Major Committee Hearings
The Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD) was taken up in the Senate Foriegn Relations Committee. Out of eight witnesses two opposed, five supported, and one was neutral.
Threatens America's Sovergnity, and Parental Rights, and could enshrine abortion into American law. Micheal Farris Ph.D, J.D., L.A.A. spoke in opposition to the treaty on these grounds. During the question and answer part of the hearing proponants of the treaty attacked him personally and misrepersented his arguments, but he perservered, offering sound legal reasoning, and showing the end result of the logic of his opponants. See his full testamony here. Watch the hearing here, and read the treaty here.
Dr. Farris is a Constitutional Lawyer who has argued Cases before the Supreme Court of the United States. He has both a degree in American Law and a degree in international law. He is the chancellor of Patrick Henry College where he teaches Government, and Law. He has also coached 7 national championship moot court teams.
Major Court Cases
Alliance Defending Freedom petitons the Supreme Court to hear Elane Photography v. Willock.
Elane Photography is a business in New Mexico that refused be the photographer at a same-sex ceremony. The same-sex couple took the case before the New Mexico Human Rights Commission that which ordered the photography shop to pay a fine for opperating according to the belief that marriage is between one man and one women. The owners promptly sued. Several months latter the Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that, "There is a price to pay" in order to believe Christianity. Read More Here.
Oral Arguments regarding Prayer were heard this week at the Supreme Court. In Greece vs. Galloway a city in upstate New York was sued for opening their coucil meetings with prayer. Read the arguments here. Read More about the Case here.
The Supreme Court heard a case this week involving the question, 'How far does a United Nations treaty go?' Read more about that here.
VA: Conservative Cuccinelli lost, although with much slimmer margins than excpected as the ObamaCare website continues to be a disaster. McAffliee took 46%, Cuccinelli took 43.5% and the Libertaritan canidate took 6.6%
MUST READ ARTICLES OF THE WEEK
Will the Court Strike a Blow for Religious Liberty?
Successful Pro-Life Conversations
Supreme Court can Stop Federal Overreach
Senate Bill 10 which is currentally in the State House would legalize homosexual marriage in Illinois. Only 13 States have made this move. Please contact the Illinois house of Repersentatives and tell them to protect the sanctity of Marriage by voting NO! on Senate Bill 10.
To see the vote in the Senate click here. The Bill is currentally being debated in the House.
As Summit Ministries noted in June of this year;
Moreover, homosexual marriage has nothing to do with “tolerance” or ending “discrimination.” It is about legitimizing the homosexual lifestyle, compelling society to embrace a radical new morality. Same-sex marriage is a contradiction, an oxymoron. It is an attempt to redefine reality and human nature. Marriage is the basic institution of society. Its very definition (and essence) is the sacred union between a man and a woman. Its fundamental aim — and the reason for centuries it has held a special status in Western civilization — is to produce, raise and socialize children. It is the social conveyor belt by which one generation is passed on to the next. Destroy the family, and with it goes the glue holding society together. Homosexuals cannot have children naturally. Their lifestyles and behaviors inevitably lead to a culture of death — the absence of any future human life, the fruits of a marital union....Even deists, such as Thomas Jefferson, believed sodomy so violated public morality that those who practiced it should be castrated.
Mr. Kuhner is absolutly correct; this is why Senate Bill 10 must be defeated.
All of which, I assume, is little comfort to the Huguenins, who now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives. Though the rule of law requires it, the result is sobering. It will no doubt leave a tangible mark on the Huguenins and others of similar views.
Reading the above quote one must ask, "Are we still in America?" This family only wished to obey Christian principles by not helping another human being sin. The Huguenins own a photography shop that routinely does weddings. They were asked by a lesbian couple to do their wedding, the Huguenins refused. The next thing they knew they were in court fighting for their right to obey Christian principles by refusing to help people sin. Earlier last week the New Mexico Supreme Court declared that the Huguenins were not protected under the First Amendment. According to the Court the Huguenins must choose between there livelyhood and their faith. They must choose between obeying God and obeying man. The Court has left no middle ground. Today Christianity is under attack. The Alliance Defending Freedom is looking into continuing the case.
Elane Photography's refusal to serve Vanessa Willock violated the New Mexico Human Rights Act, which prohibits a public accommodation from refusing to offer its services to a person based on that person's sexual orientation. Enforcing the NMHRA against Elane Photography does not violate the Free Speech or the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment or the NMRFRA. For these reasons, we affirm the grant of summary judgment in Willock's favor.
No longer can Christians practice Christianity, without persecution, even in America. What has the world come to?
Similar Topic: Townhall Article
And [Jesus] answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” ~Matthew 19:4-6 NKJV
God ordained and established the institution of Marriage, the very institution that is under attack today. Since the fall every institution established by God has come under attack by the Devil, Marriage is no different. In the past, in other nations, it has been corrupted, but this battle is really the first direct attack in America on this sacred institution. In the last couple of days this debate in America has come to a climax. Either we will continue down the path away from God and toward destruction by moral and economic means, or we will turn back.
When the Court struck down DOMA it struck down the federal definition of marriage. No longer is the Federal Government allowed to protect the foundation of society the family, instead the Government is left helpless to defend America. According to the Court, Americans can invent new rights that never existed before. No longer are humans endowed with certain rights by their creator, it is by the will of the people. This is a dangerous road to walk. If rights are not granted by God, someone above government, they can be taken by Government. Windsor vs. United States strikes not only at the moral fabric of our nation but also at the intrinsic rights listed in the Declaration of Independence as given by God.
Marriage will continue, for God is no respecter of nations. The question is: will America continue?
"And they [Sodom] were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit." ~Ezekiel 16:50*
*Note: Homosexual activists often use Ezekiel 16:49 to claim that God destroyed Sodom for inhospitality, but if the entire passage is read we find that Ezekiel is listing sins and it becomes quite clear that homosexuality is included. The Hebrew word for Abomination is the same word used in Leviticus when describing the sin of homosexuality.
Guest post by Mike Montoya
It has been 13 years since the first attempt to protect traditional marriage in the state of California. On March 7, 2000, California voters passed Proposition 22 by a margin of 61% to 39% to define marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman in the state Family Code. However, eight years later, the voice of the people was trumped by the California Supreme Court in a 4-3 decision that held that Proposition 22 did not reconcile with the California Constitution. Instead of accepting what appeared to be crushing defeat, California voters rose again in defense of marriage and passed Proposition 8 in November 2008. Unlike Proposition 22, Proposition 8 defined marriage not in the California Family Code, but in the California Constitution.
Living an hour away from San Francisco, I lived the turmoil surrounding the original vote on Proposition 8. As a vocally conservative public school student, I experienced the backlash of many “pro-tolerance” zealots who simply couldn’t understand that supporting traditional family values does not make an individual bigoted. After many bitter debates and enduring slurs of all kinds, pro-family advocates, such as me, sat in our living rooms waiting for poll results to flood our TVs. By the gracious hand of God, our work was not in vain. With a result of 52% to 48%, California stood once again to defend traditional marriage. In a state that’s been blue since Reagan, marriage was defended even in the face of militant adversaries.
But as in all political matters, nothing ends with a vote.
Suits were brought against Proposition 8’s constitutionality on the Federal level and after years of deliberation and decisions, it stood to be decided upon in the United States Supreme Court on this day, June 26th, 2013.
Sitting in the GenJ office, it has come to my attention that the Supreme Court has decided to not make a decision on Proposition 8. The ruling states that the proponents of the proposition had no standing in the 9th Circuit Court and therefore the appellate decision is null. This leaves the decision at the Federal district court level where it was originally overturned.
I am not a Constitutional scholar and therefore cannot tell you where to go from here, but I can tell you, we should neither sit nor sulk. Our nation is made of fallen men, much like you and me. Our first response must be to pray for our enemies, that they would see the damage they are advocating and that the Lord would have mercy on their ways. We must then get up, dust off our clothes, and continue fighting for faith and Christian ethics in America. Whatever you may do in response to this ruling, always remember: though we may face temporal defeat, our Lord has already won.
I leave you with this admonition, stay in the word and stand strong with your fellow believers. I can only say so much, but the inspired Word of God puts it best:
“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm.” (Ephesians 6:11-13)
Guest post by Mike Montoya
Originally published at genjlibertyscall.blogspot.com/2013/06/proposition-8-standing-strong-in-wake.html