Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Democrats Help Block Marriage Protection Amendment

Party goes on record in support of homosexual marriage

Activists pushing for legalizing homosexual marriage say they will not stop with just homosexual marriage. They demand more. They want government and societal acceptance, approval and financial support for many kinds of relationships, including polygamy.
Activists say that marriage is "not the only worthy form of family or relationship," and it "should not be legally or economically privileged above others." The statement was signed by 270 homosexual rights activists and heterosexual allies.
Other kinds of relationships that they say deserve marriage-like benefits include "committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner (polygamy)" and "queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households." The goal of the activists is the destruction of traditional marriage.
The Democratic National Committee has developed plans to help the homosexual activists achieve their goal. DNC spokesman Danien LaVera says the DNC has developed a five-point plan to help homosexuals block any legislation which prohibits homosexual marriage, and to push homosexual marriage.
The first successful effort by the Democrats occurred in Illinois where the Democrats donated $10,000 to help the activists keep the marriage protection law off the ballot in that state.
LaVera said the DNC strongly opposes efforts to ban homosexual marriage by amending the federal or state constitutions and that the Democratic party plans to step up efforts to promote pro-homosexual marriage bills in several states.
Democratic parties in eight states have already adopted platforms endorsing homosexual marriage bills. They include New York, California, Washington, Iowa, Alaska, Colorado, Massachusetts and Hawaii.
Here is the 5-point plan LaVera said the Democratic National Committee has developed to fight for homosexual marriage:
  • Labeling efforts to ban homosexual marriage as "divisive" ploys by the Republicans and others to deflect voter attention from other important issues, including "the Bush's administration's failed policies."
  • Begin a "party-building" operation which includes specific training for state Democratic operatives in all 50 states on how to campaign against ballot measures banning homosexual marriage.
  • Working closely with the gay group National Stonewall Democrats to "develop strategy and talking points' to combat state measures defining marriage as being between one man and one woman.
  • Working cooperatively with homosexual organizations fighting ballot measures in each state where they surface, providing campaign advice, expertise, and logistical and financial support.
  • Empowering and organizing homosexual communities around the country with the help of the DNC's new homosexual outreach organizer Brian Bond.

    Take Action

    1. Sign the NO HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE pledge. Officials of both parties will be notified of the number who sign the pledge. We will not provide either party with your name or email address.
    2. Please forward this email to friends and family alerting them about the plans of the Democratic party to help legalize homosexual marriage and abolish the traditional family.

    Click Here to Sign the Pledge Now!

    News from the American Family Association


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree that the Liberals have a plan to destroy marriage. This goal goes all the way back to Betty Friedan's book "The Feminie Mystique," where she characterized marriage as a "comfortable prison" for women. Gay marriage is not their primary weapon in that fight. To destroy marriage, Liberals have carefully crafted family policy (divorce law) in a way that rewards women for filing divorces. At least 2/3, some say 3/4 of all divorces are filed by women. The reward? According to the US Census Bureau publication P60-225, 84.4% of custodial parents in America are female. A sole custody award comes with federally mandated child support orders and government enforced collection, under the erroneous Liberal notion that kids need support money more than they need fathers. If the money is so important, why do the states release it to the moms with no strings? We place conditions on welfare money, so parents can't use it to buy cigarettes, alcohol, cars, TVs... Allowing a mom to have discretion over the "support" money is the financial payoff for destroying a marriage. To preserve marriage, Conservatives must squarely attack the #1 threat to any marriage - divorce. Do this by removing the incentives built into the system. People do have a right to ask a judge for permission to leave a family. But women in today's divorce courts aren't asking to leave, they're asking the judge to use government authority to FORCE OUT the other parent. Imagine the sudden decrease in divorce rates if divorce courts adopted a rebuttable presumption of sole custody to DEFENDANTS of no-fault divorces. When a plaintiff has evidence of misconduct, she takes it to the criminal justice system where the accused is tried by a JURY. Conviction automatically rebuts the presumption and the plaintiff (for cause) gets an expedited divorce and sole custody. Acquittal refers the mess back to divorce court, where the petitioner (no-fault divorce shouldn't have a "defendant" or a "plaintiff" - why are "you" suing "me" for divorce, "I" never had the power to grant it?) the petitioner is given the right to leave the family and contribute monthly child support at a basic needs level (a number equal to an income proportionate percentage of that county's monthly foster care payment - support above this amount is discretionary and the departing parent should retain the right to choose how to spend discretionary money). When we stop rewarding divorce filers, divorce rates will plummet. When divorce rates drop, fewer people will exhaust life savings to pay lawyers to conduct senseless bickering and more will have money to fund their kids' college educations. When divorce rates drop, more people will live together in one home, reducing demand for duplicate housing (doubled utilities means doubled pollution, doubled furnishings and appliances (and doubled depreciation loss on these), doubled mortgage payments, doubled interest cost) Over the past 30 years, US population has increased about 15%, while housing units have increased 65%, as a nation we're becoming "house poor". When divorce rates drop, more kids will spend more time with both parents, receiving the benefit of all the support that no parent can put in a check. Child support money is the fuel that drives the divorce engine which is the force destroying marriage in America. If we propose a presumption in favor of defendants in no-fault divorce, the feminists will counter with a proposal for "equal joint custody absent unfitness". That outcome would achieve the same objective, preserving marriage and families by eliminating government rewards for divorce. -

6:23 PM, August 31, 2006  
Blogger SCIA said...

Your thoughts on "no fault divorce" are right on target. Could not agree with you more.

Keep up the good work.

Your website is great. Everyone should visit it.

2:45 PM, September 06, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm a single father, and in a strange twist of events, I've ended up with full custody. But when it comes to the support order, she is paying far less than she is able to pay. Why? Because she complained in court that her new husband was unemployed because he was injured, even though he was unemployed BEFORE he was injured! When I was paying support to her, four years ago, I was paying three times what she is paying, yet she still finds it in her to complain about the amount that she is paying to me and makes that a sticking point when it comes to her obligations of paying 1/2 of medical, dental, and her share of the after-school care on the days she picks up her daughter after work.

But I have to admit...for me, it's not about money. I could really care less if she gives me anything, because I trust that God will supply all that I need to take care of my daughter. I believe that He is faithful in all things! What saddens me is that my ex is wanting for more rights, but lacking in responsibility and won't even demonstrate a willingness to step up to the plate at a time when a GAL is again investigating to determine my daughter's best interests. I look at that and just shake my head in disbelief, because I know when the tables were turned the other way, I would do ANYTHING to demonstrate my love for my daughter, even when that resulted in me going bankrupt and having my home foreclosed on because I couldn't maintain all my bills, and legal fees, and child support payments, etc. as I poured out my love and my money into the effort to do what is best for my child.

Now, four years after my ex has left, I've rebuilt my finances, my credit score is over 700 even with a bankruptcy/foreclosure/120 days late on mortgage payments, and I'm in the process of buying a new home!

As I said, God is faithful in all things...and this holds true even when I'm not clinging to Him as tightly as I could be, walking daily in His truth and love.

I understand that this is off-topic from the main discussion, but when I say that I stand for heterosexual marriage, I have to recognize that even within that concept there IS trouble, and the system is indeed broken. As Steve has pointed out, divorce is highly destructive, and there is indeed a growing number of women that are "divorcing for money".

My ex was the one that filed, and left the state, and ran off to her ex-boyfriend hoping to get about $1300 a month from me in child support. I'd be willing to bet that she isn't as happy now as she had planned on being, and that is because the devil served her a lie on a silver platter.

Well, I've said enough...and I'm remaining anonymous for this post to avoid getting a hit on a search engine ;).

4:03 AM, September 07, 2006  
Blogger SCIA said...

Anonymous (the one above this comment),

Your story is so real to many. Divorce is horrible as my parents divorced when I was a kid. Not a fun trip to ride on.

Your comments are not off the subject in the content of this blog. The destruction of “family” falls upon us all, heterosexual or homosexual. The only thing to it all is why do we need to include a small subgroup of people who have a different sexual orientation and lifestyle to destroy the roots of a family that much more? If the homosexual community can get married and POTENTIALLY destroy the "family" why not involve transvestites, transgenders, bi-sexuals, ect to join the fun? The question then becomes when should we put the breaks on and for what purpose?



Sorry to put the comment moderation on. There seems to be someone who can not articulate themselves without using profanity and grotesque name calling to bring their point across. I will check frequently to post those comments without vulgar language and unintelligent thought processes.

Again, sorry for the delay in the posting of your comments.


9:37 AM, September 07, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Sign my Guestbook from Get your Free Guestbook from