Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The bias against the family is breathtaking!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The bias against the family is breathtaking!





    Commentary: Media provides cover for assault on traditional marriage

    By James C. Dobson
    Special to CNN

    Wednesday, June 28, 2006 Posted: 2134 GMT (0534 HKT)

    Editor's note: James C. Dobson is founder and chairman of Focus on the Family Action. He has a Ph.D. in child development and is author of the best-selling book, "Bringing Up Boys." He's currently working on a follow-up, "Bringing Up Girls."

    COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado (CNN) -- On June 7, the U.S. Senate voted for a second time on an amendment to define marriage in the U.S. Constitution as being exclusively between one man and one woman.

    Again this year, the amendment failed to pass by a wide margin, falling 18 votes shy of a required two-thirds majority. The final tally was 49 in favor, 48 opposed.

    Rarely has there been a greater disconnect between members of the Senate and the American people who put them in power. With the help of the media, which laid down "cover" by claiming voters didn't care about marriage, 40 Democrats, one Independent and seven Republicans turned their backs on this most basic social institution.

    Let's examine the claim that traditional marriage lacks support in the court of public opinion. As it always does when conservative issues are being debated, the liberal press produced a series of trumped-up polls indicating the issue was of no interest nationally. However, there was another "poll" that the media completely ignored. In fact, there were 19 of them. They represented the 19 states in which voters overwhelmingly defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.

    Not one state has chosen by popular vote to permit marriages between homosexuals. Support for the family has been affirmed in every instance.

    In Mississippi, traditional marriage was approved by a whopping 86 percent majority. Other state votes registered similar wide margins: Nevada (70 percent), Arkansas (75 percent), Georgia (77 percent), Kentucky (75 percent), Louisiana (78 percent), Nebraska (70 percent), Missouri (71 percent), Montana (66 percent), North Dakota (73 percent), Ohio (62 percent), Michigan (59 percent), Oklahoma (76 percent), Utah (66 percent), Kansas (70 percent) and Texas (75 percent). Even states considered to be more liberal voted for traditional marriage, including Hawaii (69 percent), Alaska (68 percent) and Oregon (57 percent).

    Indeed, on the day before 48 senators bailed on marriage, a 20th state voted on its own constitutional amendment. It was Alabama, which supported traditional marriage by 81 percent to 19 percent! A search of the database Nexis revealed that not one reference to this dramatic vote in Alabama was published in the print versions of The New York Times or Washington Post. There was virtually no mention of the story in other national newspapers. Yet, each of them devoted considerable coverage to the Senate's defeat of the Marriage Protection Amendment.

    CNN and the mainstream televised news networks uttered hardly a peep about the Alabama decision. Why was the issue buried? Because the "poll" in Alabama and 19 other states didn't match the template put forward by those who wanted the amendment to be crushed. Their bias against the family is breathtaking.

    As for the senators who voted against the amendment, the excuses they gave were pitiful. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-Rhode Island, Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minnesota, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire, and many others thought they had the perfect alibi. They claimed that the issue should be handled at the state level. What hypocrisy!

    All of these senators are smart enough to know that, first, it would create utter chaos to have 50 different definitions of marriage in one country, where every state is required by the Constitution to support the laws of the other 49. Come on, Senator McCain and company. You and your colleagues know better than that.

    Second, senators wanting the states to define marriage are fully aware that the people will not be permitted to make their own decisions. Arrogant activist judges, most of them appointed by President Bill Clinton or President Jimmy Carter, will simply overturn the will of the electorate.

    It has already happened in Nebraska, Georgia and Louisiana. Furthermore, nearly 20 cases in 10 states are currently pending that challenge the traditional definition of marriage. For example, a federal judge in Washington state is considering a challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act. And finally, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority in Lawrence v. Texas, made it clear that he and his colleagues are likely to redefine marriage when given an opportunity.

    The senators who voted against marriage this month knew exactly what they were doing. The truth is they don't give a hoot about the traditional family. The majority of them have voted repeatedly to weaken or undermine this great institution. Check the record.

    Most of them consistently supported the marriage penalty tax, which for 32 years (1969 to 2001) imposed a heavier financial burden on moms and dads struggling to feed and nurture their children. Liberal senators are still trying to re-impose that outrageous surcharge even today.

    So where does the issue go from here? Time will tell. It took William Wilberforce more than 30 years to bring about an end to Britain's slave trade in the 1800s. Unfortunately, we do not have the luxury of a protracted victory.

    If the battle to protect marriage takes even five more years, liberal judges and activists will have destroyed this 5,000-year-old institution, which was designed by the Creator, Himself. Even now, they are close to achieving that coveted objective.

    I ask my fellow Americans to note the senators who did and did not defend marriage in its hour of need, and then to "vote their consciences" in 2006 and 2008. If large numbers of them do so, there could be some new faces in the Congress soon.

    The angst of voters could also result in the election of a president who will fight for the preservation of the family. That would be sweet, indeed.
    What a cook. Maybe Alabama's decision to vote in favor of denying gays equal rights wasn't reported because it's hardly news, it's more of a "DUH! It's ALABAMA!" reaction.
    "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
    Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

  • #2
    I also love his comparison of denying gays equal rights to fighting against the slave trade. Yeah, that makes sense.

    And one of the responses:
    Hear! Hear! First smart thing I've read in a very long time.
    Kathy, Birmingham, Alabama
    "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
    Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

    Comment


    • #3
      Yeah, Alabama isn't a surprise, but I am a bit surprised to see Missouri, Montana, Ohio, and Michigan on the list.

      I'd be interested to know how opinion breaks in California, New York, and the NE.
      (\__/)
      (='.'=)
      (")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.

      Comment


      • #4
        The author of this column has an excellent book riddled with 1-star ratings on Amazon.com called "Marriage Under Fire: Why We Must Win This War!"

        His 11 points are:
        [If same-sex marriage is legalized]

        1 - ...it will quickly destroy the traditional family
        2 - children will suffer most
        3 - public schools in every state will embrace homosexuality
        4 - adoption laws will be instantly obsolete
        5 - foster-care programs will be impacted dramatically
        6 - the health-care system will stagger and perhaps collapse
        7 - Social Security will be severely stressed
        8 - Religious freedoms will almost certainly be jeopardized
        9 - other nations... will follow our lead
        10 - the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed, and
        11 - the culture war will be over, and the world may soon become "as it was in the Days of Noah" (Matt 24:37) (pp. 47-64)

        "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
        Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

        Comment


        • #5
          public schools in every state will embrace homosexuality


          the health-care system will stagger and perhaps collapse


          Social Security will be severely stressed


          other nations... will follow our lead


          “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
          - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

          Comment


          • #6
            He's supposedly a doctor in child psychology, but he doesn't understand the basics of statistics. He looked at countries that have legalized gay marriage and their divorce rate is increasing(!). (much like the US and most western countries...)

            Therefore, gay marriage causes divorce.
            "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
            Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

            Comment


            • #7
              Here's my favorite quote:

              All of these senators are smart enough to know that, first, it would create utter chaos to have 50 different definitions of marriage in one country, where every state is required by the Constitution to support the laws of the other 49. Come on, Senator McCain and company. You and your colleagues know better than that.
              I'm as shocked, SHOCKED to discover there has been chaos in America's marriage laws ever since the founding of the Republic over 200 years ago.

              Actually more, when you think about it. That chaos would date back to 1620, when the first European women arrived in Virginia and hetrosexual people started getting married.

              After nearly four centuries, it's time to end this chaos! Down with federalism! Down with it, I say!

              Ein Volk! Ein Reich! Ein Bushie!
              (...or did I got to far with this last salvo?)

              Comment


              • #8
                And here I was thinking this thread was about the mafia.
                Unbelievable!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Asher
                  His 11 points are:
                  [If same-sex marriage is legalized]

                  1 - ...it will quickly destroy the traditional family

                  How on earth would this effect a hetro-family?
                  2 - children will suffer most

                  How will children suffer? By seeing to people in love? Oh the horror!!!
                  3 - public schools in every state will embrace homosexuality

                  They would embrace it as much as they embrace hetrosexuality.
                  4 - adoption laws will be instantly obsolete

                  OMG NO!!!! New laws might have to be written! We NEVER write new laws!
                  5 - foster-care programs will be impacted dramatically

                  Yes they will. There would alot more couples look at this avenue because its so difficult for same sex marriages to produce children (of course it would be easier if the above new laws were written)
                  6 - the health-care system will stagger and perhaps collapse

                  Why? Because same sex spouses would qualify for heath insurance just like hetro spouses?
                  7 - Social Security will be severely stressed

                  Social Security is still around?
                  8 - Religious freedoms will almost certainly be jeopardized

                  If they aren't part of your religion, how does it threaten your religious freedoms?
                  9 - other nations... will follow our lead

                  Yeah... just like they did with Iraq...
                  10 - the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed, and

                  Why? Becuase it will expose religion as being a waste of time and resources?
                  11 - the culture war will be over, and the world may soon become "as it was in the Days of Noah" (Matt 24:37) (pp. 47-64)

                  Don't try to force your religion on me. Freedom of religion means not having to put up with **** like this.

                  This issue gets me more steamed than the police ones I defend all the time. GRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!
                  Founder of The Glory of War, CHAMPIONS OF APOLYTON!!!
                  '92 & '96 Perot, '00 & '04 Bush, '08 & '12 Obama, '16 Clinton, '20 Biden, '24 Harris

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Asher
                    1 - ...it will quickly destroy the traditional family
                    "Dang. I married a woman when I could have married a guy. We couldda gone to ballgames together...andworn each other's clothes.

                    2 - children will suffer most
                    "Help! Don't make be leave the orphanage for that kind and loving home!!

                    3 - public schools in every state will embrace homosexuality
                    "If all you little brats grow up to practice homosexuality, then in 20 years, I won't have to teach your #@%&! kids."

                    4 - adoption laws will be instantly obsolete
                    Gay marriage = no kids = no adoptions.


                    5 - foster-care programs will be impacted dramatically
                    Still no kids.

                    6 - the health-care system will stagger and perhaps collapse
                    Psst....it already did.

                    7 - Social Security will be severely stressed
                    No kids to grow up to be wage earners -> S.S. goes b.k.

                    8 - Religious freedoms will almost certainly be jeopardized
                    Sorry, there's only so much freedom in this country; so if we give it all to the gays, there's none left over for Christians.

                    9 - other nations... will follow our lead
                    First, it was Muslim polygamy...now U.S. universal monogomy. My God, what's next?!

                    10 - the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed, and
                    And Jesus said exactly what about homosexuality?

                    11 - the culture war will be over, and the world may soon become "as it was in the Days of Noah" (Matt 24:37) (pp. 47-64)
                    But now we have the rainbow no more universal floods

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I am in favor of gay marriage (I think it would be good for the gay people and everyone else). But honestly, most people are heterosexual, and public school sex ed should reflect that.

                      Jon Miller
                      edit: not saying that homosexuality should not be part of sex ed
                      Last edited by Jon Miller; June 29, 2006, 00:33.
                      Jon Miller-
                      I AM.CANADIAN
                      GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'm gay for god
                        To us, it is the BEAST.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Zkribbler
                          Gay marriage = no kids = no adoptions.
                          Still no kids.
                          Less americans to worry about.
                          I've allways wanted to play "Russ Meyer's Civilization"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            As for the senators who voted against the amendment, the excuses they gave were pitiful. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-Rhode Island, Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minnesota, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire, and many others thought they had the perfect alibi. They claimed that the issue should be handled at the state level. What hypocrisy!

                            You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
                            "You're the biggest user of hindsight that I've ever known. Your favorite team, in any sport, is the one that just won. If you were a woman, you'd likely be a slut." - Slowwhand, to Imran

                            Eschewing silly games since December 4, 2005

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              By James C. Dobson
                              Oh, is this for use as toilet paper?

                              -Arrian
                              grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                              The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X