. It was put forth for one reason, and one reason only, i.e., the advocacy of a social engineering agenda under force of law by a radical fringe who demand that society make them comfortable with their vices, which is counter to the aforementioned common good, as classically understood from the time of Aristotle’s Politics. Any exemptions are illusions, as verified by what has been going on in Canada and Europe, especially the UK, when irrational legislation is made law. All one has to do is query those who were visited by the police for standing up for faith and right reason, which are married, not divorced! Society is not obliged to codify law that makes aberrant behavior a civil right, which is insanity, and ultimately leads to anarchy!
Moreover, we are talking proven changeable, aberrant behavior that is physically, psychologically, socially, and economically ruinous, not to mention the coercion of people of faith by its advocates, which is pure and simply, UN-AMERICAN, making a mockery of the sacrifices of all those who fought and died for our country in its history. Rational societies are obliged to discriminate between right and wrong behavior; else, they cease being rational! If responsible parents can understand this, why can’t responsible states?
Accordingly, there is no choice here, Mr. President, for the sake of a world fit to live in for our children and grandchildren. Please VETO ENDA for the common good which should be the primary goal of the state!
Sincerely,
Gary L. Morella
Research Assistant
The Pennsylvania State University
P.O. Box 719
Lemont, PA 16851
Matt Barber, Keith Boykin Debate ENDA on CNN
November 10th, 2007The great irony here is that Barber himself was fired by Allstate for criticizing homosexuality (of course, Allstate denied that was the reason for terminating him), but he cannot discuss the case because his settlement with the insurance giant includes a confidentiality clause. This debate occurred before the House vote passing ENDA.
C-FAM: Radical Homosexual Campaign Launched by UN Officials
November 9th, 2007Urgent report from C-FAM, the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute:
November 8, 2007
Volume 10, Number 47
By Samantha Singson
(NEW YORK — C-FAM) At a meeting at UN headquarters this week, a coalition of NGOs and the governments of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay hosted the New York launch of a document which seeks to advance homosexual rights at the national and international levels. Boris Dittrich, advocacy director for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender program at Human Rights Watch and moderator of the event stated that this document was the “Magna Carta for human rights in the areas of sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Called the Yogyakarta Principles, the document lists human rights that already exist in binding international law such as the right to life and freedom from torture, and reinterprets each one to include homosexual rights. Based on the tenet of non-discrimination, the Principles assert that nations are legally bound to change their constitutions and penal codes to incorporate homosexual rights, including rights to same-sex unions and gay adoption.
According to the Principles, “Sexual orientation is understood to refer to each person’s capacity for profound emotional, affectional [sic] and sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual relations with, individuals of a different gender or the same gender or more than one gender.” The document states that “gender identity is understood to refer to each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth.”
Read the rest of this article »
CWA: First Amendment Trampled With ENDA Passage
November 8th, 2007CWA Release, November 8, 2007
[Call your senators at 202-224-3121 or go to www.congress.org; call President Bush and urge him to veto ENDA if it passes at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111, or www.whitehouse.gov/contact.]
Washington, D.C. — On Wednesday, lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives passed — largely along party lines — H.R. 3685, the so-called Employment Non-discrimination Act (ENDA), by a vote of 235–184. [Click HERE for the Roll Call and HERE to see which Congressmen voted against their party’s majority.]
Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues, said, “By passing this Orwellian piece of legislation, the Democrat-controlled House has displayed exceptional arrogance. Congress apparently believes it has carte blanche authority to nullify any constitutional provision which it finds bothersome. In this case, they’ve drawn a black line through the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.”
ENDA contains an extremely weak religious exemption which might partially protect some religious organizations but would leave many others — such as Bible bookstores and many Christian schools — entirely unprotected. It would additionally crush individual business owners’ guaranteed First Amendment rights.
Read the rest of this article »
Rep. Roy Blunt: Democratic Majority’s ENDA Bill Takes Dead Aim at Religious Freedom
November 8th, 2007
NOTE: Rep. Blunt penned a column on the majority’s ENDA legislation this week for Human Events, available HERE. His speech on the floor of the House can be viewed on YouTube by clicking HERE. Call 202-225-6536 or go to his website HERE to thank Congressman Blunt for standing up for religious freedom and educating the nation on how ENDA will undermine it. If we had more Congressmen like Blunt, our freedoms would not be in jeopardy.
Majority’s ENDA Bill Takes Dead Aim at Religious Freedom
Legislation creates conflict between one’s right to religious freedom, and another’s right to sue you for exercising it
WASHINGTON – House Republican Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.) issued the following statement today after Democrats failed to secure a veto-proof majority on the so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a bill that would erode one’s right to religious freedom by strengthening another’s right to sue you for practicing it:
“The structure of the bill before us today is eerily similar to legislation we’ve seen from this majority all year: a favorable, purposefully misleading title applied to a bill that’s poorly assembled and oblivious to its own consequences.
“In this case, the so-called ‘Employment Non-Discrimination Act’ creates a legal quagmire for employees who practice, or even acknowledge, their religious beliefs – depending on where they happen to work, and subject to judicial interpretation. In the process, it erodes a basic, fundamental right bestowed upon us by our Creator – and a right guaranteed to every American under the U.S. Constitution.
“As a former president of a Baptist college in Missouri, supporters of this bill have been quick to assure me that its most onerous provisions would not apply to that school. But no such exemption is available for Christian bookstore owners, as an example, or any other small business in which people of faith and deep religious conviction are relied upon as an integral part of the workforce.
“Thankfully, Republicans secured the votes necessary this afternoon to uphold a presidential veto. It’s my hope now that this Congress can move forward on the real priorities affecting American families. Though a clear boon to trial lawyers, this bill does not meet that standard.”
NOTE: Rep. Blunt penned a column on the majority’s ENDA legislation this week for Human Events, available HERE. His speech on the floor of the House can be viewed on YouTube by clicking HERE.
Roll Call on ENDA after 235-184 Passage; Liberty Counsel Asks for Presidential Veto
November 8th, 2007Click HERE for a list of Republicans and Democrats who broke with their party’s majority on the ENDA bill.
From Liberty Counsel, November 7, 2007
Contact President Bush and Ask Him to Veto ENDA – H.R. 3685 Passed by a vote of 235 to 184
We told you earlier this week about the dangers of ENDA (Employment Nondiscrimination Act), which elevates “sexual orientation” to a protected civil right. Unfortunately, the bill passed this evening.
Religious freedom for Christian employees and business owners is in jeopardy! Read more about the dangers of ENDA.
President Bush has said that he will veto the bill. A veto override would require 270 votes (2/3 of the House).
Read the rest of this article »
Congressmen Who Broke with Party on ENDA Vote
November 8th, 2007ENDA VOTE TALLY: Total was 235-184; bill passed and moves to U.S. Senate
By Party:
Democrats 200-25
Republicans 35-159
Republicans Voting in Favor
Biggert (R-13, IL)
Bono (R-45, CA)
Campbell (R-48, CA)
Castle (R-DE)
Davis, Tom (R-11, VA)
Dent (R-15, PA)
Diaz-Balart, L (R-21, CA)
Diaz-Balart, M (R-25, CA)
Dreier (R-26, CA)
English (R-3, PA)
Flake (R-6, AZ)
Fossella (R-13, NY)
Frelinghuysen (R-11, NJ)
Gerlach (R-6, PA)
Gilchrest (R-1, MD)
Hobson (R-7, OH)
Kirk (R-10, IL)
Knollenberg ((R-9, MI)
Kuhl (NY) (R-29, NY)
LoBiondo (R-2, NJ)
McCotter (R-11, MI)
McCrery (R-4, LA)
McHugh (R-23, NY)
Miller (R-10, MI)
Platts (R-19, PA)
Porter (R-3, NV)
Pryce (R-15, OH)
Ramstad (R-3, MN)
Reichert (R-8, WA)
Ros-Lehtinen (R-18, FL)
Ryan (R-1, WI)
Saxton (R-3, NJ)
Shays (R-4, CT)
Tiberi (R-12, OH)
Walden (R-2, OR)
Democrats Voting Against ENDA
Barrow (D-12, GA)
Berry (D-1, AR)
Clarke* (D-11, NY)
Cramer (D-5, AL)
Davis (D-7, AL)
Davis, Lincoln (D-4, TN)
Edwards (D-D-17, TX)
Gordon (D-6, TN)
Holt* (D-12, NJ)
Lampson (D-22, TX)
Lipinski (D-3, IL)
Marshall (D-8, GA)
McIntyre (D-7, NC)
Melancon ((D-3, LA)
Michaud* (D-2, ME)
Nadler* (D-8, NY)
Rahall (D-3, WV)
Ross ((D-4, AR)
Shuler (D-11, NC)
Skelton (D-4, MO)
Tanner (D-8, TN)
Taylor ((D-4, MS)
Towns* ((D-10, NY)
Velazquez* (D-12, NY)
Weiner* (D-9, NY)
* indicates that “no” vote was likely because “gender identity” (pro-transgender) language was not included
PFOX: Proposed Md. ‘Gender Identity’ Bill Would Have The Effect of Legalizing Indecent Exposure to Minors
November 8th, 2007PFOX News Advisory: November 8, 2007
Contact: Regina Griggs, Director, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX)
703-360-2225 PFOX@pfox.org www.pfox.org
New “Gender Identity” Law Would Have The Effect of Legalizing Indecent Exposure to Minors
‘Weekend Transgenders’ to Use Women’s Shower Rooms and Bathrooms?
Montgomery County, MD — A bill before the Montgomery County, Maryland Council puts girls and women at risk by opening women’s restrooms and locker rooms to men who dress as women, warns Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX). The bill virtually eliminates gender distinctions by allowing Montgomery County residents to choose if they are male or female even when the choice conflicts with their biological sex.
The bill, slated for a vote on Tuesday, Nov. 13, would add ‘gender identity’ as a protected class for ‘transgenders.’ It would guarantee the right to use public facilities consistent with the person’s gender identity “publicly and exclusively expressed or asserted.” No sex change is necessary.
As an organization that aids former transgenders, PFOX can attest that many transgenders prefer to dress and act publicly and exclusively as a woman or man on weekends and then as their birth gender during the work week. These are known as “weekend transgenders.” Pedophiles could also put on a dress and assert they are exclusively female in order to get near naked children in swimming pool locker rooms.
When asked if the proposed law would apply to weekend transgenders, Council member Duchy Trachtenberg refused to answer, instead insisting that “transgender people face serious discrimination … in public accommodations.”
“There’s a good reason why transgenders face ‘serious discrimination’ when using shower rooms and toilets that don’t apply to their gender,” said Regina Griggs, executive director of PFOX. “It’s because they don’t belong there. What parents want their daughter to use the public pool’s locker room with a naked man who cross-dresses full-time or part-time? This bill in effect legalizes indecent exposure to minors in these kinds of situations.”
Read the rest of this article »
Center For Morality
2783 Martin Rd.
#327
Dublin, OH 43017
