Dr. Dobson weighs in on Connecticut gay marriage

Connecticut has captured what little market there is in the news for anything other than the global economic meltdown. Dr. James Dobson is chiming in:

“Today’s ruling by the Connecticut Supreme Court to impose same-sex 'marriage' adds another tragic example of runaway judges trampling on citizens’ right to decide public policy for themselves. In doing so, the court has placed the desires of adults over the needs of children, who, social science research proves, do best when they are raised by their married mom and dad living in the same home.

“We decry this decision by justices unelected and unaccountable to the people, and will do whatever is necessary to oppose it. Not only have these judges knowingly deprived Connecticut children of a mother or a father, but they have usurped the role of the legislators to create law. Short of a federal marriage-protection amendment, marriage can only be truly protected by defining it in state constitutions. I pray the citizens of California, Arizona and Florida will seize the opportunity next month to settle this marriage crisis in their states once and for all.”

Gay Marriage Comes to Connecticut

It has happened. The Supreme Court of Connecticut has issued its long-awaited decision in the Kerrigan case, and has effectively legalized homosexual marriage by judicial decree.

I haven't read the decision yet, but you can download a copy here (large PDF file).

As a recovering lawyer I will give you my analysis at some point FWIW.

There are several dissenting opinions:

• Justices Borden and Vertefeuille (who always did right by me when I appeared in front of her)
  

• Justice Vertefeuille separately
  

• Justice Zarella.

Kudos to Justice Zarella, who bravely stated:

The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry. If the state no longer has an interest in the regulation of procreation, then that is a decision for the legislature or the people of the state and not this court. Therefore, I conclude that the equal protection provisions of the state constitution are not triggered. I further conclude that there is no fundamental right to same sex marriage. Accordingly, I dissent.

What happens when same-sex marriage is permitted?

Think it can't affect you or affect many different spheres in society? Think again! Watch this video which is being used to rally people to the pro-family cause in California. You will be alarmed at what happened in Massachusetts when same-sex "marriage" was legalized there. As we await the Connecticut's Supreme Court decision in the Kerrigan case, please keep praying earnestly for our State.

Be sure to use the video menu to email it to others who care about our State and our children.

Pro-family rally draws large crowd; largely ignored

We know the global financial markets are imploding, but there is a relative news blackout concerning the large rally in Hartford yesterday which, even by the Courant's admission, drew 2,800 people.

In its story, the Courant focused on "progressive" (left-wing) groups who, like the Family Institute of Connecticut, are also seeking a Constitutional Convention.

The only other mention of the rally and the small counter-rally was on the Connecticut News Junkie site, which, to its credit, gave a fairly equal amount of space to both sides - although we would argue that such articles invariably serve as another platform for those promoting the smearing and jettisoning of traditional values.

Smokescreens

To see a true smokescreen, witness this comparison by Rick Green of:

Connecticut pro-family leaders who don't wish to have same-sex marriage imposed upon us by judicial fiat... with:

Racist Southerners opposed to the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. Green apparently believes that, in both cases, it would be simply be too dangerous to allow the "people" to have any input on the matter. What confusion. Mr. Green is either fabricating completely (in hope that the citizenry has been totally dumbed-down), or else he has himself completely failed to understand his own argument.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (misnamed by Mr. Green) was Federal legislation designed to secure valid, already existing Constitutional rights. We the People obviously had input in the process through our elected representatives. (Republicans in the U. S. Senate voted for it 30-1, by the way.)

In our current context, Peter Wolfgang of the Family Institute of Connecticut was absolutely correct when he said:

Our opponents don’t want the people to be heard on this because in some 40 or so states where the people were allowed to vote on it, the pro same-sex “marriage” side lost (and they usually lost by a lot).

No, our opponents would rather have the CT Supreme Court impose same-sex “marriage” by undemocratic fiat–something that may happen any day now–because it’s the only way they can win.

Critical rally for marriage this Sunday, September 28th

This Sunday, September 28th at 2:30 p.m. the Family Institute of Connecticut will hold a Rally for Marriage on the steps of the state Capitol in Hartford. FIC says:

This will be Connecticut's most important marriage protection event yet—but it may not succeed unless thousands of people like you turn out to make their voice heard!

Bishop Jeremiah Torres of the House of Restoration Church, Pastor Brian Simmons of Gateway Christian Fellowship, "CT 6" Pastor Christopher Leighton, Rabbi Joshua Hecht of Beth Israel Synagogue, Fr. Greg Markey of St. Mary's Church in Norwalk and other major clergy and politicians will join FIC executive director Peter Wolfgang to speak in defense of marriage and the right to Let the People Decide at the Rally. Parking will be available at The Legislative Office Building Parking Garage, Elm St, Market St and the Bushnell Parking Lot....

News of a "counter-rally" has raised the stakes for the Rally for Marriage. In order for our Rally to be a success, we must turn out substantially more people than our opposition. Please ask your pastor, priest or rabbi to rally fellow believers to attend the September 28th Rally for Marriage. Please arrange to have a bus leave from your church following Sunday services. The success of the rally depends on turnout, and turning out thousands for marriage protection will not happen unless Connecticut's churches are willing to take a stand. Your willingness to organize your church to attend the rally could make the difference between failure and success. The stakes are that high! For more information, contact FIC at 860-548-0066 and ask for Larry....

Change is good. Sometimes.

Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, author of Love and Economics:It Takes a Family to Raise a Village, will not buy into the hoopla concerning same-sex marriages:

Advocates of same-sex “marriage” insist that theirs is a modest reform: a mere expansion of marriage to include people currently excluded. But the price of same-sex “marriage” is a reduction in tolerance for everyone else, and an expansion of the power of the state.

Read the rest here.

Demographic Winter: coming soon to a country near you

Trailer for the DVD Demographic Winter

What is "demographic winter?" If you haven't heard this buzzword yet you will shortly. It refers to the belief that we are about to experience the opposite of a "population bomb." Abortion, failure to reproduce, denigration of traditional families and other factors are working to depopulate developed societies around the globe. In the short run, this will have the noticeable effect of Islamicizing regions such as Western Europe, a trend most ably discussed by political writer Mark Steyn in his bestseller America Alone. In the long term, even nations such as China will be affected by a failure to, well, breed at the "replacement rate" of 2.1 children per woman.

Worldwide, birthrates have been halved in the past 50 years. There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world’s population, with below-replacement fertility

Sometime in this century, the world’s population will begin to decline. At a certain point, the decline will become rapid. We may even reach population free-fall in our lifetimes.

For some countries, population decline is already a reality. Russia is losing three-quarters-of-a-million people a year. Its population (currently 145 million) is expected to fall by one-third by 2050....

Of the 10 countries with the lowest birthrates, 9 are in Europe. Overall, the European fertility rate is 1.3, well below replacement level (2.1). No European nation has a replacement-level birthrate.

Italy’s fertility rate is 1.2. Spain’s is 1.1. That means in the not-too-distant future, absent massive immigration, these countries will lose half of their people in every generation.

Russia’s birthrate fell from 2.4 in 1990 to 1.17 today – a decline of more than 50% in less than 20 years. Each year, there are more abortions than live births in the Russian Federation.

These aren't even the scariest parts of the Demographic Winter movie website. Check it out here.

The pregnant man. Or, not.

I had heard of this in passing but frankly so much strangeness crosses one's eyes these days that I hadn't actually read about it.

Thomas may be a man in the eyes of the law, but she remains physically a woman, with a woman's reproductive system, a woman's genitals, and a woman's chromosomes. So when she and Nancy decided to have a baby, she had little trouble conceiving through artificial insemination. The result is the spectacle that has drawn so much attention: a bearded pregnant woman named Thomas, who identifies herself as a man, and has a lawfully wedded wife.

More here from Jeff Jacoby, if you can stand it.

Christian divorce rates confirmed to be as high as anyone else's

From The Christian Post comes more disturbing evidence of the disintegration of society:

After months of revived debate over divorce and its increasing acceptance among Americans, a new study affirmed born again Christians are just as likely as the average American couple to divorce.

The Barna Group found in its latest study that born again Christians who are not evangelical were indistinguishable from the national average on the matter of divorce with 33 percent having married and divorced at least once. Among all born again Christians, which includes evangelicals, the divorce figure is 32 percent, which is statistically identical to the 33 percent figure among non-born again adults, the research group noted.

"There no longer seems to be much of a stigma attached to divorce; it is now seen as an unavoidable rite of passage," George Barna, who directed the study, stated in the study, which was released Monday.

More here.

Federal lawsuit seeks to overturn Massachusetts homosexual marriage

Rev. John Rankin of the Theological Education Institute has filed a lawsuit in a Federal District Court seeking to overturn the regime of homosexual marriage that was imposed on Massachusetts by its Supreme Judicial Court.

As someone who practiced law for nearly 15 years, I can tell you that his argument is extremely interesting and very fine. In essence, Rankin says that the Massachusetts Judicial Court has destroyed our concept of unalienable rights and thus our system of Constitutional Law by declaring that classes of people possess rights, not individuals. In American law, individuals possess unalienable rights for they have derived them from the Creator.

Goodridge violates the nature of personhood as defined in the Fourteenth Amendment, where the unalienable rights of life, liberty and property are ascribed equally to all persons, as individual persons, and not due to membership in any given group, whether objectively or subjectively defined, whether fixed or malleable in declared nature.

The class of people who would engage in same-sex "marriage" is not even a true class of people, as it is "malleable" or changeable. The result has actually been to destroy the rights of others and create "super rights" before which all others must yield. Thus, while claiming it was upholding rights, it has actually destroyed all rights by making them alienable. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court did this without even considering what it was doing with respect to Federal Law and our Federal Constitution. The result is that courts or legislatures can create new rights according to the whims of the season.

Under current federal law (e.g. Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act), civil rights, congruent with the Fourteenth Amendment, cannot, nor ever have otherwise been assigned to a malleable identity, to subjective choice. Goodridge thus rewrites federal law, and without examining the issue. If such malleability and subjectivity were consistently applied in this context, there would be no boundaries in place to restrict the possibility of consanguineous, polygamous or group marriage. And beyond this context, if applied consistently, malleability of individual and group identity for the sake of perceived government benefit opens up a Pandora’s Box which Balkanizes civil rights.

Notice what Rankin is saying: under the current regime, there is no brake or impediment to a government legalizing incest, polygamy or group marriage. I can't say what success Rev. Rankin will have - in this political climate, probably none apart from a Divine intervention - but I believe he has posed important questions, questions which no one seems to be articulating or which at any rate no one has dared to argue where it might count.

The number of same-sex civil unions in Connecticut plummets

Why have civil unions dropped almost in half from 2006 to 2007?

Is it because people are waiting for full marriage rights or is it because there really isn't that much demand for it?

I suspect the latter.

Massachusetts will uphold gay marriage for now

Massachusetts legislators narrowly defeated today a measure which would have allowed voters to vote directly on the question of same-sex marriage. Fifty votes were needed but only 45 voted in favor of the measure. Read an AP story here.

This is obviously a deeply disappointing day for pro-family advocates in Massachusetts. Please continue to pray for this situation.

Pray urgently for Massachusetts

Massachusetts State House in Boston

Please pray for our neighbor to the north as Massachusetts faces a Constitutional Convention. New England Concerts of Prayer states:

Once again, thank you for your powerful prayer support for the Massachusetts Marriage Amendment. The amendment must now pass a second vote by the Legislature in the Constitutional Convention which is scheduled for 1:00 pm, Thursday, June 14. In order for the Amendment to appear on the Massachusetts ballot in November of 2008, it must receive 50 votes and we currently have 57 legislators who are on record to vote for the amendment.

The new Senate President, Therese Murray, who presides over the Convention, has publicly stated that she will ask for a vote on June 14 though she herself will vote against it. Powerful forces, including the governor, attorney general, and house speaker are now pressuring the state legislators to vote against it. Newspaper reports cite that Governor Patrick will offer high paying patronage jobs to legislators to change their votes. Even U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and DNC Chairman Howard Dean have been calling our legislators twisting arms for the gay lobby. On top of all this, our opponents, MassEquality, have launched a $750,000 media campaign leading up to June 14 designed to change the votes of our legislators.

Click here to watch an important Prayer Alert video from PrayTV (Windows Media file).

Rally for Marriage brings out 300 to Hartford

Yesterday's Rally for Marriage brought out an estimated 300 people - on a Wednesday morning no less, according to the Family Institute of Connecticut. We give thanks for the representation from our elected representatives, which, according to the FIC, included Rep. Marilyn Guiliano (R - Lyme, Old Lyme, Old Saybrook, Westbrook), Al Adinolfi (R - Cheshire, Hamden, Wallingford), Vincent Candelora (R - East Haven, North Branford, Wallingford), Bruce Morris (D - Norwalk) and T.R. Rowe (R - Trumbull).

Channel 8 has some reporting here, and there's an AP story here which quotes FIC's Brian Brown on the need for a constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriage. Many media outlets seem to have ignored this story altogether.

Major rally for marriage scheduled for this Wednesday

From the Family Institute of Connecticut comes this notice:

On Wednesday, May 23rd at 10:00 a.m. the Family Institute of Connecticut will hold a second Rally for Marriage and Lobby Day on the east grounds of the state capitol in Hartford. After the Rally all of those interested will make their way over to room 1B of the Legislative Office Building where we will receive packets of pro-family information. From there we will go to meet with our individual legislators to ask them to vote against same-sex "marriage" whenever it comes up again--and to vote for a referendum to let the people decide.

Anti-family activists already plan to bring back the defeated same-sex "marriage" bill at their earliest opportunity. And several of Connecticut's Supreme Court Justices have hinted that they might be willing to impose same-sex "marriage" by judicial fiat.

At the Rally FIC will discuss a mechanism in our state constitution that provides our best opportunity to let the people decide the future of marriage. But it to make happen, we will need your support.

We need your help to get the word out about our May 23rd Rally to your churches, friends and families. We especially need the help of homeschoolers who were central in making the previous rally so successful. The next fight to protect marriage begins on May 23rd!

Please call your state representative and state senator and make an appointment to meet with them on May 23rd. House Democrats can be reached at 800-842-8267 and House Republicans can be reached at 800-842-1423. Senate Democrats can be reached at 800-842-1420 and Senate Republicans can be reached at 860-240-8800.

Directions to the Legislative Office Building (LOB)
(The Legislative Office Building is located at 300 Capitol Avenue, Hartford.)

Traveling on I-84 East - Take Exit 48, Capitol Avenue, get into the right lane of the exit ramp. At the end of the exit ramp turn right onto Capitol Avenue. Take the first right past the Legislative Office Building, proceed to the back of the garage and take a right to enter the garage using the left hand lane.

Traveling on I-84 West - Take Exit 48, towards Asylum Street, go straight onto Spring Street. Turn right onto Asylum Avenue, stay straight onto Farmington Avenue. Turn left at the YWCA (will be diagonally to your left in front of you) onto Broad Street, proceed through two stop lights, immediately after the Armory building take the first left into the driveway and then another left at the end of the driveway. Follow this road around the garage to the back and take a right to enter the garage using the left hand lane.

Traveling on I-91 North or South - Take Exit 29A, Capitol Ave., stay over to the far left. You will come to Pulaski Circle, travel halfway around and take a right onto Elm St. Go to the end of Elm St., you are now facing the Capitol Building. Take a left onto Trinity St. At the first traffic light take a right onto Capitol Ave. Go past the Capitol building and the I-84 entrance ramp, all on your right. Take the first right past the Legislative Office Building, proceed to the back of the garage and take a right to enter the garage using the left hand lane.

Parking Instructions - Parking is extremely limited. Allow yourself extra time to park.

• Limited public parking is available on level one of the Legislative Office Building.
• Across the street from the Legislative Office Building, and across Capitol Ave. is Hungerford Street. There is street parking in this entire neighborhood, free of charge.
• When all else fails, on Oak Street (diagonally across to the left from the Legislative Office Building) off of Capitol Ave., there is a public parking garage in the CT Education association Building (CEA building - across from CT Supreme Court Library). This garage costs money, but will save you the time and aggravation of having to park.
• There is also parking available on the street next to the parking garage.

I know what Thomas Hooker would do!

Thomas Hooker and Company give thanks upon reaching the Connecticut River. As far as we can tell, there was no discussion of the virtues of homosexual marriage that day.

For those who don't remember their philosophy and logic classes, Princeton's WordNet dictionary defines sophistry as "a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone."

There's no better example of this sort of thing than Hartford Courant writer Susan Campbell, who wonders what Connecticut Puritan Thomas Hooker would think about homosexual marriage.

Hmmm, that's really a tough one! Could be fodder for a graduate thesis.

Ms. Campbell has advice for the pro-family citizens of Connecticut:

Going to the Christian scriptures on this, as opponents seem so wont to do, doesn't work. If you're quoting Jesus on homosexuality, you're making it up. Jesus was silent on the topic.

Attention, Hartford Courant: the New Testament is not a collection of the "Sayings of Jesus."

The New Testament is a collection of 27 books, none of which was authored by Jesus. The New Testament books, mostly authored by Jesus' apostles, condemn homosexuality in strong terms and, by the way, we learn in 1 Corinthians, chapter 6 that some Christians used to be homosexuals before coming to faith in Christ. It seems that Jesus Christ has the power to free people from homosexual desires, or so the New Testament writers seem to have thought!

Jesus Himself, being Jewish, was raised in an environment where the Law of Moses (the Torah) forbid homosexuality on pain of death.

There was therefore no reason for Jesus to give sweeping discourses on the desirability of homosexual "marriage." All Jews and Christians who have the least shred of interest in following the sacred texts of their religions of course accept as a given that God is opposed to the practice of homosexuality.

As for Thomas Hooker, people should read what he had to say instead of suggesting that he might have lacked guidance on the matter. The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, which Susan Campbell calls "a progressive piece of writing" and which Hooker helped to author, suggests that society should be ordered according to Christian teaching and morality.

For as much as it hath pleased Almighty God by the wise disposition of his divine providence so to order and dispose of things that we the Inhabitants and Residents of Windsor, Hartford and Wethersfield are now cohabiting and dwelling in and upon the River of Connectecotte and the lands thereunto adjoining; and well knowing where a people are gathered together the word of God requires that to maintain the peace and union of such a people there should be an orderly and decent Government established according to God, to order and dispose of the affairs of the people at all seasons as occasion shall require; do therefore associate and conjoin ourselves to be as one Public State or Commonwealth; and do for ourselves and our successors and such as shall be adjoined to us at any time hereafter, enter into Combination and Confederation together, to maintain and preserve the liberty and purity of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus which we now profess, as also, the discipline of the Churches, which according to the truth of the said Gospel is now practiced amongst us; as also in our civil affairs to be guided and governed according to such Laws, Rules, Orders and Decrees as shall be made, ordered, and decreed as followeth:

How very interesting! It seems that early Connecticut residents believed their government was formed in order to maintain the liberty and purity of the Gospel.

But, one may ask, on what basis did these Colonial Progressives make decisions and laws? It seems that in Hooker's world the Governor and Magistrates had

"the power to administer justice according to the Laws here established, and for want thereof, according to the Rule of the Word of God..."

In other words, if there was no law applicable to a given situation, the Word of God would tell them what to do. (Attention Courant - that would be the Bible!)

And so, finally, we know what Thomas Hooker would think about two men getting married. He would think the same thing about it that everyone in the Judeo-Christian tradition has always thought about it: it's wrong.

Please stop saying that we can't tell what Christianity teaches about this, or worse, that it teaches that "gay marriage" is OK.

Tremendous victory for pro-family forces in Connecticut

The Hartford Courant is reporting that leading Democrats do not intend to seek a vote on same-sex marriage this term, citing the likely lack of votes:

"A significant number of legislators have told us that they are currently in favor of same-sex marriage personally, but feel the state will be ready for it in another year or two. With time, these are the people that will create a majority," [Representative Mike] Lawlor said in a press release issued Friday. "This doesn't surprise me because we've been seeing the same trends happening in the general public, too, with more people gradually coming out in support for same-sex marriage. When it passes, I hope it is a strong bipartisan vote as was the case with civil unions in 2005."

While we give thanks for this, we must remain vigilant in prayer. We ask you to continue to pray as the Connecticut Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Monday in a case seeking the validation of same-sex marriage.

Connecticut needs to repent

One famous Connecticut preacher, Jonathan Edwards, is definitely spinning in his grave tonight.

A Courant poll finds that Connecticut residents are of two minds on same-sex marriage, and also that we are fairly evenly split about whether marriage is something religious or secular. Polls ae funny things, but it certainly seems that same-sex marriage is becoming more acceptable. The incessant drumbeat of the political Left and their use of guilt-inducing rhetoric is paying off. The Courant article even admits that Connecticut is more liberal than most other places on this issue, which I find interesting.

Brian Brown, the executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, dismissed the poll results, saying the questions were skewed to draw a favorable response. Brown and other opponents of gay marriage want the issue to be put directly to the state's voters in the form of a referendum.

"Every state that's been able to vote directly on this has been with us," Brown said. Gay marriage isn't a civil rights issue, he said. "This isn't about rights and benefits. It's about redefining marriage...."

Legal and political experts who track national public opinion on same-sex marriage say they are not surprised by the intensity of the support in Connecticut.

The poll found 31 percent of the state's residents strongly support same-sex marriage. In national polls, the percentage of respondents who express strong support generally hovers between 10 percent and 15 percent.

"There is no question that Connecticut is at the liberal end of the spectrum when it comes to attitudes toward homosexuality, same-sex marriage and civil unions," said Nathaniel Persily, a professor of law and political science at the University of Pennsylvania. "Same-sex marriage will come first to the blue states and later to the red states."

Brian Brown is right. This is about redefining marriage and nothing else.

What gives them the right to overturn 4,000 years of human experience? Nothing at all. What society has ever sanctioned homosexual marriage and taught its goodness to elementary school children? None.

But as Dostoevsky said, if there is no God, everything is permitted.

Whether anyone likes it or not, the United States is at present the leading nation in the Western world. Therefore the legitimization of same-sex marriage in the United States will clearly mark the end of the Judeo-Christian worldview as the guiding principle in the Western World. It also marks the rebirth of paganism as the organizing force in Western society - not the paganism of dilettantes dancing in the moonlight, but the intolerant paganism of ancient history, cruel to the unborn, the weak, the poor and the elderly alike. And as in ancient times, it will act on its aggressive intolerance of traditionally minded Christians and Jews, this time using the modern weapons of lawsuits and hate crimes legislation.

The National Day of Prayer is this Thursday, May 3. Please pray that God will grant us repentance.

Recap of Judiciary Committee Hearing on Same-Sex Marriages

Peter Wolfgang at the FIC Blog has a great recap of the testimonies and votes of various Representatives on the Judiciary Committee in last week's same-sex marriage bill vote.

Bright spot: Democratic Rep. Bruce Morris, who isn't buying the equation of same-sex rights and civil rights for African-Americans:

He cited Loving vs. Virginia, the case striking down laws forbidding people of different races to marry, on how “marriage is fundamental to our very existence and survival.” He said Brian was right about 2 men being biologically incapable (”without outside intervention”) of having a child and that it was for reasons like this that a very liberal court in Washington ruled against same-sex “marriage.” He mentioned the remarks of another African-American member of the Committee, saying that he too had thought about this as an African-American–and concluded that the civil rights analogy employed by same-sex “marriage” proponents doesn’t hold up. It isn’t arbitrary for the legislature to say marriage is between a man and a woman because, historically and culturally, it is true.

Well, of course. This is so patently obvious that the Left must resort to Stalinist tactics of erasing history to get us to think otherwise. Still, it's comforting to hear someone in the State Democratic party state these truths so clearly.

Read it all here.