by Eric Teetsel
Government has a vital interest in the institution that creates and nurtures the next generation.
This week, the Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of two laws: Proposition 8, passed by the citizens of California in 2008; and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed by the House (342-67) and Senate (85-14) and signed by President Clinton in 1996. The court has an opportunity to affirm the meaning and purpose of marriage and the American democratic process. Read more…
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2011
Tomorrow afternoon beginning at 2:30 pm PT / 5:30 pm ET, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit will be hearing oral arguments on California’s Proposition 8.
The three-judge panel, while continuing to deliberate on the constitutionality of Prop 8, will additionally be hearing oral arguments on whether Judge Walker broke the law when he allowed the public release of videotapes of the original Prop 8 trial and whether Judge Walker’s decision to overturn Prop 8 should be reversed because he was involved in a same-sex relationship at the time. Read more…
by johnpauliiismyhero
… In the first one from the Washington Post, he lays out the basic argument. The public discourse on gay marriage has reached the point where there is no rational discourse. In the eyes of our culture, to oppose gay marriage is tantamount to ignorance, bigotry, or hate. Ironically, the replies he received in the Post simply served to prove his point. The summary of the brief article is that the public square has embraced the following game-plan: 1) first, contend that there is no such thing as a rational argument for traditional marriage, 2) then reaffirm the mistaken position that faith—as a purely personal exercise—has nothing to do with reason, and 3) finally, espouse both positions in court rulings. Read more…
by Becky Yeh
One pro-family leader is calling for Christians to be courageous in their stance for biblical values in light of a ruling that exposes supporters of a California marriage law. Read more…
September 19th, 2011
Betsy
by Jennifer Roback Morse
This article was first published at Mercatornet.com September 16, 2011.
Last week’s hearing in the California Supreme Court on whether the proponents of Prop 8 have standing to defend the measure in court seemed to go well for the defenders of natural marriage. But another issue lies beneath the surface of the court arguments. The issue is what kind of people are the marriage redefiners: Ted Olsen, Rob Reiner, and the American Foundation for Equal Rights? Read more…
Proposition 8′s sponsors will be in court Monday morning to argue whether Judge Walker’s decision to overturn Prop 8 should be vacated on the basis that the long term same-sex relationship he is involved in (and was involved in at the time of the Prop 8 trial, but failed to disclose) constitutes a conflict of interest.
If you want to follow the hearing, and don’t mind going to the website of one of Prop 8′s opponents to do so, then you can find live updates at http://www.afer.org/june13 starting at 9:00am.
by Carolyn Moynihan
Special note: Prof. Brad Wilcox will be a speaker at this summer’s “It Takes a Family” Conference sponsored by the Ruth Institute.
In the realm of parenthood today nothing can be taken for granted — not even that a mother and father are the best thing for children, at least according to certain elites. Read more…
Charlie Butts – OneNewsNow -
Pressure from homosexual activist groups has compelled the head of the 2012 U.S. Olympic gymnastics team to quit.
Two-time gymnastics gold medal winner Peter Vidmar has resigned upon receiving harsh criticism from homosexual and lesbian athletes and activists, who complained that he had donated $2,000 to promote California’s Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Read more…
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The sponsors of California’s same-sex marriage ban said Monday that the recent disclosure by the federal judge who struck down Proposition 8 that he is in a long-term relationship with another man has given them new grounds to have his historic ruling overturned.
Lawyers for the ban’s backers filed a motion in San Francisco’s U.S. District Court, arguing that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker should have removed himself from the case or at least disclosed his relationship status because his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Read more…
Loading ...
