God bless the Alabama Supreme Court for understanding that America was a country founded under God, in particular, the necessity for obedience to the "laws of nature and of nature's God", per the Declaration of Independence, for the sake of the common good as opposed to the anarchy of the Godless!
Gary Morella
______________________
Alabama Supreme Court Halts Issuance of Counterfeit Marriage Licenses
BarbWire
Montgomery, AL – In a historic ruling, the Supreme Court of Alabama in a 7-1 decision has affirmed natural marriage and ordered Alabama’s probate judges to immediately stop issuing illegal marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The ruling represents a significant shift of momentum in the same-sex marriage agenda, and is a direct challenge to the orders of U.S. District Court Judge Callie Granade, who in January purported to overturn Alabama’s marriage laws. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court offers the most forceful and clearly articulated rebuttal to date of the imaginative arguments for same-sex “marriage” employed by federal courts.
“The ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court is historic, and is one of the most researched and well reasoned opinions on marriage to be issued by any court in the country,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel.
The ruling grants in full Liberty Counsel’s emergency mandamus petition. In the petition and in a subsequent brief, Liberty Counsel demanded on behalf of its Alabama clients – Alabama Policy Institute (“API”) and Alabama Citizens Action Program (“ALCAP”) – that Alabama’s probate judges obey Alabama’s Constitution and laws. As a result of this ruling, Alabama’s probate judges must immediately cease issuing illegal same-sex marriage licenses.
Four probate judges answered Liberty Counsel’s petition, arguing that Alabama citizens have no right or interest in preserving natural marriage. The respondents also claimed that API and ALCAP have no standing, and that the Court has no jurisdiction over this case. But the Supreme Court soundly rejected those arguments, concluding that standing and jurisdiction were proper and citing a truckload of precedent. The Court said:
“It could not be clearer that the public — the people of Alabama — have an interest in the respondents’ faithful compliance with Alabama’s marriage laws.” Reinforcing the point, the Court added, “It is beyond question that the duty to issue marriage licenses only in accordance with Alabama law is a duty owed to the public for its benefit. The failure to perform that duty damages the framework of law and institutions the people have chosen for themselves.”
The unlawful issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples by Alabama probate judges was the result of federal Judge Callie Granade’s January rulings, when she purported to determine that Alabama’s marriage laws violate the U.S. Constitution. Though she had no power to extend her ruling to the entire state, some activist probate judges across Alabama who were not subject to her ruling took it upon themselves to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, in clear violation of Alabama law.
Today’s Supreme Court ruling, however, not only restores the rule of law in Alabama, but also forcefully challenges and methodically dismantles the opinion of Judge Granade and other judges who have erroneously held that the U.S. Constitution requires states to redefine marriage:
We find that the provisions of Alabama law contemplating the issuance of marriage licenses only to opposite-sex couples do not violate the United States Constitution. ...
What [Judge Granade] has done is to declare an entirely new concept of “marriage” a fundamental right under the guise of the previously understood meaning of that institution. It is, plainly and simply, circular reasoning—it assumes the conclusion of the matter, i.e., that marriage as newly defined is a fundamental right, in the premise of the question without acknowledging that a change of terms has occurred.
On its way to affirming natural marriage, the Alabama Supreme Court made several key observations about the historical and societal underpinnings of the marriage institution:
“Marriage, as a union between one man and one woman, is the fundamental unit of society.”
“Marriage has always been between members of the opposite sex. The obvious reason for this immutable characteristic is nature. Men and women complement each other biologically and socially.”
“One legitimate interest behind the laws (among others) is recognizing and encouraging the ties between children and their biological parents.”
“Government is concerned with public effects, not private wishes. The new definition of marriage centers on the private concerns of adults, while the traditional definition focuses on the benefits to society from the special relationship that exists between a man and a woman, i.e., the effects for care of children, the control of passions, the division of wealth in society, and so on.”
“If love was the sine qua non of marriage, then polygamy also would be constitutionally protected ...”
“What ultimately is at issue is the entire edifice of family law ... an edifice that has existed in some form since before the United States was even a country. ... It is no small thing to wipe away this edifice with a wave of the judicial wand.”
“The legitimacy of the judiciary is undermined when a judge legislates from the bench or usurps the power reserved to the states regarding natural marriage,” said Staver. “This decision of the Alabama Supreme Court is very well reasoned, which is quite rare from today’s courts,” he added. “The decision not only affirms natural marriage but also restores the rule of law,” Staver concluded.
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore took no part in the Court’s decision.
Three States File Bills to Circumvent ‘Gay Marriage’ Rulings by Federal Courts
Stopping the juggernaut of madness. MassResistance working with activists in all three States, and key legislators
February 22, 2015 - In the national “gay marriage” battle, the state legislatures in Oklahoma, Texas, and South Carolina are now taking active steps to fight back. Legislators in all three states have filed bills to defund and prohibit any creation or recognition of “gay marriages” by the government, no matter what the federal courts may decide. MassResistance has been working with the people involved in each of those states!
And it's not standing still. The bill in Oklahoma was passed in committee this past week and is on its way to the House floor! Plus, other states (such as Utah) are possibly in the wings to follow. Among other things, this could rekindle a constitutional battle that goes back to the founding of America.
The ‘gay marriage’ juggernaut
In just the past two years we’ve all watched in horror as liberal activist federal judges have arrogantly “struck down” laws and constitutional amendments upholding real marriage in 23 states around the country. Some of these amendments were passed by an 80% margin.
Although the US Supreme Court has announced it will be ruling on “gay marriage” this summer, it’s completely unpredictable what will happen. Many people rightly fear that the political momentum toward this madness – even among “good” Supreme Court judges” – is out of control. Will they rule (against all reason) that “gay marriage” is a protected right across America? They just might.
The recent legal attempts by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore to stop “gay marriage” in that state, though “overruled” by a federal judge” was a bold stand that inspired a lot of people, adding to the momentum of this fight!
Cutting off State funds... the power of the purse!
Pro-family legislators in all three states have filed similar bills -- that cut off all state funding (including pay and pension) from any state employee or activity that processes a “gay marriage” certificate, or legitimizes, enforces, or recognizes, a “gay marriage” in any way.
This idea of establishing “state sovereignty” on an issue not assigned to Congress in the U.S. Constitution -- or a clearly illegal act by the federal government -- is not new. And it has predictably set off a firestorm among homosexual activists and the local liberal media, reaching all the way to the New York Times and US News and World Report.
Here’s what’s happened so far in the three States:
1. Oklahoma
[In 2004, 76% of Oklahoma voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by U.S. District Court Judge Terence C. Kern on Jan. 14, 2014.]
Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern is a fearless pro-family advocate. (She spoke at the MassResistance banquet in 2011.) Rep. Kern filed bill HB 1599 in January. The bill says:
State Representative Sally Kern
B. No taxpayer funds or governmental salaries shall be paid for any activity that includes the licensing or support of same-sex marriage. No employee of this state and no employee of any local governmental entity shall officially recognize, grant or enforce a same-sex marriage license and continue to receive a salary, pension or other employee benefit at the expense of taxpayers of this state. No taxes or public funds of this state shall be spent enforcing any court order requiring the issuance or recognition of a same-sex marriage license.
C. The courts of this state shall dismiss any challenge to any portion of the Preservation of Sovereignty and Marriage Act, with an award of costs and attorney fees to defendants. No employee of this state and no employee of any local governmental entity shall violate or interfere with the implementation of this act and continue to receive a salary, pension or other employee benefit at the expense of taxpayers of this state.
D. If a judge violates this act, the judge shall be removed from office pursuant to Section 1 of Article VIIA of the Oklahoma Constitution.
This past Tuesday (Feb. 17) the Oklahoma Legislature’s Judiciary and Civil Procedure Committee approved the bill by 5-3, sending it to the House floor. Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern is nationally known as a fearless and principled pro-family advocate.
The Committee session consisted of the members grilling Rep. Kern about the bill and its effects. You can tell that some of them are lawyers and a bit skittish about the legalisms of taking on the federal government. She handled it very well. Here is the audio of the Judiciary Committee questioning Rep. Kern about her bill, from the OK State House website:
AUDIO of the Judiciary Committee legislators questioning Rep. Sally Kern about her bill, then voting to pass it. (35 min. 44 sec.)
We spoke with Rep. Kern on Friday. The homosexual activists have started their predictable campaign of disinformation and intimidation to try to stop the bill But in Oklahoma the bill seems popular enough among lawmakers to withstand that.
The session is relatively short, so things should start to move fast. The deadline for the House to deal with it is March 12. The Senate deadline is April 29. Bills must be signed the Governor by May 29.
2. Texas
[In 2005, 76% of Texas voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by Federal District Judge Orlando Garcia on Feb. 26, 2014.]
Things got started earlier in Texas. In September a major pro-family activist in Texas phoned MassResistance and asked us to be on two state-wide conference calls on the effects of “gay marriage” on a state. In October, the Texas group followed up by sending copies of our video, “What gay marriage did to Massachusetts,” to 15,000 pastors across Texas. All this was to lead up to the bill’s filing.
Representative Cecil Bell
In December, State Rep. Cecil Bell, a great pro-family supporter, filed bill HB 623 in the Legislature. It says:
(c) State or local taxpayer funds or governmental salaries may not be used for an activity that includes the licensing or support of same-sex marriage.
(d) A state or local governmental employee officially may not recognize, grant, or enforce a same-sex marriage license. If an employee violates this subsection, the employee may not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit at the expense of the taxpayers of this State.
(e) Taxes or public funds may not be utilized to enforce a court order requiring the issuance or recognition of a same-sex marriage license.
(f) A court of this State shall dismiss a legal action challenging a provision of this section and shall award costs and attorney’s fees to a person or entity named as a defendant in the legal action.
(g) A person employed by this State or a local governmental entity who violates or interferes with the implementation of this section may not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit.
So far the bill hasn’t been assigned to a committee. We were told that MassResistance would likely be asked to come and testify when it got before a committee. The session ends June 1, so it must pass the House and Senate by then. We were told that the bill’s chances of passing are “very, very good.”
Last October a Texas activist group mailed our DVD on "What 'gay marriage' did to Massachusetts" to 15,000 pastors across the state!
3. South Carolina
[In 2006, 78% of voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel on Nov. 12, 2014.]
In December, State Rep. Bill Chumley filed bill H 3022 in the General Assembly. It says:
Representative Bill Chumley
(B) No state or local governmental employee officially shall recognize, grant, or enforce a same-sex marriage license. If an employee violates this subsection, the employee must not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit at the expense of the taxpayers of this State.
(C) No taxes or public funds may be utilized to enforce a court order requiring the issuance or recognition of a same-sex marriage license.
(D) A court of this State shall dismiss a legal action challenging a provision of this section and shall award costs and attorney's fees to a person or entity named as a defendant in the legal action.
(E) No person employed by this State or a local governmental entity who violates or interferes with the implementation of this section may continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit.
On Christmas Eve, MassResistance got an email from an activist in South Carolina asking us if we could mobilize our supporters in that state to fight for the “sovereignty” bill that they had just filed, for the upcoming session starting in January. South Carolina State Rep. Bill Chumley is another fearless and principled legislator. Mass¬Resistance has been working with him on strategy issues.
On January 19, MassResistance got a phone call from Rep. Chumley, and talked about strategy issues. Since then we’ve been involved with several calls about moving the bill forward. Support around the state seems to be growing quite fast.
The bill has been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, though the hearing has not yet been scheduled. The 2015 session ends on June 4.
Utah: Waiting in the wings?
[In 2006, 78% of Utah voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by U.S. District Court Judge Robert J. Shelby on Oct. 20, 2013.]
We’ve been working with Utah activists and a few state legislators on the marriage issue since the judge’s ruling in October, 2013. In October 2014, major activists crafted a Utah resolution of state sovereignty and presented it to the Legislature. State sovereignty has always been a big issue in Utah. Activists are pressuring pro-marriage legislators to introduce text of a “sovereignty” bill similar to the others. So far the politicians have not pulled the trigger on that. We’re continuing to work with statewide activists and helping the best we can.
Why this MUST be done
Many people feel that the time for a such a confrontation by the states and the people is greatly overdue. We hope that this is the beginning of an awakening nationwide before it's too late.
Probably even more than the infamous Roe v Wade ruling in 1972, the unbelievable distortion of the Constitutional that federal judges have been using to force "gay marriage" on states is itself lawless. In case after case these judges use an utterly absurd reading of the 14th Amendment, peppered with pronouncements about current marriage law not having a "rational basis" (as if that were a legitimate basis for court decisions) to reach their predetermined conclusions. Many of these judges are radical Obama appointees, and others are strongly influenced by them. They are clearly far more interested in being right politically than judicially.
The “gay marriage” putsch by the federal courts on the people is only the latest example -- stretching back to the early days of the nation -- of a judiciary often willing to ignore the plain text of the law and the Constitution in favor of the prevailing political winds.
All of this is combined with the ceding of enormous power to the Courts by Congress and the American people over the years. It is something that the founding fathers (particularly John Adams) greatly feared and tried to protect us against.
Thus, the people must now deal with a judiciary that had already become arbitrary, oppressive, and very powerful -- and now is infiltrated by radical people whose aim is to bring a progressive brand of "social justice" to America rather than the actual legal justice that a free society must have to exist.
If nothing else, we must not forget that it was the states that existed first and created the federal government -- not the other way around. Bravo to Oklahoma, Texas, and South Carolina for understanding that. Let's hope it's not too late.
God bless the Alabama Supreme Court for understanding that America was a country founded under God, in particular, the necessity for obedience to the "laws of nature and of nature's God", per the Declaration of Independence, for the sake of the common good as opposed to the anarchy of the Godless!
Gary Morella
Counterfeit Marriage Licenses
BarbWire
Montgomery, AL – In a historic ruling, the Supreme Court of Alabama in a 7-1 decision has affirmed natural marriage and ordered Alabama’s probate judges to immediately stop issuing illegal marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The ruling represents a significant shift of momentum in the same-sex marriage agenda, and is a direct challenge to the orders of U.S. District Court Judge Callie Granade, who in January purported to overturn Alabama’s marriage laws. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court offers the most forceful and clearly articulated rebuttal to date of the imaginative arguments for same-sex “marriage” employed by federal courts.
“The ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court is historic, and is one of the most researched and well reasoned opinions on marriage to be issued by any court in the country,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel.
The ruling grants in full Liberty Counsel’s emergency mandamus petition. In the petition and in a subsequent brief, Liberty Counsel demanded on behalf of its Alabama clients – Alabama Policy Institute (“API”) and Alabama Citizens Action Program (“ALCAP”) – that Alabama’s probate judges obey Alabama’s Constitution and laws. As a result of this ruling, Alabama’s probate judges must immediately cease issuing illegal same-sex marriage licenses.
Four probate judges answered Liberty Counsel’s petition, arguing that Alabama citizens have no right or interest in preserving natural marriage. The respondents also claimed that API and ALCAP have no standing, and that the Court has no jurisdiction over this case. But the Supreme Court soundly rejected those arguments, concluding that standing and jurisdiction were proper and citing a truckload of precedent. The Court said:
“It could not be clearer that the public — the people of Alabama — have an interest in the respondents’ faithful compliance with Alabama’s marriage laws.” Reinforcing the point, the Court added, “It is beyond question that the duty to issue marriage licenses only in accordance with Alabama law is a duty owed to the public for its benefit. The failure to perform that duty damages the framework of law and institutions the people have chosen for themselves.”
The unlawful issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples by Alabama probate judges was the result of federal Judge Callie Granade’s January rulings, when she purported to determine that Alabama’s marriage laws violate the U.S. Constitution. Though she had no power to extend her ruling to the entire state, some activist probate judges across Alabama who were not subject to her ruling took it upon themselves to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, in clear violation of Alabama law.
Today’s Supreme Court ruling, however, not only restores the rule of law in Alabama, but also forcefully challenges and methodically dismantles the opinion of Judge Granade and other judges who have erroneously held that the U.S. Constitution requires states to redefine marriage:
We find that the provisions of Alabama law contemplating the issuance of marriage licenses only to opposite-sex couples do not violate the United States Constitution. ...
What [Judge Granade] has done is to declare an entirely new concept of “marriage” a fundamental right under the guise of the previously understood meaning of that institution. It is, plainly and simply, circular reasoning—it assumes the conclusion of the matter, i.e., that marriage as newly defined is a fundamental right, in the premise of the question without acknowledging that a change of terms has occurred.
On its way to affirming natural marriage, the Alabama Supreme Court made several key observations about the historical and societal underpinnings of the marriage institution:
- “Marriage, as a union between one man and one woman, is the fundamental unit of society.”
- “Marriage has always been between members of the opposite sex. The obvious reason for this immutable characteristic is nature. Men and women complement each other biologically and socially.”
- “One legitimate interest behind the laws (among others) is recognizing and encouraging the ties between children and their biological parents.”
- “Government is concerned with public effects, not private wishes. The new definition of marriage centers on the private concerns of adults, while the traditional definition focuses on the benefits to society from the special relationship that exists between a man and a woman, i.e., the effects for care of children, the control of passions, the division of wealth in society, and so on.”
- “If love was the sine qua non of marriage, then polygamy also would be constitutionally protected ...”
- “What ultimately is at issue is the entire edifice of family law ... an edifice that has existed in some form since before the United States was even a country. ... It is no small thing to wipe away this edifice with a wave of the judicial wand.”
“The legitimacy of the judiciary is undermined when a judge legislates from the bench or usurps the power reserved to the states regarding natural marriage,” said Staver. “This decision of the Alabama Supreme Court is very well reasoned, which is quite rare from today’s courts,” he added. “The decision not only affirms natural marriage but also restores the rule of law,” Staver concluded.Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore took no part in the Court’s decision.
Read more here
‘Gay Marriage’ Rulings by Federal Courts
Stopping the juggernaut of madness. MassResistance working with activists in all three States, and key legislators
February 22, 2015 - In the national “gay marriage” battle, the state legislatures in Oklahoma, Texas, and South Carolina are now taking active steps to fight back. Legislators in all three states have filed bills to defund and prohibit any creation or recognition of “gay marriages” by the government, no matter what the federal courts may decide. MassResistance has been working with the people involved in each of those states!
And it's not standing still. The bill in Oklahoma was passed in committee this past week and is on its way to the House floor! Plus, other states (such as Utah) are possibly in the wings to follow. Among other things, this could rekindle a constitutional battle that goes back to the founding of America.
The ‘gay marriage’ juggernaut
In just the past two years we’ve all watched in horror as liberal activist federal judges have arrogantly “struck down” laws and constitutional amendments upholding real marriage in 23 states around the country. Some of these amendments were passed by an 80% margin.
Although the US Supreme Court has announced it will be ruling on “gay marriage” this summer, it’s completely unpredictable what will happen. Many people rightly fear that the political momentum toward this madness – even among “good” Supreme Court judges” – is out of control. Will they rule (against all reason) that “gay marriage” is a protected right across America? They just might.
The recent legal attempts by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore to stop “gay marriage” in that state, though “overruled” by a federal judge” was a bold stand that inspired a lot of people, adding to the momentum of this fight!
Cutting off State funds... the power of the purse!
Pro-family legislators in all three states have filed similar bills -- that cut off all state funding (including pay and pension) from any state employee or activity that processes a “gay marriage” certificate, or legitimizes, enforces, or recognizes, a “gay marriage” in any way.
This idea of establishing “state sovereignty” on an issue not assigned to Congress in the U.S. Constitution -- or a clearly illegal act by the federal government -- is not new. And it has predictably set off a firestorm among homosexual activists and the local liberal media, reaching all the way to the New York Times and US News and World Report.
Here’s what’s happened so far in the three States:
1. Oklahoma
[In 2004, 76% of Oklahoma voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by U.S. District Court Judge Terence C. Kern on Jan. 14, 2014.]
Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern is a fearless pro-family advocate. (She spoke at the MassResistance banquet in 2011.) Rep. Kern filed bill HB 1599 in January. The bill says:
State Representative Sally Kern
C. The courts of this state shall dismiss any challenge to any portion of the Preservation of Sovereignty and Marriage Act, with an award of costs and attorney fees to defendants. No employee of this state and no employee of any local governmental entity shall violate or interfere with the implementation of this act and continue to receive a salary, pension or other employee benefit at the expense of taxpayers of this state.
D. If a judge violates this act, the judge shall be removed from office pursuant to Section 1 of Article VIIA of the Oklahoma Constitution.
Read entire bill HB 1599 here.
This past Tuesday (Feb. 17) the Oklahoma Legislature’s Judiciary and Civil Procedure Committee approved the bill by 5-3, sending it to the House floor. Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern is nationally known as a fearless and principled pro-family advocate.
The Committee session consisted of the members grilling Rep. Kern about the bill and its effects. You can tell that some of them are lawyers and a bit skittish about the legalisms of taking on the federal government. She handled it very well. Here is the audio of the Judiciary Committee questioning Rep. Kern about her bill, from the OK State House website:
AUDIO of the Judiciary Committee legislators questioning Rep. Sally Kern about her bill, then voting to pass it. (35 min. 44 sec.)
We spoke with Rep. Kern on Friday. The homosexual activists have started their predictable campaign of disinformation and intimidation to try to stop the bill But in Oklahoma the bill seems popular enough among lawmakers to withstand that.
The session is relatively short, so things should start to move fast. The deadline for the House to deal with it is March 12. The Senate deadline is April 29. Bills must be signed the Governor by May 29.
2. Texas
[In 2005, 76% of Texas voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by Federal District Judge Orlando Garcia on Feb. 26, 2014.]
Things got started earlier in Texas. In September a major pro-family activist in Texas phoned MassResistance and asked us to be on two state-wide conference calls on the effects of “gay marriage” on a state. In October, the Texas group followed up by sending copies of our video, “What gay marriage did to Massachusetts,” to 15,000 pastors across Texas. All this was to lead up to the bill’s filing.
Representative Cecil Bell
(c) State or local taxpayer funds or governmental salaries may not be used for an activity that includes the licensing or support of same-sex marriage.
(d) A state or local governmental employee officially may not recognize, grant, or enforce a same-sex marriage license. If an employee violates this subsection, the employee may not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit at the expense of the taxpayers of this State.
(e) Taxes or public funds may not be utilized to enforce a court order requiring the issuance or recognition of a same-sex marriage license.
(f) A court of this State shall dismiss a legal action challenging a provision of this section and shall award costs and attorney’s fees to a person or entity named as a defendant in the legal action.
(g) A person employed by this State or a local governmental entity who violates or interferes with the implementation of this section may not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit.
Read entire bill HB 623 here.
So far the bill hasn’t been assigned to a committee. We were told that MassResistance would likely be asked to come and testify when it got before a committee. The session ends June 1, so it must pass the House and Senate by then. We were told that the bill’s chances of passing are “very, very good.” Last October a Texas activist group mailed our DVD on "What 'gay marriage' did to Massachusetts" to 15,000 pastors across the state!
3. South Carolina
[In 2006, 78% of voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel on Nov. 12, 2014.]
In December, State Rep. Bill Chumley filed bill H 3022 in the General Assembly. It says:
(C) No taxes or public funds may be utilized to enforce a court order requiring the issuance or recognition of a same-sex marriage license.
(D) A court of this State shall dismiss a legal action challenging a provision of this section and shall award costs and attorney's fees to a person or entity named as a defendant in the legal action.
(E) No person employed by this State or a local governmental entity who violates or interferes with the implementation of this section may continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit.
Read entire bill H 3022 here.
On Christmas Eve, MassResistance got an email from an activist in South Carolina asking us if we could mobilize our supporters in that state to fight for the “sovereignty” bill that they had just filed, for the upcoming session starting in January. South Carolina State Rep. Bill Chumley is another fearless and principled legislator. Mass¬Resistance has been working with him on strategy issues.
On January 19, MassResistance got a phone call from Rep. Chumley, and talked about strategy issues. Since then we’ve been involved with several calls about moving the bill forward. Support around the state seems to be growing quite fast.
The bill has been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, though the hearing has not yet been scheduled. The 2015 session ends on June 4.
Utah: Waiting in the wings?
[In 2006, 78% of Utah voters passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It was “struck down” by U.S. District Court Judge Robert J. Shelby on Oct. 20, 2013.]
We’ve been working with Utah activists and a few state legislators on the marriage issue since the judge’s ruling in October, 2013. In October 2014, major activists crafted a Utah resolution of state sovereignty and presented it to the Legislature. State sovereignty has always been a big issue in Utah. Activists are pressuring pro-marriage legislators to introduce text of a “sovereignty” bill similar to the others. So far the politicians have not pulled the trigger on that. We’re continuing to work with statewide activists and helping the best we can.
Why this MUST be done
Many people feel that the time for a such a confrontation by the states and the people is greatly overdue. We hope that this is the beginning of an awakening nationwide before it's too late.
Probably even more than the infamous Roe v Wade ruling in 1972, the unbelievable distortion of the Constitutional that federal judges have been using to force "gay marriage" on states is itself lawless. In case after case these judges use an utterly absurd reading of the 14th Amendment, peppered with pronouncements about current marriage law not having a "rational basis" (as if that were a legitimate basis for court decisions) to reach their predetermined conclusions. Many of these judges are radical Obama appointees, and others are strongly influenced by them. They are clearly far more interested in being right politically than judicially.
The “gay marriage” putsch by the federal courts on the people is only the latest example -- stretching back to the early days of the nation -- of a judiciary often willing to ignore the plain text of the law and the Constitution in favor of the prevailing political winds.
All of this is combined with the ceding of enormous power to the Courts by Congress and the American people over the years. It is something that the founding fathers (particularly John Adams) greatly feared and tried to protect us against.
Thus, the people must now deal with a judiciary that had already become arbitrary, oppressive, and very powerful -- and now is infiltrated by radical people whose aim is to bring a progressive brand of "social justice" to America rather than the actual legal justice that a free society must have to exist.
If nothing else, we must not forget that it was the states that existed first and created the federal government -- not the other way around. Bravo to Oklahoma, Texas, and South Carolina for understanding that. Let's hope it's not too late.
Original by MassResistance here
Related Topics of Interest
____________________________________________________________________________
© 2002- Tradition in Action, Inc. All Rights Reserved