Document text
- Subscribe - Contact Us - Rate Card - Place an Ad Archives Revels Classifieds Real Estate Menu Guide Wedding Weather Subscribe Contact Us October 4, 2005 "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." – Declaration of Independence as originally written by Thomas Jefferson, 1776. ME 1:29, Papers 1:315 Who grants the RIGHT to marry … government or God? From the RIGHT Side Mike Green In the ongoing war declared by gay activists upon American society over the past quarter-century, we have witnessed an evolution in their systemic encroachment upon the institution of marriage. Once upon a time gays fought against rampant persecution and eventually found a sympathetic public responding to their legitimate appeal. There are laws on the books today that cover the spectrum of insolent human behavior in this society; and what the laws don’t cover, all of the religions seek to instill as an overall catch-all … love one another. But neither law nor religion could stem the growing tide of anti-gay attitudes and behavior in America exhibited by many otherwise law-abiding and so-called religious folk. “We want just to be left alone,” cried many gay activists. Well … not really. Following successive legal battles that overturned sodomy laws and riding a wave of public sympathy during the outbreak of a short-lived AIDS epidemic, gay activists sought to change this society into one that didn’t just allow gays to be left alone, but one that would also accept and even encourage the nation’s youth to pursue sexual liaisons and relationships that would defy past paradigms and openly attack the legitimacy of marriage as a religious institution containing rigid boundaries created by God. Using high-profile celebrities and wielding enormous power in the industries of influence (film, fashion, media, politics and Hollywood), the movement to gag America with gay lifestyles produced a sort of gay “chic,” complete with parades to display pride; and ushered in a new generation that experimented with gay sex in like manner to the ‘60s generation that experimented with drugs. Playing upon the heartstrings of a sympathetic public reeling from guilt as it began to emerge from the darkness of an era when black people were routinely treated worse than animals by many hate-filled individuals hiding behind the façade of a Christian God-fearing populace, gay activists embraced yet another method of unraveling the stigma of godless lifestyles in which they were intertwined … the Civil Rights Movement. Emulating the steps toward equal rights taken by a disenfranchised portion of the population that had endured centuries of inhumane treatment, the gay movement risked distancing sympathetic blacks when it equated social stigmas and violent attacks suffered by gays over the past 25 years to the institutionalized racism that had crippled generations of blacks on the heels of centuries of Holocaust-type experiences that affected literally tens of millions of slaves and their descendents. When one examines the horrors of the black experience in America, including the impact of routine raping of black women and children, the emasculating demeaning torturous treatment of boys and men, the infectious disease-ridden living and working conditions, the enormous amount of fear and death, not to mention the fact that black people were regarded as mere property and owned nothing (not even dignity), it is understandable why black Civil Rights leaders would not support those activists in the gay community who were washing themselves in the blood of black families that paid an enormous price for freedom and opportunity in this country. Nevertheless, gay activists found their niche in “civil rights” and have continued to make progress through state legislatures, court proceedings, marches, parades and even civil disobedience through unlawful marriage ceremonies. Today we see state after state forced to defend the will of the people by instituting laws protecting the institution of marriage , while those who attack it on all sides fill the coffers of politicians and the dockets of courts with a wide variety of attempts to overturn the laws the people continue to uphold. Oregon has not been spared in the onslaught conducted by radicals who are committed to changing the social face, intellectual focus, moral perspective and religious acceptance of gay lifestyles in this society through tiny incremental steps. Measure 36 was a piece of legislation passed by Oregonians in November of last year that amended the state constitution to legally recognize marriage only between one man and one woman. It was one of the ways in which the public responded to gay activist demands that religious people set aside religious beliefs and accept the gay worldly perspective of how we ought to live as a society. Senate Bill (SB) 1000 was yet another attempt by marriage marauders earlier this year to usurp the will of the people and force all Oregonians, under the authority of law, to conform to the whims of a few. Initiated and encouraged by governor Ted Kulongoski (who, at last check, was supposed to uphold the laws rather than operate as an arm of a special interest group), the bill found itself dumped at the end of the last session of the state legislature and left at the doorstep like a jilted date. Still, the gay activists continue their push and will likely sooner or later, break down the door that now creaks and splinters from the weight of their progress, to cross over the marital threshold into wedded bliss. I say God bless them. They worked hard to redefine what rights are in this country. And due largely to a population that has forgotten the historical position of Thomas Jefferson (the writer of the Declaration of Independence and authority on the “rights” of American citizens), gays have convinced people like Oregon’s governor that it is the government that affords rights to the citizenry. But Jefferson differed with such notions and instead wrote that rights come from an authority higher than government: "No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority." Thomas Jefferson to New London Methodists, 1809. ME 16:332 "Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will. This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance." Thomas Jefferson : Legal Argument, 1770. FE 1:376 Inalienable rights are not given nor granted by the government, rather they are gifts from our “Creator,” the “Author of nature” … our “God.” These are the words of Thomas Jefferson himself. "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." Thomas Jefferson : Rights of British America, 1774. ME 1:211, Papers 1:135 "Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?" Thomas Jefferson : Notes on Virginia Q.XVIII, 1782. ME 2:227 Our government, a necessary evil, is relegated to the task of simply securing and protecting those natural rights afforded to us by God. "Natural rights [are] the objects for the protection of which society is formed and municipal laws established." Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1797. ME 9:422 The problem the gay activists have is not totally with the position of the defenders of marriage and religious beliefs, but rather they oppose the boundaries of marriage set by God. Gay activists are engrossed in a debate with God. Given that the debate boils down to a matter of beliefs, I acknowledge that gays have the right to believe whatever they will. God granted that right to us all, whether one chooses to believe that or not. Therefore, I have no qualms about gay activists exercising their freedom of belief and freedom of lifestyle choices. Jefferson didn’t seem to mind either. "The manners of every nation are the standard of orthodoxy within itself. But these standards being arbitrary, reasonable people in all allow free toleration for the manners as for the religion of others." Thomas Jefferson to Jean Baptiste Say, 1815. ME 14:262 Yet, many conservatives perceive that gay activists do not merely desire to live and let live, but rather petition Christians to endorse, support, accept as good, and teach Christian children that gay and lesbian lifestyles are equal to lifestyles encouraged by Judaism and Christianity … just simply a different choice that isn’t good or bad. That influence is profoundly destructive as it undermines the core teachings of Judeo-Christian living and the basis of marital commitments as ordained by God. In order for Christians to accept the perceptions in which the world engages in relationships, Christians must reject the teachings of Jesus Christ. Gay activists claim that their lifestyles are indeed equal to heterosexual relationships and marital partnerships. In a world devoid of God, that argument rings true. But for Christians, the debate goes to the heart of what they believe and what their children will believe. For if the gay activists are right, then Christian teachings are wrong. Christians counter the gay activists’ claim of inequality by noting that marital boundaries are apportioned equally to all men and women. After all, God provided both gays and non-gays the liberty to live as each may choose, inside or outside of His boundaries. None, however, are given permission to engage in sexual relationships outside of the boundaries of marriage … despite the freedom all have to choose such lifestyles. God did not provide any “right” to marry those of the same sex, and government has no such authority. Yet, today society debates the issue of marriage as if it is a right that some authority forgot to extend to gays. It appears that some gay and lesbian activists today seek approval of their lifestyle. Gay activists may not intentionally send the message that they desire the endorsement of God, but they send a strong message to those who believe in the Judeo-Christian God that the church ought to embrace the gay lifestyle. It reveals to some degree a measure of uncertainty, as many gay activists seek validation through governmental and church authorities. That is not to say all gays and lesbians seek such confirmation. Many people, regardless of chosen lifestyle are perfectly comfortable living as they choose without permission or validation from God or government. But, the debate over same-sex marriage rages on because of the enormous amount of organized actions taken by gay activists to ensure no area of our society is left untouched by their presence and voice. It is an endeavor one can only presume seeks acceptance by society as a whole, which includes both religion and government. According to Jefferson, however, the government doesn’t possess the power to over rule God and extend rights to anyone. The government can only protect those inalienable rights granted to all by our “Creator," the "Author of nature" ... "God.” It seems that gay activists are not satisfied with the end roads they have made in such a short time. They do not seem to be satisfied with mere acceptance by society and the opportunity to live in peace side-by-side with those who disagree with their lifestyles. Instead, the gay movement seeks to abolish any differentiation that exists and blur the lines of behavior and relationships currently considered “right” and “wrong.” Hollywood constantly provides us with glimpses of a society that embraces gay and alternative lifestyle cultures through presentations of such ideals in sitcoms, dramas and films depicting gay dilemmas as they exist and to some degree how the writers believe things could be or ought to be. There is no way around it; the gay activist movement is seeking some sort of approval or confirmation. That begins with gaining validation through an authority and finding a way to persuade such authority to grant gays and lesbians “equal rights.” Currently all gays have the right to marry the opposite sex. That is equal under the law. But the gay movement isn’t simply about being protected under current laws, but rather changing those laws to confirm and condone alternative lifestyles by linking gay and lesbian activists’ agendas with a race of formerly subjugated people, thereby intertwining itself inexplicably with the Civil Rights Movement of the past in the mind of the public today. The notion that “gay rights” has anything to do with “civil rights” fought for by blacks is a misnomer. Blacks fought for rights that Jefferson spoke of … those inalienable rights granted by God. Blacks didn’t demand the government change the laws to accommodate a special dispensation to accommodate our lifestyles . Chances are there were gays and lesbians within black America during the time equal rights were being sought. Yet, there was no cry for “gay rights” from within black America then … or today. And certainly there was no comparison of the petition for government confirmation of an exercised behavior and choice of relationship partner, to the fight for government recognition of an already lawful and God-given right to equal treatment that was being denied to people based solely upon the color of their skin. Many gay activists today seek to empower government to take control over marriage, redefine it, and extend it to them. They fail to realize that marriage existed long before this government. It doesn’t belong to the government. As Jefferson declared, government’s job is to secure and protect the inalienable rights granted by God … one of which is marriage. The government doesn’t have the authority to venture into the world of religion and begin legally defining or redefining anything. Unfortunately, the problem in society today is that government has indulged in an extra-constitutional policy of capitalizing on marriage through the granting of licenses and extension of so-called “benefits.” This incursion into a realm even the founding fathers regarded as outside of the legal duties of government has inadvertently placed government in a precarious perch atop a precipice of appeasement. It must now maintain a balance between the manner in which it treats out-of-wedlock heterosexual couples and out-of-wedlock gay couples. Operating under a law of equal treatment, it must capitulate to the gay activist movement that demands equality. By considering heterosexual couples “common-law married” based upon an arbitrarily set period of time, it logically follows that government must also acknowledge the same for gays. And given the fact that government now deems itself the authority that grants citizens the ability to marry, it finds itself in the unenviable position of usurping the authority of God and capitulating to the lawful demands of gays for equal treatment under the law. If the government refuses, it stands accused of unequal treatment of a segment of the population. The government may continue its charade of catering to the people’s will in a democratic process, but only for a limited time. Therefore, since the government wishes to play God, it must eventually make the difficult decisions that were once foregone conclusions throughout society. And as we the people become more and more dependent upon government to provide us with direction in every aspect of life, our leaders will someday come to rue the day they endeavored to encroach upon the inalienable rights of the people and remove God from His rightful post as the Supreme Authority in America. Mike Green is an award-winning columnist and author. From the RIGHT Side is a web-only column published by the Daily Tidings. To respond to this column send email to [email protected]. Only those responses containing the writer's name, city and phone number (for verification purposes only) will appear on our site. Letters to the Editor and Guest Forums should be e-mailed in text-only format to [email protected]. Please include your address and a daytime phone number where you can be reached for confirmation. Submissions cannot have run in any other publication. Letters are limited to 250 words, Guest Forums are limited to 600 words, and may be edited for length, content and clarity. DailyTidings.com Home Page Archives | Revels | Classifieds | Real Estate Guide | Weather | Subscribe | Contact Us Copyright 2005 Ashland Daily Tidings and Ottaway Newspapers All Rights Reserved Deep Muscle Stimulator Ceramic Piggy Banks FREE Entertainment Guide Women's & Men's Slippers Accelerate Weightloss Products Backpacks Generic Viagra Vegas Travel Guide Search Engine Optimization Sportsbook Absinthe Supply Student Loans Hotel & Airline Reservations African Safari Hammocks Helzberg Diamonds Online Casinos Community Bonus Casino King of Spirits ink cartridges Mortgage Calculator Security Systems Mailing Lists Click Here Advertisement .:Advertisements:. Site Search: RESOURCES - Mail Tribune News - ODOT Road Cams