Tell lawmakers you oppose same-sex marriage
Gaylord Merryweather
The lame-duck session of our state Legislature is upon us, which must
mean the issue of same-sex marriage is on the front burner again. The
two must somehow be yoked together.
The state Senate is expected to vote Thursday on a bill that would
change the definition of marriage in New Jersey to include the
homosexual community. Lawmakers would not bring it up during regular
sessions because too many people might be paying attention to Trenton
and would raise a great battle cry against such an absurd proposal. So
while the citizens are focused on Christmas shopping and such, maybe
they can sneak it through just like they did for getting same-sex civil
unions passed.
We've been asking for years for the legislators to put the question on a
ballot and let the people decide on such an important change in our
society, but they know what the outcome would be and they won't let that
happen. So far, 31 states have put the question on a public ballot and
all 31 states have turned it down. The state of Maine is the latest; the
people voted to overturn the decision their legislators made regarding
this issue. Let the people decide! This republic we live in is a
representative form of government. And the legislators are supposed to
uphold the Constitution of the United States and reflect the will of the
people. It is obvious New Jersey legislators have their own agenda and
could care less what the people want.
The truth of the matter is that the civil union bill gave all the same
rights to homosexual couples that any heterosexual couple has. The New
Jersey Equality group wants you to think otherwise, but they are not
being truthful in the matter. Under the New Jersey Civil Union Law
passed in 2006, same-sex couples in civil unions are guaranteed the same
rights and protections, including hospital visitation rights, adoption
rights, and health and insurance benefits. The "equality people" seem to
think if they keep telling lies long enough and loud enough that people
will start believing them.
I am not taking this public stand for myself. However this comes out, it
will not affect me personally in any way. I will continue my 43-year
marriage until death parts us. My concern is for my grandchildren and
future generations that could be plagued with a society that adopts
same-sex marriage as acceptable and normal. The truth is that same-sex
attraction can be prevented and changed. There is no such thing as a
"gay gene." We must stop lying to our children. Already our public
school system is indoctrinating our children to accept the concept of
two mommies or two daddies as appropriate in our society. This provides
fodder for good people to rise up in favor of school vouchers so that
parents can choose how their children are taught. The teachers union is
being controlled by the same people who are behind this legislation. But
that's another topic for another day.
I want to use whatever influence I have to make sure that the silent
majority hears the side that believes we should not change the
centuries-long tradition that marriage is between a man and a woman. To
change such a long-term understanding of marriage to accommodate a small
minority of the population seems ludicrous. Of the 8,600,00-plus
individuals living in New Jersey, 37.2 percent are joined in
one-man/one-woman marriage relationships. Conversely, 0.04 percent of
New Jerseyans have entered into civil unions. The truth is that a small
minority of homosexuals has taken advantage of civil unions, and that
most are not interested in formalizing their relationships. It is only
the activists who want this bill. The face that this minority is well
financed and influential is what makes it such a public issue. My point
is, if something so foundational to society is radically redefined to
serve four one-hundredths of a percent of the population, then that can
hardly be qualified as true equality.
President Obama has stated that America is not a Christian nation. He
added that it's not a Jewish nation, nor a Muslim nation. The point was
that America is a nation that includes people of many different
religions. Whether we adhere to the Old Testament, the New Testament or
the Qur'an, the teaching of the definition of marriage is the same --
the union of one man and one woman. It is the teaching of all the major
religions of the world. But the majority of people who are citizens of
this country call themselves Christians. The hallways of most of the
government buildings in Washington, D.C., are engraved with scriptures
from the Holy Bible. Since our beloved Constitution was framed out of
biblical principals, a legitimate point can be made that from God's
word, the Judeo-Christian opinion is that God's blessing is on the
marital covenantal relationship between a man and a woman. We can thumb
our nose at God and choose another way, but there will be consequences
to pay. "God is not mocked, whatever a man sows he will also reap,"
(Galatians 6:7). In this case, whatever a state or nation sows, it also
will reap. Maybe the reaping has already begun.
What shall we do? For those who care about this, the hour has come. The
Senate committee cleared the bill Monday. The full Senate could vote on
the measure as soon as Thursday.
Use telephone calls and e-mails to communicate what your opinion is to
your state senators and assemblymen. It's too late for letters. The
names, e-mails and telephone numbers for lawmakers are on our Web site,
www.chestnutag.org. The New Jersey Family Policy Council has led the
charge in this matter. A visit to their Web site would be beneficial for
more facts (www.njfpc.org).
I'm proud of Sen. Jeff Van Drew, who has stated that if it comes to the
Senate floor he would vote against it. Assemblymen Nelson Albano and
Matt Milan have made the same statement. These men are not voting along
party lines, but are voting their conscience. This takes courage in the
face of great pressure.
The Senate president, the assembly speaker and the sitting governor (all
Democrats) are pushing hard for the passage of this bill. Pressure from
the people will cause other senators and assemblymen to seriously
consider how they vote on this issue. Elections will be coming, and the
people will remember.
The Rev. Ralph E. Snook
Vineland
anonymous
> marriage until death parts us. My concern is for my grandchildren and
> future generations that could be plagued with a society that adopts
> same-sex marriage as acceptable and normal. The truth is that same-sex
> attraction can be prevented and changed.
Why stop there, sir, if you know so much about homosexuality. How many
of your daughters have married converted ex-gay homoesxuals?
> There is no such thing as a
> "gay gene."
We all know there is no gay gene. The are two heterosexual couples who
produce a homosexual every tenth offspring in society. How
heteorsexuals do it isn't clear, but they are successful and
consistent. The numbers don't lie.
> We must stop lying to our children. Already our public
> school system is indoctrinating our children to accept the concept of
> two mommies or two daddies as appropriate in our society.
As any child knows, you don't need to be married or have a marriage
license to produce offspring.
> This provides
> fodder for good people to rise up in favor of school vouchers so that
> parents can choose how their children are taught.
Private schools can teach whatever they want and they do teach all sorts
of things in
christian schools.
> The teachers union is
> being controlled by the same people who are behind this legislation. But
> that's another topic for another day.
>
> I want to use whatever influence I have to make sure that the silent
> majority hears the side that believes we should not change the
> centuries-long tradition that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Don't worry, sir, a man will always be able to marry a woman who earns
less money, has less education and and the woman will always be able to
divorce the guy and walk away with half the assets of the marriage for
nothing more than washing the skid marks from his dirty underwear.
> To
> change such a long-term understanding of marriage to accommodate a small
> minority of the population seems ludicrous.
You, sir, are entitled to your opinion.
> Of the 8,600,00-plus
> individuals living in New Jersey, 37.2 percent are joined in
> one-man/one-woman marriage relationships. Conversely, 0.04 percent of
> New Jerseyans have entered into civil unions. The truth is that a small
> minority of homosexuals has taken advantage of civil unions, and that
> most are not interested in formalizing their relationships. It is only
> the activists who want this bill.
Most homosexuals don't want to get married. But that doesn't mean that
homosexuals globally don't want equal rights as can be found in Canada
for all its citizens regardless of their sexual orientation.
> The face that this minority is well
> financed and influential is what makes it such a public issue. My point
> is, if something so foundational to society is radically redefined to
> serve four one-hundredths of a percent of the population, then that can
> hardly be qualified as true equality.
Well, again that is your view and you are entitled to it. In Canada
Muslim, Jews,
First Nation and East Indians are entitled to live their life according
to their beliefs. All Canadians must wear a motorcycle helmet or a
Military helmet as the case maybe but East Indians are entitled to wear
a turban according to their religion. That is a very small minority,
but in Canada it isn't about numbers, it is about the civil rights of
all Canadians.
>
> President Obama has stated that America is not a Christian nation. He
> added that it's not a Jewish nation, nor a Muslim nation. The point was
> that America is a nation that includes people of many different
> religions. Whether we adhere to the Old Testament, the New Testament or
> the Qur'an, the teaching of the definition of marriage is the same --
> the union of one man and one woman.
That is awesome and it appears that is the way the law will stay.
rochrist
Fuck off, poser.