Liberty and Virtue

A person who experiences same sex attraction and who endeavors to live chastely in accordance with his religious beliefs keeps an eye out for examples of gay activists' (1) showing intolerance and hatred of traditional religious and moral beliefs and believers, (2) attempting to deny freedom of speech, assembly and religion to others, and (3) trying to cause the government to impose liberal views on sexual morality on society. Other stuff of interest to blogger may also occasionally be posted.

Gay activists do not speak for all those who experience same sex attraction!

Not all those with SSA reject traditional sexual morality!

Not all those with SSA support promiscuity!

Not all those with SSA believe the gay activist ideology of “gay pride”!

Not all those with SSA believe in making their sex drive their primary public identity!

Not all those with SSA support public indecency in “gay pride” parades!

Not all those with SSA support government promotion of homosexual activity!

Not all those with SSA support same sex marriage!

Not all those with SSA support biased teaching in public schools on homosexual matters!

Not all those with SSA demonize traditional religious believers!

Not all those with SSA wish to deny basic freedoms of speech, religion and association to those who disagree with the gay activists’ ideology and agenda!

Christian charity for persons does not require affirmation of sinful or immoral activity!

Monday, October 11, 2004

Cheney on Government Promotion of Homosexuality

Cheney addressed the issue of civil same sex "marriage" in his debate last week with Senator Edwards. Here's in part what he had to say:

IFILL: The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President.

I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting: "Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when you were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used your family's experience as a context for your remarks.

Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional ban on same-sex unions?

CHENEY: Gwen, you're right, four years ago in this debate, the subject came up. And I said then and I believe today that freedom does mean freedom for everybody. People ought to be free to choose any arrangement they want. It's really no one else's business.

That's a separate question from the issue of whether or not government should sanction or approve or give some sort of authorization, if you will, to these relationships.

Traditionally, that's been an issue for the states. States have regulated marriage, if you will. That would be my preference.

Mr. Cheney is quite correct to state that the issue of freedom is very different from the issue of government sanction, approval or authorization of sexually-active homosexual relationships and activity. But that is precisely what is at issue with regard to civil same sex marriage. Civil same sex marriage does not increase the freedom of people to live together in what they can consider some sort of marriage, but rather gives government imprimatur and promotion to homosexual activity. And government approval is precisely the goal of gay activists in their same sex "marriage" push. Since freedom is not at issue in same sex "marriage", and since people in a free society have a right to disagree on the morality of homosexual activity without the government's imposing on society one liberal view on sexual morality, and since the danger of activist judges using ambiguous constitutional concepts to impose their left-wing social agenda is a nationwide danger, it is urgently necessary to pass a federal constitutional amendment that would protect the traditional definition of marriage. There is no other way to combat left-wing judicial activism. Leaving it up to the states, as Cheney wishes to do, will not prevent the Federal judiciary from imposing same sex "marriage" nationwide through Constitutional "interpretation" and/or nullification of the Defense of Marriage Act signed by President Clinton.

Charles S.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

<< # St. Blog's Parish ? >>