You Call This 'Respect'?

It's called the "Respect" for Marriage Act of 2009, but -- like most bills backed and driven by the far fringe of the Democratic Party -- even the name is a lie.

HR 3567, whatever you want to call it, is a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (which protects every state's right to recognize only marriage between one man and one woman.)  Moreover, it provides federal recognition for any marriage recognized in any state.

In short, it is the Last Big Push the gay rights lobby needs to achieve one of its most cherished goals -- nationwide legalized same-sex marriage.

If that doesn't bother you, fine.  Let it happen.

But if you are one of those 60-90% of the American people across the United States who believe marriage is between one man and one woman, you had better get moving.  This bill leaves the entire definition open-ended.  Welcome to the new age of polyandry and intergenerational sex.  Not only will states be  coerced by judicial fiat into accepting marital forms the people reject (as has already been done in Massachusetts and attempted in many others), no state into which such a couple moves will be allowed to treat them as anything but a normal married couple.

Now, the gay rights lobby is going to try to tell you that all this will only affect same-sex couples, and it won't bother your marriage or your family one little bit.

But that, as well, is a complete lie.  They wouldn't want it if it didn't have a more public effect.  Because the goal is not to protect private behavior.  The goal of the gay rights lobby is, and always has been, to change society and force it to accept their "lifestyle choice" as a legal and moral equivalent to traditional, heterosexual marriage -- or, as we've called it for thousands of years, "marriage."

It is not enough to obtain the same rights and privileges that actual married couples have.  It is not enough to have unique protections against perpetrators motivated by aversion to what from ancient times has been recognized in most cultures as aberrant sexual behavior.  In addition, gay rights activists demand something that no other minority group is required to be given -- blanket approval of their behavior and unquestioning acceptance of their intellectual and moral arguments.

Once this legislation passes, no state's individual Defense of Marriage Act will stand past the first opportunity the Court gets to strike it down.  Once this legislation passes, books about gay adoptive penguins will not be found only in the far reaches of liberal school systems.  They will be everywhere.  The Administration is already moving this direction.  This year's "bullying" curricula are not targeted at those who taunt the skinny kid for wearing glasses, but at those who look askance at the high school boy with a beard and a dress.  The new "school safety czar," Kevin Jennings, (excuse me, I mean the head of the "Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools) is the founder of the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network -- and has every intention of carrying his agenda into the national public school system.

This is it, people.  Every other battle the marriage protection movement has held the line on will be lost if this is passed.  All that is needed to bring down "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is the first case to argue that you can't keep "married" gays out of the service unless you ban all married people.  All laws preventing gay adoption will be struck as discriminatory.

Moreover, anything that touches the federal government or any kind of federal funding -- everything from your land-grant university's married housing to every IRS benefit that is associated with marriage -- will be restructured to fit the new federal open definition of "marriage."

This is the fight, boys and girls.  This is where Christian conservatives will take the hill or be buried under it.  Call your Senator.  Call your Congressman.  Demand town halls.  Demand a hearing.  This isn't an amendment (and it doesn't need to be, because every time a Federal Marriage Amendment came up, the cowards on the Hill voted it down.)  It doesn't require any states to ratify it (and few of them would, considering that more than forty states have passed marriage protection amendment laws of one kind or another -- eleven in 2004 alone).  It is more permanent than a Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, and more far-reaching in its own way than Cap and Trade or the Health Care bill.

When radical feminists tried to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s, it seemed a done deal until an unknown conservative lady lawyer started calling legislators and making speeches.  Phyllis Schlafly single-handedly killed the ERA.  We need a Phyllis Schlafly today, but we don't have the luxury of seven years to work it all out. This bill is in process today.  It is not an amendment.  It does not require your permission-but it can be stopped by your vocal opposition.

If "blue dog Democrat" means anything, it better mean protection of traditional marriage.  Because without all the Republicans and some of the Democrats, this legislation is a done deal.

We need our Phyllis.  We need people willing to put pressure to bear on the Congressmen and the Senators who have birthed this abomination and those who are so much as considering endorsing it.  We need fifty-one courageous Senators to step forward and brave the cries of "intolerance" and the bricks  that will inevitably be hurled their way (not brickbats-these people throw real bricks; ask the cops who were at the Stonewall riots). We need an understanding that the history of the gay rights movement is one of deception and violent pressure.

Time is short, and the stakes are as high as they've ever been on this issue.  Don't let this happen.  Tell your public servants to obey the voice of the people and protect marriage.

We don't need this kind of "respect."