This is proof that voting for a Liberal simply because he aligns with some of your views will still burn you! When voters in NJ voted for Democrat James E. McGreevey, they had no idea they were also voting for so-called gay marriage, but in fact they were. Of course if given a vote, the people of NJ would outlaw morally depraved efforts to place anything but one man and one woman into an institution with the name “marriage”. Just as is happening all across this nation and Thank God will soon happen here in Tennessee. The voters in NJ voted for McGreevey because they thought the Liberal was someone they agreed with, but now they have been burned. And many in NJ still don’t even realize it was him that burned them.
Yesterday Dr. Michael Savage uncovered that McGreevey loaded up the NJ Supreme Court with pro-gay activist judges. Of the 4 judges in the majority of the 4-3 ruling, that voted for homosexuals to be treated as if they were heterosexual. 3 of those judges were appointed by none other than Liberal Democrat and formerly down-low gay sex at highway rest stops James E. McGreevey. (Yes heterosexual fornication is also a sin, but McGreevey was engaging in depraved unnatural activity with any man he could get his hands on. While he had a wife and kids at home!) McGreevey claimed he was against gay marriage, to stealthily win the Governorship and then stacked the court with judges that would favor it. Everyone knew he was a Liberal Democrat and simply hoped he was not “that Liberal”. The bottom line is that all candidates prove to be a bit more Liberal once in office than they told voters they were when running for office. So if a candidate seems to be fairly Liberal like McGreevey, you have to assume he’s actually a far Left Liberal, willing to allow all manner of sin to be not just allowed, but actually encouraged by the state with special recognition, licensing and benefits.
Of the judges on the NJ Supreme Court 3 were nominated by McGreevey and 4 by former Republican Governor Christine Todd Whitman. Only one of Withman’s appointed judges sided with McGreevey’s picks. At 75% she did pretty good! I’m not saying Whitman is very Conservative, because I never felt she was, but she is more of a Conservative than McGreevey. Savage details it all here on his web site.
The bottom line is that the people of NJ need to press for the ability to amend their state’s constitution to end this mess. And everyone across the nation should press for a Constitutional amendment that affirms state recognized marriage in America can only be between one man and one woman. As I continually mention, Utah was not allowed into the Union until that state and its largest religious body denounced polygamy. Certainly they would not have been permitted with gays calling themselves married. America has always been against so-called gay marriage, to the point of it being so obvious that nobody felt a need to waste paper on making laws to outlaw it before now. Keep in mind there were laws against fornication and sodomy. America had a level of sexual morality, that homosexual-activists are trying to tear away. Americans regardless of their race or status do not want gays calling themselves “married” and if Americans want to stop it they will need to eventually do so on the federal level. Because if not, the gay activists will press their own claim on the federal level. Just as immoral baby killers pressed the federal courts about the issue of abortion when some states outlawed it. Pro-gay Liberals will do the same with this issue of who can be called “married” in America. The attitude of Americans against gays’ efforts is far stronger than even the effort to prevent the intentionally targeted killing of babies in the womb. So there is no shortage of people who are against the pro-gay lobby. But those who are against that lobby must press the case to the highest level or the pro-gay lobby will.
Also, legislative bodies need the ability to be able to over-ride a court ruling with a 2/3 majority vote. This will ensure in cases where courts grossly overstep their bounds, the issue can be swiftly corrected. The NJ court did not uphold law, they made it. And the people need a means to press for removal of such insane rulings. Savage feels the judges themselves should be removed. Down here in the South, we vote for our judges to obtain and maintain their posts. So it’s very easy for us to remove the ones who don’t act right. Maybe that’s why you have not seen any Southern court ruling for gays to call themselves “married”.
The gay lifestyle is, unnatural, unhealthy and unproductive. Which is why Jesus said:
Mark 10:6-9 (New King James Version)
|
Hear Michael Savage speaking about NJ and issues of sexual morality using the audio link below.
Michael Savage on NJ and sexual morality - WMA Audio (Size: 682 KB)
(If linking, please link to this post, not the audio file. For the sake of bandwidth there will be no other formats made.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Independent Conservative - Copyright 2008 - Copyright Notice
[powered by WordPress.]
30 queries. 0.312 seconds
October 26th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
A church is free to “marry” just about anything it wants to but the state has the right to recognize only certain kinds of unions. Those specific state sanctioned unions should be the type of union that benefits the state. The union between man and woman benefits the state since it is the best environment in which to raise children.
You cannot build a city, state or nation on the foundation of gay “marriage” just look at how the childless populations of liberal cities like San Fran or states like Vermont are shrinking due to a lack of children. What are these states going to do when it comes to the next generation of citizens? Are they going to count on newly immigrated individuals to take the place of natural born citizens who have a much stronger tie to the community?
Simply put, it is in the state’s best interest to promote two parent male, female households and is has every right to discriminate in favor of real marriage.
It is legal to discriminate on the basis of sex…(e.g. the draft, public nudity restrictions, pregnancy leave)…you just cannot discriminate of the basis of race. So the people who want to compare gays to blacks can just stuff it. It’s not the same thing and never was.