SAME-SEX MARRIAGES

I am utterly amazed at the unchristian bigotry and hatred that permeates the "Reverend" Louis P. Sheldon's writings and speech and yet he is able to call himself a Christian with a straight face. His conscience must really be searing. If so, there is still time for him to repent! If not, he might be beyond my ability to influence him to repent. However, using the honorific term "Rev." before his name, leaves me with the same bad feeling as if I were to have had to address Khruschev as President.

Mr. Sheldon continues to oppose God in his determination to violate the Ancient Law of Hospitality for which Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, (see Ezekiel 16:49-50, Isaiah 1:9-11, Jeremiah 23:14). In an article in the June 23, 1996 issue of The Dallas Morning News regarding "Same-sex Marriages," he further reveals that he worships Satan, the Father of Lies in his effort to subjugate his fellowman and deprive them of their God given rights. I thought I would share it with you. My only comment to him is the warning of Jeremiah,

Jeremiah 23:1-4
1 ¶ Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.

2 Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD.

3 And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I [you] have driven them, and will bring them again to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase.

4 And I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed them: and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall they be lacking, saith the LORD.

This Article is in two parts, viz. Pro and Con.

Written by Even Wolfson, director for Lambda Legal Defense & Education Fund and co-counsel in a case in Hawaii seeking the rights to marry for same-sex couples.

Imagine a typical hectic day and then a phone call comes -- your spouse has collapsed at work, and it looks like a heart attack. Every second counts as you dash from a crucial business meeting or cancel your turn driving the kids so you can rush to his or her side.

No questions asked, no fumbling to explain why or for whom, you get immediate access to your spouse, medical records, doctors when you get to he hospital. You need say only two words -- "my wife" or "my husband" -- and doors open. You get to your loved one in time.

Unless of course, you happen to be gay. Would your boss be understand- ing as you bolt from the office? Would the doctors confer with you about treatment questions? Would the hospital even allow you into the emergency room?

Civil marriage bring legal and social recognition that supports couples and families in the unpredictable, turbulent world. But today, gay and lesbian couples are not allowed to legally marry in any state -- no matter how long they have been together, no matter how committed their relation- ship, and no matter how much their families need the protections, responsibilities and benefits that comes with civil marriage.

The so-called Defense of Marriage Act now before Congress, like bills pushed in 35 states by the Christian Coalition and other religious/political extremist groups, would keep marriage a special privilege for non-gay couples only. The federal bill would stop discussion, even though people all across the country are just beginning to talk about how the denial of the freedom to marry harms real-life gay couples.

Some say this is a matter of religion, even though we are talking about civil-marriage licenses. The separation of church and state guarantees the distinction between civil and religious marriage bonds. No religion would be forced to perform or recognize marriages for gay couples. But, at the same time, religions should not be dictating who gets a civil-marriage license.

For example, some religions oppose divorce and remarriage. They are free to do so religiously, but we still allow civil marriage for those seeking to remarry.

Some say gay people should be denied the choice of marriage because marriage is only for people raising children. Yet we know this is not true, for many non-gay couples marry without having kids (ask Bob and Elizabeth Dole). Also, many lesbians and gay men are parent- ing kids; don't their kids deserve the [same] protections and legal assurances that would come to their families through marriage?

Most fundamentally, since both non-gay and gay people seek to marry for a mix of reasons -- emotional as well as economic, personal as well as practical, spiritual as well as social -- the important personal decision to marry should belong to the couple in love, not the government.

A case in Hawaii on behalf of three couples says exactly that. The Hawaii Supreme Court ruled in May 1993 that the state's denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples is discriminatory and sent the case back to the lower court to give the government a chance to try to justify its position. Trial now is scheduled in the lower court in the fall, with a final decision on a likely appeal to the Hawaii Supreme Court at least two years away. The high court has posed the question, why shouldn't gay couples willing to take on the commitment and responsibilities of civil marriage be able to do so, like anyone else?

The Supreme Court recently held that a Colorado law aimed at withdraw- ing legal rights from lesbians and gay men, like any law , "singling out [a] certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status or general hardships," is unconstitutional. In Romer vs. Evans, Justice Anthony Kennedy (appointed to the Supreme Court by President Ronald Reagan) said that government cannot "deem a class of persons a stranger to its laws." Last week, (June16, 1996) the court reaffirmed the principle, sending AB anti-gay rights amendment to the Cincinnati charter back to an appeal court for
reconsideration.

Yet making gay couples second-class citizens is exactly the intent of bills being pushed in Congress and state legislatures. The anti-gay backlash has begun, even before we have won the basic freedom to marry that all other Americans take for granted. Knowing that fair-minded Americans are just beginning to learn and think about gay people and marriage, these groups want to choke off all discussion in favor or hate mongering against lesbians and gay men.

Their anti-marriage bills -- the title "Defense of Marriage Act" is certainly ironic -- do noting to bolster anyone's marriage. They do not address non-gay and gay couples' serious, everyday concerns, such as economics, health care, education or retirement pensions. They do not even give power to the states, as supporters misleadingly claim. Instead, in the heat of an election year, [contrary to the Congressional Republican's own assertion] they would grab new powers for the federal government.

Under these proposals, Congress, for the first time in American history, would step into the arena of marriage law and invent a federal definition of what :good" and "bad" marriages are. Non-gay couples in good marriages would be rewarded with federal protections and benefits such s Social Security and pensions for surviving spouses. Gay couples, who years from now might at last [be] able to marry in at least one state, would find America a "house divided," in which they are literally married one day, "unmarried" the next, depending on what state they are in, or which government bureaucrat they are dealing with.

The so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" is really an attack on marriage, because it says that the federal government can shred you lawful marriage if you and your spouse are of the same sex [or if a heterosexual couple chooses not to have children]. Targeting gay people for [special] second-class marriages -- withholding Social Security and other federal benefits and protections -- is intended "not to further a proper legislative end but to make them unequal to everyone else."

It's exactly what the Supreme Court repudiated in its historic Colorado decision. We should not have second-class citizens in America, and we should not have second-class marriages.

All of us have attended friends' or family members' weddings held not where the couple lives but where they grew up, or where they rented a beautiful lodge. Those couple are still married when they return home from their honeymoon and don't have to get remarried if they move. The Constitution assures us that this is one country. and if you're married, you're married! But the Christian Coalition and the politicians pushing their bills would change that -- starting with gay people.

There was a time in this country when African-Americans were not permitted to marry. Similar laws targeted Asian-Americans. We changed those laws. Less than 30 years ago, there were laws saying people could not marry someone of the "wrong" race. We changed that, even though the polls showed people were against interracial marriage.

Women used to be the legal property of their husbands. We changed that. And there was a time when people were forced to remain in a failed marriage. We changed that, too, and the Supreme Court said a divorce in one state must be recognized throughout the United States. Though the attacks rage on in Congress and several states, so far this year 17 states have refused to be stampeded and have rejected anti-bill.

Should you care if the two women who live next door decide to marry each other? Would your life be different if the two men down the street are legally married? You may not want to no to their wedding, but you have no business telling them they cannot get married. Marriage is not a limited commodity, gay people will not use up all the licenses, or take anything away from marriages between a man and woman.

Allowing lesbians and gay men to share equally in the commitment of civil marriage is anything but an attack on marriage. The instability. uncertainty and radical discrimination contained in anti-marriage bills like the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" are the real attack. If marriage needs defending now, it is not from gay couples in love; it is from politicians willing to subvert the Constitution for discriminatory or political purposes, and from others unwilling to stand up for what is right.

Whatever one's stand on equal marriage rights today, what we need is more discussion, not a politically-motivated rush to judgment.

[To Mr. Wolfson's argument, I will add that through the gift and power of revelation from God, I can state emphatically that under the Gospel of Jesus Christ, man has only two commandments to follow. He that hath wisdom and understanding, read:

Matthew 22:35-40
35 Then one of them, [which was] a lawyer, asked [him a question], tempting him, and saying,

36 Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour (sic) as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.]

Written by The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, an organization based in Anaheim, Calif.

Only in the courts and in some of our more liberal legal and lobbying organizations could the debate over changing the nature of marriage to eliminate the essential "one man/one woman" formula last more than a few minutes.(1)

In every poll(2), there are few issues on which the American people have reached such a well-defined consensus.

Marriage, a tried and true institution, has sustained America(3) during these past two centuries, and its healthy practice holds the keys to out future.

The climate created by misguided attempts to legalize gay marriages is hostile to the strong compass guiding American.(4) The Defense of Marriage Act before Congress deserves immediate passage and signature from the president.

Unfortunately, we need look back only one month for a well-publicized example of governmental hostility to the American consensus [here Mr. Sheldon is guilty of inciting the American people]. The U.S. Supreme Court threw out an anti-gay rights amendment to the Colorado constitution.

The majority cited some vague right to be homosexual in denying the people of Colorado the right to set standards for their community. Then last week, the Supreme Court took a similar position in sending an anti-gay rights amendment to the Cincinnati charter back to an appeals court for reconsideration.

In the Colorado case, Justices William Rehnquist, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia defended the people of Colorado and the rest of us(5) very eloquently in the dissenting opinion written by Mr. Scalia. Americans, particularly parents and other family members, have good reason to be concerned about the decline in morals and the blurring of community standards across the nation.

We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion," John Adams said. "Our constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."(6)

Heterosexual marriage is not a relative cultural norm but an absolute for the continuation of civilization.(7) Efforts to legitimize "homosexual marriage" are exercises in political cosmetics -- using the rhetoric of equality to disguise an agenda aimed at special unwarranted privilege.(8) It is a deceitful attempt to undermine the institution of marriage.(9) It would push our country onto a misguided track that has destroyed other civilizations.(10)

In his recent book Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover explained it clearly. "When left to itself, human sexuality appears unconstrained and to the innocent mind shockingly polymorphous. But the hallmark of society in which all sexual constraints have been set aside if that it sanctions homosexuality as well. Plutarch, the first-century Greek moralist, saw libertinism to be the third and next-to-last stage in the life cycle of a free republic before its final descent into tyranny.(11)

A lawsuit concerning homosexual marriage is being reviewed by the Supreme Court of Hawaii, where the polls show that three out of four people oppose homosexual marriage.(12)

At the core of the effort of homosexual extremists to legitimize their behavior is(13) the debate over whether or not homosexuality is some genetic inherited trait or whether it is a chosen behavior.(14) The activists argued that is an immutable characteristic.(15)

But no school of medicine, medical journal or professional organization much as the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association has ever recognized the claim that homosexuality is genetic, hormonal or biological.(16)

Homosexuality is a choice.(17) No other group of Americans has ever claimed special rights and privileges(18) based solely on their choice of sexual behavior, and the Constitution is silent(19) on any basis for special privileges.

A significant point in the debate over homosexual marriage is the right of the government to regulate the times, places and manner in which people may act on their sexual desires.(20) At present, all states allow only two people in the marriage relationship. There are age restrictions and pro- hibitions on marrying closely related members of the same family.(21)

Just as the state has a "compelling interest on behalf of its citizens in imposing these limits on marriage, it has the same interest in prohibiting the marriage of homosexual(22) (refer to Gay (Gai) Marriages? in these Journals of Discourses)

One prominent homosexual spokesman, former New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan, has said that even with homosexual marriages, most homosexuals will continue to explore random extra-marital outlets. What normal group of people open the discussion of "extra-marital" affairs in the well-founded national concern about the spread of HIV-related illnesses, isn't such a suggestion irresponsible, at the very least and bordering on criminal?(23)

Mr. Sullivan also talks of their "varied and complicated lives" and warns homosexuals to resist allowing their diverse lives to be shaped into a "single moralistic model."(24)

There is a great deal of confusion among homosexuals about whether they want marriage with its restrictions on their behavior. They recognize the taxpayer-financed benefits bonanza (Social Security, Medicare, etc.), but they refuse to yield on the practice of random and anonymous sex.(25)

With the 1990 passage of a much-publicized "domestic partnership ordinance in San Francisco, a mere 3 percent of the city's 200,000 homosexual residents applied for certificates under the ordinance. Similarly, since January of this year, when San Francisco inaugurated nonbinding (sic) marriage agreements, 0.18 percent of the homosexual population has applied.(26)

Is this sort of murky arrangement that Texans or people in other states wish to recognize and place on an equal plane with traditional marriages? I don't believe so, and the prospect of having this presented in "family life" courses in public schools is disturbing.(27)

A study of 34,706 students in grades seven through 12 in Minnesota found that 25.9 percent of students age 12 were "unsure" of their sexual orientation. This declined sharply to 5 percent by age 18. But the implica- tions of this and other data are troubling -- what happens when homosex- uality and homosexual marriage are added to a list of choices for these young people to consider?(28)

And whose voice will be raised in that classroom to challenge such teaching?(29)

Whatever the pronouncement of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Hawaii Supreme Court -- Americans know that "homosexual marriage is an oxymoron.(30)

Sen. Don Nickles, R-Okla., Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., and REP. Steve Largent, R-Okla., have introduced the Defense of Marriage Act in the Congress. It reasserts the definition of marriage as one man/one woman and allows states not to recognize homosexual marriages performed in other states.(31)

The bill is just common sense.(32)

America is fast becoming a nation where "rights" are created and bestow- ed routinely on whichever group can cry the shrillest that it has been victimized.(33)

Across the country, thinking people are becoming alarmed as they wit- ness the erosion of our nation's moral core. They recognize the libertine behavior cannot be rewarded at the cost of destroying America's moral consensus. We must set moral boundaries if we are to continue as a free republic, and that should start with the reaffirmation of one man/one woman marriage.(34)
 
 

-----------------------------------------------------
AN OPEN APPEAL TO MR. SHELDON:

I appeal to Louis Sheldon to forsake Satan and evil and return to the Lord God whom you profess but blaspheme in the manner in which Isaiah and Christ prophesied:

Isaiah 29:13
13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near [me] with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Matthew 15:7-9
7 [Ye] hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.

 

Jeremiah 12:10
10 Many pastors have destroyed my vineyard, they have trodden my portion under foot, they have made my pleasant portion a desolate wilderness.
 

Jeremiah 23:1-4
1 ¶ Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.

2 Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD.

3 And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I [you] have driven them, and will bring them again to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase.

4 And I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed them: and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall they be lacking, saith the LORD.

Mr. Sheldon, you are saying that homosexuality is so utterly desirable, so preferred that the only way you and others like you can insure that your philosophy is carried on generation to generation is to slander and rail against God's gift of homosexuality? Don't rail against a gift, rail against its usage.

Freedom of Choice means just that. To deny people the Freedom of Choice, trying in your misguided, demonic way and thinking, to insure that everyone is saved, was exactly the Plan of Satan for which the War in Heaven was fought and for which he was cast out of heaven, made Satan, the Father of Lies and named Lucifer meaning Deceiver.

To deny anyone any Freedom of Choice is to thwart the final Judgment and therefore, the purpose of God.

God has promised He will forgive you and remember your sin no more but unless you repent, He has said it will be better for the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah than for you!

__________
Footnotes:

(1) No one is eliminating anything. Similar to what Christ said, Gay people are not doing away with marriage but fulfilling it.

(2) Mr. Sheldon's argument sounds like they were taken verbatim from that enunciated by the Pro-Slavery, Pro-Segregationist, Pro-Klu Klux Klan antichristian faith merchants of the 18th century. When slavery was abolished, very poll showed that Americans supported the enslavement of blacks, "niggers" to Mr. Sheldon and friends. Fortunately, Mr. Sheldon, this country is a country based on laws and not public opinion polls, otherwise, Christian Faith Merchants like Mr. Sheldon would still enslave blacks to this day.

(3) Despite the abundance of men cheating on their wife and fathering million of babies out of wedlock .

(4) Nothing in legalizing gay marriages is a threat to anyone but Satan! There is nothing stronger or more pervasive than systemic prejudice perpetrated by man's Professional Faith Merchants.

(5) Watch how you use the phrase "the rest of us." As is typical of bigoted antichristian faith merchants, Mr. Sheldon erroneously claims to be able to speak for 45 million homosexually gai people.

(6) Whose morals and which religion?

(7) I challenge Mr. Sheldon to learn the actual history of government sanctioned marriage, period. Amounts to only a blip compared the time man has been on earth!

(8) ON THE CONTRARY: Denial of equal rights for all God's children is to set up a special class of people and the granting of special rights to that group. That is contrary to the laws of God!

(9) That's the pot calling the kettle black

(10) Name one civilization destroyed because of homosexuality and if you say the Roman civilization, you are more illiterate pernicious and perverse in your selective misinterpretation of history than I had given you credit.

(11) Mr. Sheldon confuses tyranny with anarchy! As a so-called "Reverend," Mr. Sheldon would have as his choice of scholars, scholars of man. However, for me and my house, we'll rely on the Word of God!

(12) Law is not based upon public opinion but what is right.

(13) At the core of the effort of God's children is equal rights granted by God.

(14) For the Word of God, refer to The Book of the Millennial Dispensation Chapter 8. Also see Did you Choose to be Gay? in these Journals of Discourses

(15) Mr. Sheldon enunciates his own unfounded interpretation! No one has ever claimed any human behavior is immutable.

(16) A perfect example of an antichrist in Ministerial garb twisting and obfuscating the truth. He states another truth but bastardized the real truth. The truth is, no one has ever claimed that science ever said its was genetic, hormonal or biological. Plus it would have been a complete fraud for the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association, whose expertise is the mind, to have said the cause was either genetic, hormonal or biological which is beyond their expertise and Mr. Sheldon knows this or he should. However, Medical Science is united in asserting the individual was born with the proclivities, propensities, predisposition.

(17) As is heterosexuality a choice to live according to that which the person feels is natural for him/her. Beyond that, you have no choice as to who you fall in love with.

(18) No to give everyone equal rights is to grant heterosexually gai people like you special rights and privileges. God has said his spirit will be poured out upon mankind in these days and his spirit will overcome Satan, your God, the Father of Lies.

(19) The Constitution is not silent on equal human rights for all the people.

(20) Marriage and sex are two different things. Read the Bible which you blasphemously profess to believe.

(21) Why? Man's law is based on reason! Think it through, I'm sure the Spirit of God will be with you long enough to learn and understand the truth, but only if you are truly seeking the truth.

(22) Mr. Sheldon is trying to judge an apple based on what he thinks of an orange

(23) Since when does anyone disallow something because someone is not so inclined to do what is socially acceptable. If that were the criteria, with all the child and teenage promiscuity, heterosexual marriages would have been outlawed centuries ago. You do what is right to improve society. Society's do things that promote the overall well-being and health of society.

(24) Taking someone's words out of context, even Mr. Sheldon's, can be made to appear undesirable. But his, like yours, is but one opinion and while the most vocal does not speak for all homosexually gai people as your opinion does not speak for God nor even most Christians.

(25) After a hundreds of years of unfounded antichristian religious prejudice and a hundred years of intense legal and social homophobic in which "Christian" Faith Merchants brands a child of God a criminal simply for being born, is it any wonder that it takes time to reacclimatize to freedom?

(26) After a hundreds of years of unfounded antichristian religious prejudice and a hundred years of intense legal and social homophobic in which "Christian" Faith Merchants brands a child of God a criminal simply for being born, is it any wonder that it takes time to reacclimatize to freedom and above all, teach people that God never once abandoned them only the Sadducees and Pharisees of man's religion?

(27) The extension of equal freedoms and responsibilities to all of God's children has always been disturbing to Satan and his followers

(28) The application, interpretation and ramifications of this study are highly questionable. To suggest it is troubling that a young, naive and immature individual hasn't yet been influenced by peer and parental prejudices in forming an intractable image of the self is a very pernicious dogma of Satan. Objectivity always requires an open mind, not a closed. intractable mind. Children should be discourages from engaging in heterosexual experimentation. Clean, healthy homosexuality does not produce an unplanned and unwanted new life. Unclean and unhealthy heterosexuality transmits diseases and creates life before children are ready.

You who profess a belief in God are quick to deny His power and influence. Is not this the age when you don't want children to experiment heterosexually? This is precisely the very reason and one of the purposes for which God created and ordained homosexuality!

(29) Satan will always find agents to accomplish his nefarious plans of limiting man's freedom and the judgment. Opposition is not necessary in an educational atmosphere of truth, freedom and objectivity

(30) The word "Marriage" has been bastardized or properly applied to explain a "marriage between two corporations." Now, according to Mr. Sheldon's definition, all those marriages must be annulled, struck down and invalidated because a marriage is only between a man and a woman. The only oxymoron is attaching the word "Reverend" to Louis P. Sheldon. Jeremiah's warning in Jeremiah 23:1-4 is very applicable to you even in our day. I call on you to repent this very day for your sin is more grievous before God than that of the inhabitants of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

(31) The first act of you and Satan's attempt to destroy the constitution of the United States. It was prophesied that the Constitution of the United States would hang by a thread. Now I understand how you and Satan will bring this about.

(32) The bill is just common sense for Satan and the antichrists

(33) Equal Rights for each and everyone of God's children whether white or black, American or Russian, male or female, homosexual or heterosexual is not a right that can be created or destroyed by man, only recognized or withheld

(34) Christ said it best., Matthew 15:7-9

7 [Ye] hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.

A Response to California Assemblyman William J. Knight

Defense of Marriage Act (A Satanic Attempt to Deny People Civil Rights)

Jack Kemp, A Born-Again Liberal

Russia, Be Kind to your History or it Won't be Kind to You