A BLOG BY ALAN CHAMBERS

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. Floor Statements on Same-Sex Marriage

The Massachusetts Legislature is today wrestling with how to respond to their Supreme Court, which has made same-sex marriage the law of that state.

Even if the Massachusetts legislature is successful in passing a constitutional amendment to block same-sex marriage, it won’t come before voters for ratification for another for two years. And beginning on May 17, the state will begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Once these same-sex couples sue for recognition in their home states, the wildfire will begin. Same-sex marriage is likely to spread to all 50 states in the coming years. So regardless of what Massachusetts does today, it is becoming clear that the Congress must act, and act soon. And the Senate will begin working on the issue in the weeks ahead.

We didn’t seek this fight, and we don’t relish it. But the courts have brought it to us, and the people will respond. We will not let activist judges redefine marriage for our entire society. We reject intolerance, we reject hatred. We must treat all our fellow citizens with kindness and civility.

But marriage should remain what it has always been in our nation: the union of a man and a woman. It is my hope that Massachusetts Legislature will act today.

Massachusetts Marriage Affirmation & Protection Amendment

Alan Chambers Testifies Before the Massachusetts Judiciary Committee

Honorable Co-Chairs and Members of the Massachusetts Judiciary Committee:

My name is Alan Chambers. I am an independence loving and voting citizen of the United States of America. I am a lover of freedom and a defender to the death of every person's God created right to choose for themselves what kind of life they desire to lead, liberties they strive to take and happiness's they yearn to pursue. It is every individual's right to govern themselves in a manner in which they best see fit. Making right and wrong choices is a developmental part of becoming a responsible adult able to think for oneself.

A wise friend once said that rules are for babies; mature adults are able to moderate themselves. The United States of America is becoming a nation of court mandated do's and don'ts. Our culture is redefining right and wrong based on these new directives. As we come to rely on and live by these new rules, Americans are digressing in their maturity and ability to assume personal responsibility. Forcing every big and small battle into the courts is creating an increasingly childish society dependent on the court to parent us. We are signing away our God given freedom to choose, a right that our forefathers died to give us. Maturity is most tangibly seen when, although we have been empowered by God with the freedom to choose to do anything we please, we live by a code of self-governed restraint.

As you all know, Goodridge v. the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is a case before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in which 7 same sex couples are demanding marriage licenses. That court's response to this case will either continue to whittle away our freedoms or strengthen them; contribute to our cultural need for a baby sitter or empower us to live within the already sufficient set of boundaries that has defined marriage since the beginning of time. I hope that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court will deny these 7 couples marriage licenses thus guarding this state, and quite possibly our entire nation, against frivolous lawsuits, which ultimately restrict our overall freedoms. These couples have every right to be together, but their behavioral, not genetic, choices should not be allowed to infringe on society as a whole.

Today, I exhort you: vote in favor of the Marriage Affirmation and Protection Amendment; reaffirm what every culture in history has held sacred: marriage between one man and one woman. A vote in favor of this amendment is a public declaration in support of the bedrock of this great nation. A vote against this amendment is a bullet fired at the family. Corporately, you have the ability to head off a decision that could forever negatively alter the hallowed and deified uniting of one man and one woman by redefining holy matrimony. I urge you to uphold what is moral, legal and right and what honors those leaders who have gone before you.

Finally, having grown up with a homosexual orientation, having lived as an openly gay man, I once dreamed of living in a monogamous same sex marriage relationship. Today, having experienced sexual reorientation, now living a heterosexual lifestyle for the past 11 years and enjoying the bonds of heterosexual marriage for over 5 years, I can attest firsthand to the fact that same-sex marriage is not needed. I can also attest to the fact that same-sex marriage is not what those seeking it are ultimately after. I implore you all to ask yourselves the question, "What's next?" If marriage is redefined to include homosexuals, then what will the next battle be? I guarantee this is only the beginning of wide sweeping legislation changes that seek to limit the freedoms of many in the name of expanding the freedoms of a few. No other behaviorally defined group in history has sought to redefine our culture like the Gay and Lesbian Elite. Re-affirm today that our current freedoms are sufficient for all, that Gay and Lesbian people already have the God created right to choose for themselves what kind of life they desire to lead, liberties they strive to take and happiness's they yearn to pursue. Re-affirm that more rules are not necessary and that the morality of a few is not enough to redefine morality for us all.

Vote yes to protecting the children of today. Vote yes to protecting children of tomorrow. Vote yes to protecting the family. Vote yes on the Marriage Affirmation and Protection Amendment.

Liberty Counsel Release on Massachussetts Judicial Tyranny Related to Same-Sex Marriage

Massachusetts Court Says Legislature May Not Adopt Civil Unions As A Substitute For Same-Sex Marriage – The Majority of States Are Rejecting The Liberal Court Ruling

Orlando, FL – Today, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a 4-3 opinion stating that a proposed Senate bill creating civil unions for same-sex couples does not comply with its decision last year in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, which ruled that withholding civil marriage from same-sex couples violates the Massachusetts Constitution. Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, an international religious freedom education and litigation organization, stated that the Massachusetts legislature may now have the ammunition amend its constitutional to preserve marriage between one man and one woman.

On November 18, 2003, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a 4-3 decison stating that forbidding same-sex marriage violates the Massachusetts Constitution. The court gave the legislature 180 days to respond to the decision. Following the Goodridge ruling, the Massachusetts Senate on December 11, 2003, to the state Supreme Court Justices posing the question whether Senate No. 2175, entitled “An Act Relative To Civil Unions”, would be a permissible substitute for same-sex marriage:

"Does the Senate, No. 2175, which prohibits same-sex couples from entering into marriage but allows them to form civil unions with all ‘benefits, protections, rights and responsibilities’ of marriage, complied with the equal protection and due process requirements of the Constitution of the Commonwealth in articles 1,6,7,10,12 and 16 of the Declaration of Rights?"

Today four Justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court wrote that civil unions for same-sex couples still violates the state constitution. Three same three Justices who dissented in Goodridge again argued that the matter of same-sex marriage should be left to the legislature.

Staver noted, “Today’s decision requires the state legislature and the citizens of Massachusetts to confront same-sex marriage head-on. Civil unions are a compromise. Now that the Massachusetts Court ruled it will not accept anything less than same-sex marriage, the line has been drawn in the sand. The vast majority of Americans continue to believe that marriage between one man and one woman is an institution that must be preserved. The Massachusetts decision spawned a huge backlash throughout the country. At least 14 states (GA, IL, KS, KY, MD, MA, MI, MS, MO, NM, OK, UT, and WI) have filed legislation to ban same-sex marriage through a state constitutional amendment. Three other states are soon to follow (FL, MN and TX). Ohio will now become the 38th state to expressly ban same-sex marriage. Only 38 states are necessary to amend the U.S. Constitution, an effort that gained momentum since the Goodridge decision. Liberty Counsel supports such an amendment (see our statement on the Federal Marriage Amendment at www.lc.org). As I predicted last year, the sleeping giant of the majority of Americans who believe in traditional family is awakening, and the Massachusetts decision has served only to energize this pro-family movement.”

SIGN THE PETITION FOR A FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT

Mathew D. Staver, Esq.
Liberty Counsel
PO Box 540774
Orlando, FL 32854
800-671-1776
www.lc.org

No Room for Lukewarm Voters or Presidents: It's Either Bush or Dean

Hopefully like most Americans, I have grown weary of politicians who will say anything just to secure a vote. We live in a culture littered with passive, wishy washy, mushy middle of the road politicians who do not know the meaning of honesty or personal conviction. However, two presidential contenders do serve as energizing exceptions to this trend, the only clear leaders for their respective parties and as candidates for our consideration: Republican incumbent, President George W. Bush and Democratic frontrunner, Dr. Howard Dean.

I must confess I am a staunch conservative, yet anti-death penalty, opposed to homosexual rights but for a new era of compassion and understanding towards homosexual people, pro-Iraq War, pro-life member of the Republican National Committee who did once and will again vote for George W. Bush. I am adamantly opposed to most every social position that Dr. Howard Dean holds. And, while I disagree with Dr. Dean on 99% of the issues, I find him a refreshing alternative to the other Democratic candidates for president. I readily admit that if I was a partisan Democrat I would see no other viable candidate for the Democratic nomination for President. And, if I can be so bold to speak a word of advice to partisan Democrats: if you don’t choose Dean over the other nominees you are being hypocritical.

I mean, Howard Dean absolutely represents what the Democratic Party has been reduced to: pro-abortion, pro-homosexual rights, liberal, anti-war, anti-conservative Christian and pro-big government party for the politically and socially correct. Howard Dean is the only Democratic candidate who will admit his firm stance on the issues I mentioned. While I do not hold to his views, I respect his honesty and willingness to be real. He loses his temper because of his passion for what he believes. He lives his beliefs and makes no apologies for them. Why can’t we find more people on both sides willing to be as vulnerable and courageous?

This presidential race, more than any other in history, is indicative of the kind of nation the United States of America is and is going to become. Are we a Christian nation that believes in biblical family values or are we a pagan nation that is no longer going to allow for the interjection of faith into the running of government? Howard Dean has said that politics shouldn’t be about things like abortion, guns and gays—yet a substantial part of his platform involves these social issues. I think that the laws enacted regarding these issues by the people we elect are the pulse of who we are as a society.

In my opinion, President George W. Bush has stood firmly, honestly and unabashedly for what he holds dear: the preservation of family values and the system of government that our forefathers originally intended. President Bush has not wavered on his platform issues and has courageously defended his positions, decisions and values. He, like Howard Dean, is unrestrained in defining his convictions.

So, when November 2004 rolls around I hope that America will choose to be hot or cold on all of the issues mentioned in this article. I hope that George Bush and Howard Dean are the two that we will choose from and that Americans will decide to get off the couch and the fence and vote for what is best for all. It is time for the lines to be drawn clearly.

Animal Farm: Coming to America?

Unfortunately, George Orwell might have been prophetic--his book, Animal Farm, sure reads like a modern day interpretation of life in the politically correct new millennium. After all, it seems that some animals have become more equal than others.

Case in point, in a media interview this past November an Anglican Bishop (see Catholic World News article below) happened to share his personal opinion that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation and found himself at Cheshire Police Headquarters being interrogated about his violation of a 1986 Hate Speech Law. His opinion was steeped in biblical, historical and modern day fact as there is 2,000 year old evidence that homosexuals can and have changed. I Corinthians 6:9-11 gives an account of this saying first that a number of sinful people groups won't inherit the Kingdom of God; the passage goes on to give the good news that all of those groups had hope because change was possible and had actually happened for some. Additionally, there is NO refuting the personal story of people like me who once were gay but are no longer.

We are living in a time when simply believing that homosexuality is sinful can land you in jail. Indeed, there is a different set of rules for those who criticize homosexuals--even the Ku Klux Klan (a true hate group) can openly demonstrate and speak out against black people and get away with it--after all that is freedom of speech. However, exercise that same freedom and simply state that homosexuality is a sin and can be changed and you will find yourself publicly whipped and possibly even jailed.

Of course, it isn't illegal---YET--to speak out against homosexuality in this country, but there is a precedent for abuse if you dare to even think negatively about the issue of homosexuality or homosexual people. The media, many in the gay community and liberal politicians showed us what can and will be done to anyone who offers anything other than praise for homosexuality when they viciously and wrongly victimized Dr. Laura for sharing her thoughts on why homosexuals are not sexually attracted to the opposite sex. Dr. Laura simply said, "...it is a biological error that inhibits you from relating normally to the opposite sex" (Bruce, The New Thought Police). She didn't call anyone a biological error as so many claimed, she called the inability to relate sexually to the opposite sex the error. But, a smear campaign is never based on all the facts--not even ones waged on gay and lesbian people.

We are living in dangerous times. We have left the terrible days when gay and lesbian people were dehumanized, misunderstood and ridiculed only to enter a day where the oppressed have become the oppressor. There is a balance but I wholeheartedly believe the majority wouldn't like it--someone always has to have the upper hand.