|PRISON PLANET.com Copyright © 2002-2003 Alex Jones All rights reserved.|
|Does Homosexual Marriage Signal America's Final Undoing?
The assault against traditional marriage is now in full swing. Across the country, judges, mayors, legislators, and governors are calling for the legalization and moral acceptance of homosexual marriage. Many people wonder if such an event signals the beginning of America's ultimate demise. It might.
Social and cultural acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle certainly contributed to the collapse of many empires of antiquity, including the Canaanite, Persian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Greek, and Roman empires. In fact, Senator Zell Miller of Georgia recently quoted noted historian Arnold Toynbee on the floor of the U.S. Senate as saying, "Of the 22 civilizations that have appeared in history, 19 of them collapsed when they reached the moral state America is in today." That statement is even more startling when one realizes that the statement was made some 30 years ago! If history is any teacher, one must conclude that the acceptance of homosexuality by any mainstream culture tends to doom that society!
That the United States has chosen to embrace the homosexual lifestyle by granting it legal protection, even political correctness, reveals just how depraved our once great nation has become. Should we now be shocked that homosexual marriage is on the verge of becoming a reality? It was inevitable.
Consider the positions of both major parties on the subject of homosexuality. For years, both Democrats and Republicans have excused and embraced this deviant behavior. Both President Clinton and President Bush have promoted open homosexuals to high public office. Both Clinton and Bush have embraced the "don't ask, don't tell" policy of allowing homosexuals to serve in the U.S. armed forces. Neither party has been willing to clearly denounce homosexual conduct.
President Bush's pro-homosexuality record is especially disturbing considering the fact that he has publicly proclaimed himself to be both a conservative and a Christian. Furthermore, his position on homosexual marriage is full of obfuscation.
While stating his support for a constitutional amendment prohibiting homosexual marriage, President Bush has enthusiastically endorsed "civil unions" for homosexuals. However, can anyone successfully explain the difference between "marriage" and "civil union?" For all practical purposes, they are one and the same.
It should be obvious to everyone that President Bush is playing word games with the American people. He wants the support of both homosexuals and conservative Christians. He isn't the least bit interested in providing bold, decisive leadership for the American people regarding our nation's moral depravity!
Furthermore, instead of merely being "troubled" by all the illegal homosexual marriages being conducted across the country, he should shoulder his responsibility as America's Chief Executive and "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
Back in 1996, Congress overwhelmingly passed and President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law. DOMA clearly states that marriage is only "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife." Under DOMA, a spouse is defined as, "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or wife."
Accordingly, Phyllis Schlafly is correct when she insists that President Bush should instruct the Internal Revenue Service to require joint returns to include proof of lawful heterosexual marriage thereby enabling the IRS to identify and reject joint returns claiming fake marriages. He should also pressure Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (and any other governor) to enforce state laws against sodomite marriage or risk losing federal funds. He should also instruct all federal agencies to energetically enforce compliance with DOMA.
Furthermore, if President Bush was seriously opposed to same sex marriages, he would loudly and loquaciously lobby Congress to pass Rep. John Hostettler's bill (H.R. 3313) to prevent federal courts from overturning DOMA. That he is doing none of the above proves that his support for traditional marriage is shallow at best and perhaps even nonexistent.
Beyond that, the willingness of our political and judicial leaders to embrace homosexuality reveals their rejection of God's moral law and authority. It is no coincidence that within a matter of weeks after the White House and federal courts collaborated to remove the Ten Commandments from the Alabama Judicial Building in Montgomery that the entire nation would be embroiled in a fever pitch effort to legalize same sex marriage. God will not be mocked. When one sows to the wind, he reaps a whirlwind.
By accepting homosexuality, America is now fueling the flames of debauchery. When homosexuality is finally and fully accepted by American law, pedophilia and other more onerous behavior will not be far behind. As such, America is on the verge of a self- induced implosion.
If the American people do not quickly reject the leadership of the two major parties and seek a radical return to moral and constitutional leadership, there is nothing left for America but a steady and certain undoing.
Furthermore, it's not as if the American people have no choice. Michael Peroutka is running for President of the United States on the Constitution Party ticket. He is the only candidate for president that is willing to face the issue of homosexual marriage from both a constitutional and moral perspective.
In fact, people who truly believe in the importance of preserving traditional marriage have only one choice: Michael Peroutka and the Constitution Party. To support either the Democrat or Republican candidate for president is a wasted vote and will only serve to facilitate America's slippery slide toward moral upheaval.