MariaRegina
10th February 2004, 04:49 AM
February 9, 2004
Beloved Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
As a nation we are potentially headed towards a potential catastrophe that will change life as we know it in the United States. What I refer to is the radical homosexual agenda to redefine marriage. This is not a personal issue. We leave it to God to judge those outside of the Church for their personal behavior. We cannot allow an activist judiciary change our culture. This redefinition will not stop at the present goal of a 'union of two' of the same sex, it is the gateway to polygamy and 'group marriage.' Our children will be targeted for more aggressive indoctrination in government schools and traditionally minded Christian congregations will be harassed.
I ask you to please take the time to read the letter below and act upon it.
In Christ,
+Metropolitan Moses
>
> Dear Despota,
>
> Most people are simply unaware of how close America is to radically redefining marriage, an institution of God, and the foundation of civilization and democracy. Yesterday, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts eliminated any small doubt that remained about same-sex (homosexual) marriage in that state. Nothing short of full-fledged marriage will suffice, the court said. This decision brings same-sex marriage to every state in the nation, including yours.
>
> Homosexuals have a right to live as they choose; but they do not have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society in a vain attempt to gain moral approbation for their lifestyle. There are only two ways to head off the seemingly inexorable march of the courts toward the radical redefinition of marriage in complete defiance of the will of the people -- change the members on the Court or pass a constitutional amendment. Stripping the jurisdiction of the federal courts before the Lawrence decision would have been a good idea. Now such a law would not help us at all. A majority of Americans, therefore, now favor a constitutional amendment (see http://www.allianceformarriage.org/reports/030304/030304.htm).
>
> Congress will soon be deciding on the right text for a constitutional amendment setting forth that marriage must be between a man and a woman.
>
> At the time it was written, I supported the Musgrave Federal Marriage Amendment (see http://www.contenderministries.org/law/linkpages/09052003hjr56text.php), but the legal landscape has radically changed. Two things have happend. First, the Lawrence decision has been issued (see http://www.sodomylaws.org/lawrence/lawrence.htm) -- any federal law, any state statute, and any state constitutional provision that opposes homosexuality is in jeopardy because of the principle of federal constitutional supremacy. Second, "civil unions" that make homosexual couples legally recognized "spouses" and give them all the rights of married couples, have burst onto the scene in several states.
>
> I now support the Insititution of Marriage Amendment. What is the difference between the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Institution of Marriage Amendment? The FMA protects only the "word" marriage, allowing for "civil unions", "domestic partnerships", etc. (see http://www.allianceformarriage.org/reports/fma/colorchart.cfm). The IMA, on the other hand, protects the "institution" of marriage by limiting the use of all government power to enact same-sex marriages and their look-a-likes, civil unions.
>
> I urge you to support the Institution of Marriage Amendment by contacting:
>
> (1) your U.S. Congressman, (click here to find your Congressman)
> (2) both of your U.S. Senators (click here to find your Senators); and
> (3) the White House.
>
> Tell them: "The time is now for a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. We want a stop to same-sex marriage and we want a stop to civil unions. The Musgrave text is unacceptable. Please support the Institution of Marriage Amendment."
>
> Although it is important to call every Congressman and Senator, right now the focus should be on Republicans and the White House. They are going to be the ones who decide what the text looks like.
>
> The time is short! The decision on the text will be made in the next few days. This may be the only time in U.S. history that we can stop the "gay rights" (homosexual) movement from obtaining full rights of marriage, by whatever name it is called.
>
> Please take action now! Thank you for your support.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> M
> ______________________________________________________
>
> Consequences of the Legalization of Homosexual Marriage
>
> Some legal scholars predict it would take at least a decade to begin to grasp the full extent of the social, moral, and legal implications of redefining the most fundamental social institution in society. The following should therefore be viewed as only a partial listing of the probable consequences of the legalization of homosexual marriage.
>
> * Further erosion and devaluation of the institution of marriage.
> * Promotion of homosexuality in public and private schools via homosexual curricula, re-education programs and hate speech regulations, and taxpayer-funded homosexual activism.
> * Requirement that businesses provide sex partner subsidies to homosexual employees.
> * Expansion of homosexual adoption.
> * Deprivation of parental rights.
> * Application of federal and state civil rights legislation to any forms of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
> * Increased government funding for organizations that promote homosexuality.
> * Persecution of faith-based charities.
> * Persecution of traditional religious institutions.
Beloved Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
As a nation we are potentially headed towards a potential catastrophe that will change life as we know it in the United States. What I refer to is the radical homosexual agenda to redefine marriage. This is not a personal issue. We leave it to God to judge those outside of the Church for their personal behavior. We cannot allow an activist judiciary change our culture. This redefinition will not stop at the present goal of a 'union of two' of the same sex, it is the gateway to polygamy and 'group marriage.' Our children will be targeted for more aggressive indoctrination in government schools and traditionally minded Christian congregations will be harassed.
I ask you to please take the time to read the letter below and act upon it.
In Christ,
+Metropolitan Moses
>
> Dear Despota,
>
> Most people are simply unaware of how close America is to radically redefining marriage, an institution of God, and the foundation of civilization and democracy. Yesterday, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts eliminated any small doubt that remained about same-sex (homosexual) marriage in that state. Nothing short of full-fledged marriage will suffice, the court said. This decision brings same-sex marriage to every state in the nation, including yours.
>
> Homosexuals have a right to live as they choose; but they do not have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society in a vain attempt to gain moral approbation for their lifestyle. There are only two ways to head off the seemingly inexorable march of the courts toward the radical redefinition of marriage in complete defiance of the will of the people -- change the members on the Court or pass a constitutional amendment. Stripping the jurisdiction of the federal courts before the Lawrence decision would have been a good idea. Now such a law would not help us at all. A majority of Americans, therefore, now favor a constitutional amendment (see http://www.allianceformarriage.org/reports/030304/030304.htm).
>
> Congress will soon be deciding on the right text for a constitutional amendment setting forth that marriage must be between a man and a woman.
>
> At the time it was written, I supported the Musgrave Federal Marriage Amendment (see http://www.contenderministries.org/law/linkpages/09052003hjr56text.php), but the legal landscape has radically changed. Two things have happend. First, the Lawrence decision has been issued (see http://www.sodomylaws.org/lawrence/lawrence.htm) -- any federal law, any state statute, and any state constitutional provision that opposes homosexuality is in jeopardy because of the principle of federal constitutional supremacy. Second, "civil unions" that make homosexual couples legally recognized "spouses" and give them all the rights of married couples, have burst onto the scene in several states.
>
> I now support the Insititution of Marriage Amendment. What is the difference between the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Institution of Marriage Amendment? The FMA protects only the "word" marriage, allowing for "civil unions", "domestic partnerships", etc. (see http://www.allianceformarriage.org/reports/fma/colorchart.cfm). The IMA, on the other hand, protects the "institution" of marriage by limiting the use of all government power to enact same-sex marriages and their look-a-likes, civil unions.
>
> I urge you to support the Institution of Marriage Amendment by contacting:
>
> (1) your U.S. Congressman, (click here to find your Congressman)
> (2) both of your U.S. Senators (click here to find your Senators); and
> (3) the White House.
>
> Tell them: "The time is now for a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. We want a stop to same-sex marriage and we want a stop to civil unions. The Musgrave text is unacceptable. Please support the Institution of Marriage Amendment."
>
> Although it is important to call every Congressman and Senator, right now the focus should be on Republicans and the White House. They are going to be the ones who decide what the text looks like.
>
> The time is short! The decision on the text will be made in the next few days. This may be the only time in U.S. history that we can stop the "gay rights" (homosexual) movement from obtaining full rights of marriage, by whatever name it is called.
>
> Please take action now! Thank you for your support.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> M
> ______________________________________________________
>
> Consequences of the Legalization of Homosexual Marriage
>
> Some legal scholars predict it would take at least a decade to begin to grasp the full extent of the social, moral, and legal implications of redefining the most fundamental social institution in society. The following should therefore be viewed as only a partial listing of the probable consequences of the legalization of homosexual marriage.
>
> * Further erosion and devaluation of the institution of marriage.
> * Promotion of homosexuality in public and private schools via homosexual curricula, re-education programs and hate speech regulations, and taxpayer-funded homosexual activism.
> * Requirement that businesses provide sex partner subsidies to homosexual employees.
> * Expansion of homosexual adoption.
> * Deprivation of parental rights.
> * Application of federal and state civil rights legislation to any forms of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
> * Increased government funding for organizations that promote homosexuality.
> * Persecution of faith-based charities.
> * Persecution of traditional religious institutions.