Showing posts with label DOJ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DOJ. Show all posts

Friday, September 09, 2016

Minn. School Sued: OKs Boy Flashing in Girls Room

Several families have filed a federal lawsuit against numerous Obama administration officials and the Virginia (Minnesota) School District for permitting a sexually confused boy to confront half-naked girls in their locker rooms.  After the girls and their parents complained, the school suggested they use a private room, but the boy follows them there repeatedly and harasses them by raising his dress and otherwise exposing himself.
"No student should be forced to use private facilities at school, like locker rooms and restrooms, with students of the opposite sex. No government agency should hold hostage important education funding to advance an unlawful agenda."
For background, read about other parents suing local schools and the Obama administration in North Carolina and in Illinois for open restroom mandates.  Also read Florida School Challenges Obama Transgender Bathroom Regulations

And read Men Allowed in Girls Rooms in Chicago Public Schools





-- From "11 Families Sue School District for Allowing Transgender Student in Female Locker Room" by Teresa Lo, JD Journal 9/8/16

Alliance Defending Freedom [ADF] is fighting a Virginia, Minnesota school district. The conservative group filed a lawsuit on the behalf of 11 families who want to stop the allowance of the opposite sex in their children’s locker rooms, Fox News reports. The lawsuit named Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Virginia School District #706, and Secretary of Education John King Jr. as defendants.

The lawsuit filed said that a transgender student, only identified as Student X, used the female locker rooms and restrooms and participated on girl athletic teams. The ADF said that Student X violated some girls by twerking in their presence, dancing to suggestive songs, and making jokes about a girl’s bra size.

According to the lawsuit, girls who were uncomfortable with Student X were told they could use another locker room. One student, called Plaintiff A, said that she was told she could change in an empty boy’s locker room but Student X followed her in there. Plaintiff A said there was nowhere to go for privacy.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Bathroom Lawsuit Filed Against Virginia H.S." posted at KQDS-TV21 (Duluth, MN) 9/9/16

The ADF lawsuit explains that the [federal] DOE and DOJ are unlawfully redefining the terms of Title IX, something that only Congress can alter, and are illegitimately forcing their political will on all public schools across the nation. As the lawsuit points out, no federal law requires schools to allow boys into girls’ locker rooms or girls into boys’ locker rooms, and other courts have rejected the agencies’ interpretation to the contrary. The lawsuit also explains that the DOE did not comply with key provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act when it adopted its rules.

The complaint explains some of the real concerns of students and parents, such as when a biologically male student who identifies as a female—and who is allowed to enter the girls’ locker room under the district’s policy—went on to dance in the locker room “in a sexually explicit manner—‘twerking,’ ‘grinding’ and dancing like he was on a ‘stripper pole’ to songs with explicit lyrics, including ‘Milkshake’ by Kelis. On another occasion, a female student saw the male student lift his dress to reveal his underwear while ‘grinding’ to the music.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Group sues Virginia school district over restroom policy" by Lisa Kaczke, Duluth News Tribune 9/8/16

"What these girls are asking for is something that for all of American history has been the common-sense presumption, that you have facilities for girls, facilities for boys and any student that is uncomfortable with that — including the transgender student at the heart of this case, (who) they're not uncompassionate to — they would think the best thing would be for this student to have the option to use the ... restroom of (the student's) biological sex or to make one of the single-stall restrooms available for (the student) to use," said Matt Sharp, an attorney with the Arizona-based Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious legal advocacy nonprofit group.

The lawsuit seeks to have the district's policy and the federal guidance declared unlawful, and a permanent injunction issued against both. It also seeks "an award of nominal damages in the amount of one dollar, and compensatory damages" for each plaintiff, along with legal fees.

Virginia Superintendent Noel Schmidt declined to comment Thursday, and the school district's attorney, John Colosimo, couldn't be reached for comment.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Girl in Restroom Attacked by Man — Was He a Woman?

And read 'Sex Change' Surgery is Toddlers' Choice, Schools Say

Thursday, May 12, 2016

N. Carolina Parents Sue Obama's Transgender Agenda

They say they just want to go to the bathroom and take a shower in private!

Parents and students who formed North Carolinians for Privacy have filed a lawsuit in the Raleigh, North Carolina Federal Court to stop President Obama from using billions of taxpayer dollars to hold them hostage to his Gay/Transgender Agenda that demands men be permitted to use girls' restrooms and locker rooms.

"The [U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education] must stop using falsehoods about what federal law requires to threaten student access to educational opportunities and financial assistance."
-- Jeremy Tedesco, Senior Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)
For background, read North Carolina Interrupts Transgender Agenda with New HB2 Law

UPDATE 9/9/16: Minnesota School Sued for Permitting Boy to Flash & Harass Girls in Locker Room

Also read Illinois Parents Sue Obama's Indecent Mandate for their School

And read Florida School Challenges President Obama's Transgender Bathroom Regulations



-- From "Arizona-led group files lawsuit in support of HB2" by Joel Brown, WTVD-TV11 (Raleigh-Durham, NC) 5/11/16

The suit accuses the U.S. Department of Justice and Education of holding federal education money hostage.

The group, North Carolinians for Privacy, argues that federal law does not forbid sex-specific restrooms and that the federal government is bullying North Carolina by threatening to cut federal funding.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "North Carolina students sue U.S. over stance on bathroom access" by Colleen Jenkins, Reuters 5/11/16

The issue of whether transgender people deserve the same federal protections extended to blacks and religious minorities is already before courts in North Carolina.

The Justice Department sued the state on Monday, asking a federal district court to rule that North Carolina was violating the 1964 Civil Rights Act [Title IX] and order it to stop enforcing [the state's new HB2 that provides privacy in restrooms].

North Carolina stands to lose $4.8 billion in funds, mainly educational grants, if it does not back down, according to an analysis by lawyers at the University of California, Los Angeles Law School.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Privacy Group Sues DOJ to Save 'Bathroom Law'" by Dan Mccue, Courthouse News Service 5/11/16

As far as the plaintiffs [North Carolinians for Privacy] are concerned, the defendant departments [of education and justice] are making student aid and other educational funding contingent on students sharing restrooms and locker rooms with members of the opposite sex.

They claim the DOJ and education department have overstepped their authority in redefining sex and gender under Title IX, and that students' constitutional right to privacy would be violated if the state or the University of North Carolina were to bow to federal demands that transgender students be afforded full access to bathrooms that do not comport with the gender identified on their birth certificates.

The group is represented by Jeremy Tedesco, James Campbell, Kristen Waggoner, Joseph LaRue, and Jonathan Caleb Dalton of the Alliance Defending Freedom of Scottsdale, Arizona, David Cortman and J. Matthew Sharp of the Alliance's Lawrenceville, Georgia chapter, and by Deborah Dewart of the Liberty, Life and Law Foundation of Swansboro, North Carolina.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Saturday, May 07, 2016

Illinois Parents Sue Obama: Indecency in Schools

Attorneys representing 73 parents and 63 students in suburban Chicago filed a lawsuit this week against the Obama Administration and the largest high school district in Illinois for colluding to invade the privacy of students in the girls restrooms and locker rooms using new unlawful "transgender rights" edicts.
“It’s important to recognize that there’s a lagging legal framework in the face of rapidly changing social norms.  Our understanding of gender identity is changing, and the law hasn’t kept up.”
-- Francisco Negrón, National School Boards Association General Counsel

"No school should impose a policy like this against the will of so many parents.”
-- Vicki Wilson, Illinois parent and co-founder of Students and Parents for Privacy (lead plaintiff)

“Allowing boys into girls’ locker rooms, a setting where girls are often partially or fully unclothed, is a blatant violation of student privacy. The school district should rescind its privacy-violating policies, and the court should order the Department of Education to stop bullying school districts with falsehoods about what federal law requires.”
-- Jeremy Tedesco, Senior Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom

“To impose such a rule on still-developing teenage girls, as they’re already struggling with puberty’s changes on their bodies and social pressures to look a certain way, undermines their dignity and tells them that their rights don’t matter. This isn’t a message our schools should be sending to our girls.”
-- Jocelyn Floyd, Attorney, Thomas More Society
For background, read Department of Education Demands Communal Nudity in Illinois Public Schools Using Full Force of Federal Government but as of last week a Florida School Challenges President Obama's Transgender Bathroom Regulations

Also read Chicago Schools Force Co-ed Hotel Rooms for Trips

UPDATE 5/12/16: North Carolina Parents & Students Sue Obama's Transgender Agenda

UPDATE 9/9/16: Minnesota School Sued for Permitting Boy to Flash & Harass Girls in Locker Room

Click headlines below to read previous articles:

President Obama's OSHA Teams Up with EEOC to OK Perverts in Employees' Restrooms

Washington, D.C.'s Bathroom 'Bigot Snitch' Law

Homosexual, Lesbian Teachers Arrested for Sex with Students

Lesbian Seminar Teaching Kids How to be Homosexual

Transgenderism Taught to Kindergartners Across America







-- From "Illinois Families Sue Over Transgender Access to Locker Room" by Michael Tarm, Associated Press 5/4/16

Lawyers for Alliance Defending Freedom and Thomas More Society, two conservative groups, filed the 77-page suit Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Chicago on behalf of 51 families with links to Palatine-based Township High School District 211. It names the district and the U.S. Department of Education as defendants.

The battle for access to girls' facilities at William Fremd High School by the transgender student — who was born male but identifies as female — helped spark a national debate last year that has since spread to other districts.

The [new transgender] policy, [the lawsuit] says, causes other girls fear and embarrassment. It adds: They are "afraid they will have to see a male in a state of undress," which, for some, is a "distraction throughout the school day." One girl's anxiety led her to wear gym clothes under her street clothes so she can peel just the outer clothes off in the locker.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Illinois group sues Obama administration over transgender students’ bathroom access" by Emma Brown, Washington Post 5/4/16

A group of Illinois students and parents sued the Obama administration Wednesday over its stance on transgender students’ access to school bathrooms and locker rooms, arguing that the U.S. Education Department is illegally forcing local authorities to let children use facilities that correspond to their gender identity.

The complaint alleges that the federal government has violated students’ fundamental right to privacy and parents’ constitutional right to instill moral standards and values in their children.

The lawsuit represents the first legal challenge to the Obama administration’s interpretation of Title IX, a federal anti-discrimination law, as providing transgender students with the right to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity instead of their biological sex.

Palatine officials — facing the loss of $6 million in federal funding — ultimately decided to allow a transgender student to change in the girls locker room instead of sending her down the hall to a separate facility.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Transgender Restroom Fight Spreads to Illinois" by Jack Bouboushian, Courthouse News Service 5/5/16

Students and Parents for Privacy and three female students sued the U.S. Department of Education, Secretary of Education John King, the Department of Justice, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Cook County, Ill., and the directors of Township High School District 211 in Illinois Federal Court on Wednesday.

"This is a civil rights action to stop the Department of Education and Township High School District 211 from continuing to trample students' privacy and other constitutional and statutory rights by forcing 14- to 17-year-old girls to use locker rooms and restrooms with biological males; and to set aside DOE's ultra vires legislative rule redefining 'sex' in Title IX to include gender identity," the 83-page complaint begins.

"This creates an intimidating and hostile environment for the girl members of Students and Parents for Privacy, some of whom are as young as 14, because Student A - who is biologically a male - actively uses their private facilities at the same times as plaintiffs," the complaint states. "As a direct result of defendants' policies and actions, every day these girls go to school, they experience embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, fear, apprehension, stress, degradation, and loss of dignity because they will have to use the locker room and restroom with a biological male."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Lawsuit filed after transgender student gets locker room access in Palatine" by Duaa Eldeib and Dawn Rhodes, Chicago Tribune 5/5/16

The District 211 transgender student, who has not been identified publicly, initially filed a complaint with the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights alleging that the district discriminated against [Student A] when it denied [him] access to the girls locker room. The district had previously allowed the student to use the girls restroom.

In an unprecedented decision, federal education authorities found that the district had violated Title IX. The district risked losing millions of federal dollars and a possible lawsuit by the federal government if it failed to reach a resolution. In a controversial decision, the district agreed in December to allow the student locker room access and installed privacy stalls. Proponents of the settlement heralded it as a civil rights victory.

The religious liberty group Thomas More Society also is representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which seeks to keep the district from enforcing the locker room agreement and restroom policy and to bar the Department of Education from taking action against the district. The plaintiffs also argue in the suit that the locker room agreement prevents students from practicing the modesty that their faith requires of them.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "NW suburban families file lawsuit in transgender locker room case" by Maudlyne Ihejirika, Chicago Sun-Times 5/4/16

The lawsuit, Students and Parents for Privacy v. United States Department of Education, seeks an injunction against District 211. Headquartered in Palatine, it serves nearly 12,500 students from Palatine, Hoffman Estates, Inverness, Schaumburg and parts of seven other northwest suburbs in five high schools and two alternative high schools.

It also asks the court to declare the policy and the district’s agreement with the Department of Education unconstitutional and illegal under both federal and Illinois law, and to have the court invalidate the department’s interpretation of Title IX’s sex discrimination provisions.

District 211 Supt. Dan Cates said Wednesday that the district affirms and supports the identity of all its students and will stand by the highly publicized agreement it reached last December with the department’s Office for Civil Rights. . . .

“We have implemented the agreement without any reports of incident or issue,” Cates said. “Our students have shown acceptance, support and respect of each other. Individual changing stalls in our locker rooms are readily available to every student and further accommodations that provide even greater privacy remain available upon request.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Obama plans new push for transgender rights in schools" by Caitlin Emma, Politico 5/6/16

The divisive and politically combustible issue of bathroom access for transgender individuals is about to become further inflamed, as the Obama administration is expected in coming weeks to aggressively reinforce its position that transgender student rights are fully protected under federal law, sources told POLITICO.

With the Justice Department already locking horns with North Carolina over the state’s so-called bathroom bill, the administration plans to reaffirm its view that robust protections for transgender students are within the existing scope of Title IX, a federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded education programs and activities. Multiple agencies are expected to be involved.

New guidance on Title IX represents a natural outgrowth of the administration’s aggressive agenda on gender equity and civil rights. In April 2014, guidance issued by the Education Department on sexual violence explicitly mentioned that transgender students are protected under Title IX. LGBT advocates saw it as an important moment for the transgender community, but have wanted the administration to go even further in clarifying the law.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Federal Government Survey Shows 'Sexual Orientation' is Learned Behavior, NOT Genetic

And read Gay Agenda Increases Suicides of Young Men: Study

In addition, read Transgenderism is a 'Delusion' According to Victims and Professionals

UPDATE 6/7/16: PBS Praises Transgender Activism of Atherton High School in Louisville, Kentucky (video)

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

Media, Obama Conspire With Abortionists re: Videos

As a third undercover video was released concerning Planned Parenthood involvement in selling aborted baby organs, the nation's largest abortion provider begged mainstream media outlets to embargo the video.  Meanwhile, the Obama administration defended Planned Parenthood and the right of women to kill their unborn children, and is refusing to investigate the allegations, but rather is considering a plea by top Democrat Nancy Pelosi to persecute the whistleblower pro-life organization that exposed Planned Parenthood's butchery.

The media have also largely ignored thousands of protesters across the nation calling for an end to taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood.


For background, read Planned Parenthood Caught Selling Aborted Babies (includes first two videos)

UPDATE 8/23/15: America Protests Planned Parenthood, Media Ignore

Also read Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!



-- From "Planned Parenthood taps crisis communications firm" by Jennifer Haberkorn and Anna Palmer, Politico 7/28/15

Planned Parenthood has enlisted high-profile Washington public relations firm SKDKnickerbocker as it scrambles to deal with the ongoing scandal and release of a third undercover video Tuesday showing a clinic’s staff handling fetal tissue after an abortion.

SKDKnickerbocker is no newbie to working on Planned Parenthood issues. The Democratically aligned firm is run by well-connected operatives, including Anita Dunn and Hilary Rosen. It also worked with the group during the 2012 election cycle, according to SKDKnickerbocker’s website.

The group circulated a memo to reporters and producers late Monday that discouraged them from airing the undercover videos, arguing that they were obtained under false identification and violated patient privacy.

Planned Parenthood also has lobbying firms Capitol Counsel on retainer. Glover Park Group has also previously done work for the group. Planned Parenthood spent nearly $1.3 million on lobbying during the first six months of 2015, according to federal disclosures.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Planned Parenthood’s PR Firm Is Asking Reporters Not To Air Undercover Video" by Chuck Ross, Reporter, Daily Caller 7/28/15

Politico itself may have gotten SKDKnickerbocker’s message. As flagged by The Federalist, the outlet sent a tweet of its scoop at around noon on Tuesday noting that the PR firm “circulated a memo” to reporters and news producers. That tweet was later deleted, however. Politico did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

SKDKnickerbocker’s memo mirrors language used by Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards in her numerous attempts to discredit the Center for Medical Progress [CMP, the whistleblower pro-life organization].

“This has been a three-year, well funded by the most militant wing of the anti-abortion movement in this country to try to entrap doctors and, of course, highly doctored videos which show absolutely they — doctors repeatedly said, it’s all been edited out, Planned Parenthood does not at all profit from fetal tissue donation, which is an important element of health care research in this country,” Richards said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Planned Parenthood Threatens TV Stations Demanding They Censor Shocking Undercover Videos" by Sarah Zagorski, LifeNews.com 7/28/15

Here’s a portion of their threatening letter:
When your network decides whether to consider this story newsworthy, or whether to use any of this footage at all, we urge you to keep this in mind: The extremists who entered Planned Parenthood labs under false pretenses violated research protocol, and, worse, violated the privacy of patients involved. Those patients’ privacy should not be further violated by having this footage shared by the media.

The storage and examination processes that CMP used to get this footage are medically necessary. It is necessary medical professionals ensure an abortion is complete so that patients do not get an infection. When tissue is donated for medical research, these steps are also necessary for the donations to be completed. It is also medically necessary that researchers evaluate the laboratory procedures of a medical provider for safety standards and best practices.

Some of the conversations and protocols that occur in medical settings and among professional peers can sound jarring when taken out of context. While this can be difficult to hear or watch, it should not be used as an excuse to defund Planned Parenthood.

CMP gained access to Planned Parenthood facilities under false pretenses and filmed without securing approval from the Planned Parenthood staff being filmed or the patients whose privacy is compromised by this secret videotaping. The material should not be aired.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pelosi urges DOJ probe into group targeting Planned Parenthood" by Sarah Ferris, The Hill 7/23/15

“Let’s have an investigation of those people who were trying to ensnare Planned Parenthood in a controversy that doesn’t exist,” [House Minority Leader Nancy] Pelosi said Thursday in her first public remarks about Planned Parenthood since the first undercover video surfaced last week.

“Planned Parenthood has said that they have done nothing illegal,” she said. “They do not ever charge, which would be illegal, for fetal tissue. They have only defrayed the cost of mailing that to someone, which is not breaking the law.”

Her remarks come one day after White House press secretary Josh Earnest also defended the women’s health provider.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch said Wednesday that she [as the Department of Justice] would review “all information” available before deciding to launch a full investigation.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Health chief defends Planned Parenthood amid calls to defund" by Peter Sullivan, The Hill 7/28/15

President Obama’s top healthcare official [Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell] defended federal funding for Planned Parenthood at a hearing on Tuesday as Republicans zeroed in on cutting off its money.

“What I think is important is that our HHS funding is focused on issues of preventative care for women, things like mammograms and cancer prevention screenings,” Burwell told the House Education and the Workforce Committee.

Burwell resisted those calls [from Congress for an investigation], deferring to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

She said that she had not seen the undercover videos but had read about them.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Third graphic Planned Parenthood video released" by Jennifer Haberkorn, Politico 7/28/15

A new undercover video released by opponents of Planned Parenthood on Tuesday includes graphic depictions of a technician sorting through the tissue collected after an abortion.

The latest tape also includes footage of a physician in a laboratory talking with an actor posing as a purchaser of tissue samples. “I think the per-item [pricing] works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it,” she said. The group that made the videos, which calls itself the Center for Medical Progress, identified the physician as Dr. Savita Ginde, who is vice president and medical director of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains in Denver.

The video, the third released by the Center for Medical Progress, includes an interview with a woman who says she used to work at Stem Express, in a Planned Parenthood clinic. “I thought I was going to be just drawing blood, not procuring tissue from aborted fetuses,” Holly O’Donnell, the former procurement technician, said in the video.

Republican lawmakers have called on HHS and the Justice Department to investigate whether Planned Parenthood has broken federal laws preventing the group from profiting on fetal tissue donation.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Anti-abortion activists rally across US as third video targets Planned Parenthood" by Lauren Gambino, UK Guardian 7/28/15

Coinciding with the newest video’s release, anti-abortion activists staged “women betrayed” rallies in dozens of cities around the country to protest the organization. At the US Capitol in Washington, protesters were joined by Republican presidential contenders Ben Carson and Rand Paul, along with several other anti-abortion politicians.

During the rally, Paul announced that he had secured a commitment in the Senate to vote on a bill that would defund the organization before Congress recesses. Republicans face an uphill battle to secure the 60 of 100 senate votes needed to approve the bill – there are 54 Republicans in the Senate and only a handful of anti-abortion Democrats.

David Daleiden, the Center for Medical Progress’s head, has said there are several more videos to be released soon, in addition to between 100 and 200 pages of documents from Planned Parenthood and its “proxies”.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Products of Conception Protest Planned Parenthood in 65 Cities Across U.S." by Samuel Smith, Christian Post Reporter 7/29/15

. . . the Washington, D.C. protest, which was organized by the Students for Life of America, [included] presidential candidates Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson.

Cruz told the crowd that the recent videos display enough evidence to suggest that Planned Parenthood officials have violated federal law and that the Department of Justice should conduct a criminal investigation into the matter.

Carson argued that the recent videos are another sign that the American society is becoming a more "pro-death" and "evil" society. But with the emergence of the videos, Carson said that the opportunity has arisen for moral individuals to recreate a pro-life culture.

Although Cruz and many other Congress members have called on Attorney General Loretta Lynch to authorize the Department of Justice to conduct a full investigation into Planned Parenthood's organ compensation practices, Cruz implied that such an investigation wouldn't happen because of the partisanship of Obama's Justice Department.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Click headlines below to read previous articles:

Over-the-Counter Abortion Paid by ObamaCare: Study

Obama Administration OKs Aborted Baby Brain Experiments

President Obama Asks God to Bless Planned Parenthood

President Obama Touts Abortion, as Americans March Against It

President Obama's Preference for Infanticide Exposed by Georgia Teacher (who is then fired)

UPDATE 7/30/15 - Another undercover video:


UPDATE 8/4/15 - And even more undercover video:


UPDATE 8/12/15 - And still more undercover video:


UPDATE 8/19/15 - And one more undercover video:

Saturday, April 04, 2015

Judge Orders Prisoner Sex Change Paid by Citizens

U.S. District Court Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco ruled that it's unconstitutional to deny Jeffrey Bryan Norsworthy, 51, who has been serving a life prison sentence since 1987, his request for California taxpayers to fund a six-figure sex change surgery so that he can live the rest of his life in prison as Michelle-Lael Norsworthy.
He's a “pleasant-looking woman, slender and coiffed in a ponytail.”
-- Judge Tigar
Also, yesterday, President Obama's DOJ (Eric Holder) told a federal court in Macon, Georgia to provide free hormone therapy to a male cross-dressing prisoner.

UPDATE 6/25/15: President Obama's New 'Free' Sexual Mutilation — Gay Agenda

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

Judge Orders Massachusetts to Pay for Inmate’s Sex-change Surgery

Lawsuit: No Cross-dressing in Connecticut Boys Detention

Minnesota Says Title IX Forces School Boys into Girls' Showers

ObamaCare Pays for 'Transgender' Sexual Mutilation — Gay Agenda

Also read President Obama Floods Gay Agenda with Taxpayers' Money

-- From "Judge orders CA to pay for inmate’s sex change" by Don Thompson, Associated Press 4/2/15

Norsworthy has lived as a woman since the 1990s [in the men's prison] and has what Tigar termed severe gender dysphoria.

“The weight of the evidence demonstrates that for Norsworthy, the only adequate medical treatment for her gender dysphoria is SRS,” Tigar wrote, referring to sex reassignment surgery.

“This would be a first” for California, said Joyce Hayhoe, a spokeswoman for the federal receiver who controls California prison medical care. The cost to taxpayers for such surgery is uncertain, she said.

“It’s several tens of thousands of dollars, possibly close to $100,000, depending on the circumstances. But It’s hard to estimate,” Hayhoe said.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "California prison ordered to grant inmate’s sex change surgery" by Lindsey Bever, Washington Post 4/3/15

However, U.S. District Court Judge Jon S. Tigar in San Francisco said on Thursday that the department denied her request for sex reassignment surgery, or SRS, likely because it has a policy against approving it as a treatment for transgender inmates. He granted a preliminary injunction, telling the prison system to let her have the operation “as promptly as possible.”

“The weight of the evidence demonstrates that for Norsworthy, the only adequate medical treatment for her gender dysphoria is SRS, that the decision not to address her persistent symptoms was medically unacceptable under the circumstances, and that [California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation] denied her the necessary treatment for reasons unrelated to her medical need,” Tigar wrote in his ruling. Denying her the surgery, he said, would violate her constitutional rights.

In 1987, Norsworthy was convicted of murder and sentenced to life behind bars. She is now being held at an all-male prison called Mule Creek State Prison, some 40 miles from Sacramento. Officials have argued that if she has the surgery, keeping her in that facility — or any men’s prison — could put her at risk for sexual assault. Moving her to a women’s prison, they said, could put her or other inmates at risk because she has a history of domestic violence, the AP reported.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "State prison officials ordered to allow sex-reassignment surgery" by Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle staff writer 4/3/15

State prison inmate Michelle-Lael Norsworthy became convinced of her female identity in the mid-1990s and started taking hormone therapy, with prison doctors’ approval, in 2000. In 2009, she was gang-raped by nine inmates in a yard at the male prison and was infected with hepatitis C. Now 51, Norsworthy suffers sleeplessness, panic attacks and other anxiety symptoms associated with the condition known as gender dysphoria.

The evidence indicates that “prison officials were deliberately indifferent to her serious medical need,” said U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar. He said officials had disregarded the recommendations of Norsworthy’s treating physicians and instead had assembled their own dubious medical reports to justify a blanket policy of refusing all such requests.

The department says it has several hundred transgender inmates who are taking hormones. . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Judge's order for inmate's sexual reassignment may be appealed" by Ryan Parker, Los Angeles Times 4/3/15

“We are still considering all options, including an appeal,” said Terry Thornton, a spokeswoman for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

“After having received continuous and effective medical and mental health treatment for over fifteen years to address her gender dysphoria, Plaintiff Michelle Norsworthy now seeks the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction ordering state doctors to perform immediate sex reassignment surgery," according to a DOC filing in the case.

“But Norsworthy has not demonstrated a medical necessity for such surgery, much less any sudden or dramatic deterioration in her medical or mental health that might otherwise warrant such an order,” it continued.

Surgical operations do not take place at prisons in California, officials said. All operations, including Norsworthy’s should it happen, are done at community hospitals.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Justice Department Sides With Transgender Inmate In Georgia Lawsuit" by David Ingram, Reuters 4/3/15

Lawyers with the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights division said in papers filed in a federal court in Macon, Georgia, that the refusal of adequate treatment for a recognized mental illness amounted to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Chinyere Ezie, a staff attorney at the Southern Poverty Law Center who represents the Georgia inmate, said the Justice Department brief appeared to be the first of its kind on behalf of the U.S. government.

The Georgia inmate, Ashley Diamond, 36, [a man who has] lived as a woman and took hormones before going to prison for burglary and other charges in 2012. Her lawyers said in court papers that her physical and mental health were at risk without treatment, and that prison officials have placed her in unsafe facilities with violent men.

The case is Ashley Diamond v. Commissioner Brian Owens, et al, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, No. 5:15-cv-50. (Reporting by David Ingram in New York; Editing by Jonathan Oatis)

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "DOJ says transgender prisoner 'forced to suffer needlessly'" by Tim Devaney, The Hill 4/3/15

Transgender prisoners are “among the most vulnerable populations incarcerated in our nation’s prisons and jails,” the Justice Department said.

“By taking action in this case, the Justice Department is reminding departments of corrections that prison officials have the obligation to assess and treat gender dysphoria just as they would any other medical or mental health condition,” Vanita Gupta, acting assistant attorney general for civil rights, said in a statement.

“Prisoners with gender dysphoria should not be forced to suffer needlessly during their incarceration.”

The lawsuit also claims Diamond has been sexually assaulted inside the men’s prison.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Justice Department: Ashley Diamond's gender condition should be treated by prison system" by Michael Doyle, McClatchy Washington Bureau 4/4/15


Underscoring a significant legal turnaround, federal officials say a restrictive Georgia policy for providing health care to inmates with a condition called gender dysphoria violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

The federal move assists Diamond, who’s sued the Georgia Department of Corrections over its refusal to provide feminizing hormones while incarcerated. Other transgender inmates in similar circumstances also could be affected if the Justice Department prevails.

Until 2011, the federal Bureau of Prisons maintained the same gender dysphoria policy as the one it’s now challenging in Georgia. The federal policy changed under pressure from a lawsuit filed by a transgender inmate currently held at Federal Medical Center, Butner, in North Carolina.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Transgender Inmate’s Hormone Treatment Lawsuit Gets Justice Dept. Backing" by Matt Apuzzo, New York Times 4/3/15

With his action on Friday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., the nation’s first black attorney general, asserted that the campaign for the rights of gays, lesbians and transgendered people was a continuation of the movement that won equal rights for blacks in the civil rights era. He has been one of the Obama administration’s most outspoken voices on the issue of same-sex marriage, and he drew criticism from conservatives last year when he advised state attorneys general that they were not constitutionally obligated to defend bans on same-sex marriage.

In recent years, the Obama administration brought civil rights cases against school districts based on where the Justice Department said transgender students were being harassed, or discriminated against. In one instance, school officials in Arcadia, Calif., settled with the Justice Department in a case over whether a transgender boy who was born a girl should be allowed to use boys locker rooms and restrooms. The school district agreed to change its policies and treat him like other male students.

This week, the Justice Department sued Southeastern Oklahoma State University, accusing the school of discriminating against a transgender employee. Federal civil rights law does not explicitly ban discrimination against transgender people, but Mr. Holder announced in December that the Justice Department considered such bias to be prohibited under the same civil rights law that outlaws sex discrimination.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

For additional background on President Obama's Department of Justice (Eric Holder), click headlines below:

DOJ Creates Law for Transgenders

DOJ Forces School Girl into Boys Locker Room

DOJ Launches Transgender Cop Training

DOJ Forces Employees to Celebrate Sexual Deviancy

DOJ OKs Illegal 'Gay Marriages,' Harms Kids

DOJ Tells States to Violate Oath for 'Gay Marriage'

Also read Transgender/Gay Agenda Attacks America One Town at a Time but nationwide: President Obama's Cross-dressing Military Fantasy is Reality

And read Transgenderism is a 'Delusion' According to Victim

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Obama's Eric Holder Creates Law for Transgenders

Having failed to convince Congress to pass new laws forcing employers (including churches and Christian schools) to hire the sexually confused and cross-dressing men, President Obama's attorney general has, by edict, created an unconstitutional de facto Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) for all government employees.

For background, read about President Obama's unilateral action against Christians via ENDA.

Also click headlines below to read previous articles concerning President Obama's Department of Justice (DOJ):

DOJ Forces Employees to Celebrate Sexual Deviancy

DOJ OKs Illegal 'Gay Marriages,' Harms Kids

DOJ Launches Transgender Cop Training

DOJ Tells States to Violate Oath for 'Gay Marriage'

DOJ Forces School Girl into Boys Locker Room

Also read
School Doesn't Back Gay Agenda, President Obama's DOE Investigates

And read President Obama's Cross-dressing Military Fantasy is Reality

-- From "US announces protections for transgender workers" by The Associated Press 12/18/14

The Justice Department is now interpreting federal law to explicitly prohibit workplace discrimination against transgender people, according to a memo released Thursday by Attorney General Eric Holder.

That means the Justice Department will be able to bring legal claims on behalf of people who say they've been discriminated against by state and local public employers based on sex identity. In defending lawsuits, the federal government also will no longer take the position that Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act, which bans sex discrimination, does not protect against workplace discrimination on the basis of gender status.

The new position is a reversal in position for the Justice Department, which in 2006 stated that Title VII did not cover discrimination based on transgender status.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "DOJ: Transgender people can’t be discriminated against at work" by Sandhya Somashekhar, Washington Post 12/18/14

The outgoing attorney general said in a memo that it is the Obama administration’s position that workplace discrimination on the basis of gender identity is prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination on the basis of sex.

Holder was criticized by the Family Research Council [FRC], a socially conservative group. Peter Sprigg, senior director for policy studies, said the interpretation was “inconsistent with the original legislative intent” of the Civil Rights Act. “Probably not one person thought they were passing a bill to protect men who wanted to become women or women who wanted to become men,” he said.

In his memo, Holder acknowledged that “Congress may not have had such claims in mind when it enacted Title VII.” But he wrote that “the Supreme Court has made clear that Title VII must be interpreted according to its plain text, noting that ‘statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonably comparable evils.’”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "DOJ: Civil Rights Act Protects Transgender Government Employees" by Ryan J. Reilly, Huffington Post 12/18/14

In a memo, Holder wrote that the "best reading of Title VII's prohibition of sex discrimination is that it encompasses discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status." Holder said that while Congress "may not have had such claims in mind when it enacted Title VII, the Supreme Court has made clear that Title VII must be interpreted according to its plain text."

In a statement, Holder called the move an “important shift" that "will ensure that the protections of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are extended to those who suffer discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status."

The Employment Litigation Section of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division enforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act against state and local governments. DOJ does not file suit against private employers for discrimination claims.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "DOJ Announces Civil Rights Act Now Applies To Transgender Employees" by Jonah Bennett, Daily Caller 12/18/14

Holder’s memo is part of a broader effort by the Obama administration to be more inclusive and has been seen by some as a substitute for Congress’ failure to pass a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act which includes protection for sexual orientation and gender identity. However, Holder’s interpretation of Title VII is vastly different than the DOJ’s interpretation under the Bush administration in 2006, which rejected the idea that discrimination applied to transgender status.

DOJ’s Civil Rights Division can now enforce the decision against any state and local governments in the event of non-compliance.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Eric Holder’s Transgendered Mutilation of Title VII" by Ed Whelan, National Review Online 12/19/14

In a fog of wordplay divorced from any plausible account of the original meaning of Title VII, Holder asserts that “Title VII’s prohibition against discrimination ‘because of … sex’ encompasses discrimination founded on sex-based considerations, including discrimination based on an employee’s transitioning to, or identifying as, a different sex altogether.” (Emphasis added.)

Holder’s reference to “a different sex” is badly confused and odd. A man who identifies as a woman—yes, even a man who butchers and drugs himself to appear more like a woman—is still a man. Indeed, when anyone points out this elementary biological reality, transgender activists insist that gender is fundamentally different from sex.

One controversy that long divided advocates of the bill titled the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA, was whether the bill’s prohibitions on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation should be extended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity. Under Holder’s cross-dressing reading of Title VII, that controversy was pointless because Title VII’s “plain meaning” already bars discrimination based on gender identity. Indeed, if Title VII broadly bars discrimination “founded on sex-based considerations,” I don’t see why Holder isn’t also contending that Title VII’s plain meaning bars discrimination based on sexual orientation. But that may just be the next lawless surprise in the offing.

To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.

For further background, read how ENDA laws are being used to force Christians "into the closet" and read how "transgender rights" are being forced through public schools nationwide.

Also read Gay Agenda will be Complete when Christians are Muzzled, Say Homosexualists as well as Senator Ted Cruz Says the Gay Agenda Ends Christian Liberty

Saturday, November 01, 2014

NY Incestuous Marriage OK: Unanimous Appeals Court

Marriage of opposite-sex close relatives had been illegal in New York for over a hundred years until this week when the New York Court of Appeals overruled a 2007 decision by U.S. immigration officials that voided the 2000 marriage between Vu Truong, then a 24-year-old male U.S. citizen of Rochester, and Huyen Nguyen, then 19, a Vietnamese citizen and Truong's half-niece.

What is marriage? When it becomes anything, it becomes nothing

UPDATE 1/18/15: Teen Girl to Marry Father in New Jersey—Adult Incest is Legal

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

Judge Says Incest OK; It's the New Gay

Polygamy Too: Federal Court Ruling for 'Gay Marriage' —  4th Circuit judge says 'incest marriage' will follow

Incest a 'Fundamental Right,' Says German Ethics Council

Pedophiles Win in 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

Pedophilia is Sexual Orientation, Like 'Being Gay'

-- From "Woman's marriage to half-uncle legal, N.Y. top court rules" by Daniel Wiessner, Reuters 10/28/14

The U.S. Justice Department claimed an 1893 state law that bars marriages between "a brother and sister of either the whole or the half blood," as well as "uncles and nieces or aunts and nephews," applied to Nguyen and Truong.

In a 6-0 decision siding with Nguyen, Judge Robert Smith wrote, "First cousins are allowed to marry in New York, and I conclude that it was not the Legislature's purpose to avert the similar, relatively small, genetic risk inherent in relationships like this one."

The decision by the court in Albany, which allows Nguyen to remain in the United States, went against a 1921 ruling in which the court said a man's marriage to his half-brother's daughter was void.

The case is Huyen Nguyen v. Eric Holder, New York State Court of Appeals, No. 146.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Uncle's marriage to niece ruled legal" by Matthew Hamilton, Albany Times Union 10/28/14

There are now fewer restrictions on marriage in New York, though the change is probably not one you were expecting.

Judge Robert Smith wrote that while state law prohibits primarily parent-child and brother-sister marriages — "grounded in the almost universal horror with which such marriages are viewed" — there is no comparably strong objection to uncle-niece marriages. Smith wrote that the domestic relations law prohibiting some whole- and half-blood marriages "has not been viewed as expressing strong condemnation of uncle-niece and aunt-nephew relationships."

Judge Victoria Graffeo wrote in her concurring opinion that the court didn't receive any scientific evidence that would allow it to draw a conclusion about the genetic ramifications of such half-blood marriages.

Albany Law professor Vincent Bonventre, one of the state's top court-watchers, said the decision would set precedent. "The court made it clear that its construction of the statute applies to criminal cases or civil cases: It's universally applicable," Bonventre said. "From now on, unless the Legislature changes the rule, a half-uncle is permitted to marry a half-niece."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "'Half-Blood' Uncle-Niece Couples Endorsed in NY" by Adam Klasfeld, Courthouse News Service 10/29/14

New York lawmakers may need to revisit an incest law that permits the marriage of a Vietnamese woman and her half-uncle, three justices with the state's high court noted.

U.S. Customs and Immigration Service learned that Nguyen was both Truong's bride and half-niece only after Nguyen tried to remove the conditions on her residency two years later.

Fighting to remain in the United States, Nguyen appealed the agency's denial to the 2nd Circuit, which punted the matter to the New York Court of Appeals to clarify the state's laws on the matter.

With one member of the seven-judge court abstaining, the court issued two concurring opinions Tuesday that keep Nguyen and Truong's marriage intact.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "NY State blesses ‘incest’ marriage between uncle, niece" by Julia Marsh, New York Post 10/29/14

Family law expert Michael Stutman of the firm Mishcon de Reya, who is not involved in the case, said the ruling is in synch with today’s modern families.

“As people are more mobile and living longer marriages are ending and people remarry and you get blended families with step children and half children,” Stutman reasoned.

“There are plenty of other societies that allow so-called intermarriage without worrying about genetic defects. And frankly we have a long history of cousins marrying each other, take FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt,” he said.

The president and his wife were fifth cousins once removed.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "New York appeals court unanimously OKs some incestuous marriages" by Ben Johnson, LifeSiteNews.com 10/31/14


. . . Since the passage of the 1965 Immigration Act, the U.S. government has given preferential treatment to relatives of American citizens.

But when the Department of Homeland Security learned that the two were related, officials initiated deportation hearings instead. Judge Philip Montante Jr. ruled that their marriage was invalid due to incest, a decision upheld by the Board of Immigration Appeals last year.

. . . "The decision in this case turned on a technicality,” Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, founder of The Ruth Institute, a think tank dedicated to preserving marriage, told LifeSiteNews. “The woman didn't literally marry her uncle. She married her half-uncle,” her mother's half-brother. . . . “All the legal arguments and pieces are in place to remove further prohibitions on incestuous marriages. It is only a matter of time.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "State Court of Appeals approves marriages between half-uncles and half-nieces" by Glenn Blain, New York Daily News 10/28/14

The Rev. Jason McGuire, executive director of conservative group New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, saw danger signs in the court’s decision.

“If government’s only interest in marriage is who loves each other, than what logical stopping point is there?” McGuire said.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read 'Gay Marriage' Not Favored in Polls, Only in Court

And read America Going to Hell; Christians Lose Convictions

Saturday, July 19, 2014

Supreme Court Blocks 'Gay Marriages' OKd by Obama

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that more than 1,000 same-sex "marriages" that occurred during a weeks-long chaotic period last year caused by a single activist judge are NOT required to be recognized by the State of Utah until its appeal is heard, even though the Obama administration's DOJ rushed to recognize the "marriages" immediately.
“Constitutional rights do not spring into existence by mass social activity triggered by the unreviewed decision of a single district court judge.”
-- State of Utah, in court brief
For background, read how President Obama's Department of Justice rushed to recognize same-sex "marriages" in Utah just days after the U.S. Supreme Court put a halt to the illegal marriage chaos.

Also read Lawless Obama Administration Tells States to Violate Oath for 'Gay Marriage'

For the "big picture," read how activist judges across America are forbidding voters the right to define marriage as between one man and one woman.  However, there's a lone appellate judge who says that there is NO constitutional protection for "gay marriage."

In addition, read President Obama Favors the One Percenters (Homosexuals)

-- From "Supreme Court Delays Benefits for Utah Gay Couples" by Brady McCombs, Associated Press 7/18/14

The couples were wed during a 17-day stretch in December when same-sex marriages were legal before the nation's highest court put the practice on hold. They had been set to get benefits Monday.

Utah Gov. Gary Herbert applauded the Supreme Court's decision. "I believe states have the right to determine their laws regarding marriage and, as I have said all along, that decision will ultimately come from the United States Supreme Court," he said in a statement.

The Supreme Court's order doesn't apply to any other states, but it could foretell how the high court would deal with similar situations elsewhere, said Douglas NeJaime, a University of California-Irvine law professor. Hundreds of other gay couples also married in Michigan, Wisconsin and Indiana after state bans were struck down and before those rulings were put on hold.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Supreme Court Blocks Recognition of Utah Same-Sex Marriages" by Brent Kendall, Wall Street Journal 7/18/14

The high court, granting an emergency request by Utah Republican Gov. Gary Herbert, issued a brief order postponing the effect of a lower-court ruling that said the state had to recognize the same-sex marriages immediately.

Utah is in the process of preparing a petition to the Supreme Court that asks the justices to decide whether the state can continue to prohibit gay marriages. But questions surrounding existing Utah gay unions raise somewhat distinct legal issues.

Utah said that requiring the state to recognize the marriages now would be an unfair end run around the normal legal process, which is still going on.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Justices Say Utah Doesn't Have to Recognize Gay Marriages" by Adam Liptak, New York Times 7/18/14

The marriages took place between Dec. 20, when Judge Robert J. Shelby of Federal District Court in Salt Lake City struck down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage, and Jan. 6, when the Supreme Court issued a stay blocking that ruling while the decision was appealed.

On June 25, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, in Denver, upheld Judge Shelby’s ruling. Utah officials have announced that they will soon ask the Supreme Court to hear that case, which presents the separate and much larger question of whether there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

Friday’s order came in a different case, one concerning the status of what the state calls “interim marriages,” meaning those entered into during that period in December and January when same-sex marriage was briefly allowed.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "U.S. Supreme Court grants Utah a stay in same-sex marriage case" by Maya Srikrishnan, Los Angeles Times 7/18/14

Utah wanted to ensure that it did not have to recognize the marriages performed while its ban was inoperative. Last week, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals denied Utah's request for a stay on that issue, giving it until July 21 to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Utah contended that would "create chaos" and "deprive public officials (and the governments they represent) of their own due-process rights to effective appellate review."

In its appeal to Sotomayor, Utah said, “Here, every single interim marriage performed as a result of the district court’s ... injunction directly challenges the sovereignty of Utah and its people. Each such marriage undermines the state’s sovereign interest in controlling ‘the marriage status of persons domiciled within its border.'"

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Supreme Court grants stay in Utah marriage recognition case" by Jessica Miller, The Salt Lake Tribune 7/18/14

Utah asked [the Supreme Court] for the emergency order on Wednesday, saying that the state believes it will ultimately prevail in its fight to revive a ban on same-sex unions. If it loses, the state said it would work to nullify the marriages entered into during that window.

Utah continues to defend its right to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman on two fronts — in Evans. v. Utah and in the Kitchen v. Herbert case that in December toppled the state’s ban on same-sex unions.

Kimball ruled in May in the Evans case that Utah must recognize and imbue all same-sex marriages performed in the state with the same rights and privileges afforded to married opposite-sex couples. His decision did not go into effect immediately to give the state time to appeal.

Utah’s emergency application was filed with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who oversees the federal court circuit of which Utah is a part and who, in January, halted the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples in Utah after 17 days of marriages.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read 'Gay Marriage' Not Favored in Polls, Only in Court

And read American Decline: Obama's Gay Agenda vs. Christians

Monday, June 30, 2014

Sheriff Defies ACLU: July 4th Prayer in Louisiana

Sheriff Julian Whittington will host the second annual 4th of July “In God We Trust Rally” in Bossier City, Louisiana where everyone is invited to enjoy food, fun, patriotic and Christian music, along with prayer on public property. Louisiana’s American Civil Liberties Union has complained that the event is illegal.
“I think Bossier Parish is a better place with Christianity and Christian values involved in it. I am an elected official. I’m also a citizen here. I think this is what’s best for us. I don’t work for anybody in Washington. What they do, what they say, I couldn’t really care less,”
-- Sheriff Julian Whittington, Bossier Parish
For background, read Atheists Fret Supreme Court Ruling Favoring Prayers in Christian America

And also read the resulting resurgence in public prayer following the Supreme Court decision.

-- From "Bossier Sheriff's office to host 4th of July 'In God We Trust' rally" posted at KTBS-TV 3 (Shreveport, LA) 6/24/14

. . . Throughout the ceremony, there will be church singing groups, patriotic videos and remarks.

Sheriff Whittington will honor Posse members who served in World War II and recognize Young Marines success stories. Students from Princeton Elementary School will read their award-winning essays of "What Does Freedom Mean to Me," and one local pastor will make you laugh with his imitations of the Presidents.

. . . Sheriff Whittington will offer his remarks, and Gov. Bobby Jindal will also deliver a special message via video. The Sheriff will also make a check presentation to show the thousands of dollars that have been donated to the Young Marines program after the federal government denied grant funding last spring. Sheriff Whittington made it very clear to the Department of Justice that he was not going to remove voluntary prayer and the mention of God from the Young Marines program in order to receive the grant money and stood firm that the program would continue…with or without federal aid.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Bossier Sheriff stands for his right to pray when, where and with whom he pleases" by Adam Duvernay, Shreveport Times 6/28/14

“Last year, we didn’t really know what we were doing and we had so many people, so much reaction from people, so we held the event and over 1,000 people showed up and said, ‘We agree with you. For a nation that was founded on Christian values, our government was formed around it, it’s on our money, it’s in our oath, we pledge as elected officials, to somehow now say it’s somehow taboo or you have to run with it is ridiculous. We agree with you. Stick with it,’” Whittington said.

That’s how Bossier City resident Holly Lanaghan feels about it, anyway. She said everything — from schools to local governments — is improved by closer ties to God. She supports Whittington’s stance and practices.

“It sure can’t hurt. When you take God out, that’s when things start going downhill. I think more people support the sheriff than don’t,” Lanaghan said. “There’s one God and he loves everybody. It doesn’t matter what title you want to hang on yourself. God is not about religion. He’s about the relationship we should have with him.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read FDR's D-Day Prayer is Un-American, Say Atheists

And read of the myriad atheist lawsuits against Christians and prayer nationwide.

However, in response, read of countless examples of citizens banding together to defy the atheists and pray in school and other local government bodies, and also read the long list of states enacting laws to bring prayer back to schools.

Monday, March 31, 2014

Obama DOJ OKs Illegal 'Gay Marriages,' Harms Kids

It's routine now: First an activist judge negates a state constitution defining marriage, followed by activist clerks issuing same-sex "marriage" licenses, then a higher court halts the rogue "marriages" -- even becoming null and void.  However then, the Obama administration decrees it will recognize the "marriages" regardless.

UPDATE 7/19/14: Supreme Court Blocks "Gay Marriages" OKd by Obama's DOJ

UPDATE 7/28/14: 4th Circuit Appeals Court Says Mother & Father No Better than Gay 'Parents' (see article excerpts below)

For background, read Suddenly, 'Gay Marriages' Start, then Stop in Michigan as well as Federal Judge Orders Utah 'Gay Marriages' to Proceed

In addition, read how activist judges across America are forbidding voters the right to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

And also read Lawless Obama Administration: States Should Violate Oath for 'Gay Marriage'

Homosexualists always ask, "How will a 'gay marriage' affect someone else?"  Answer: It greatly affects the children; click headlines below to read how.

Parents Unnecessary, Homosexualists Argue in Court

White House Says Kids Don't Need Mom, 2 Dads OK

Homosexualists Use Children to Battle Christianity

And from the archive, read American Voters Getting Message - Gay Agenda Targets Children and also read about The Gay Agenda Effect on Children

-- From "U.S. to Recognize Same-Sex Marriages in Michigan" by Matt Apuzzo, New York Times 3/28/14

The federal government will recognize more than 300 same-sex marriages that were performed in Michigan last weekend, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said Friday, a day after Michigan’s governor said his state would not.

Mr. Holder’s announcement caps a period of rapid change and uncertainty over the status of same-sex marriage in Michigan. On March 21, a federal judge struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, and the next morning gay and lesbian couples rushed to exchange vows. By late that afternoon, however, an appeals court stayed the judge’s ruling.

Mr. Holder said the federal government viewed it differently. “These families will be eligible for all relevant federal benefits on the same terms as other same-sex marriages,” he said in a statement released by the Justice Department.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Feds recognizing Mich. gay marriages though state won't" by Todd Spangler, Detroit Free Press 3/28/14

At least for now, couples married Saturday in four counties in Michigan — Ingham, Muskegon, Oakland and Washtenaw — will have the same standing regarding federal income and estate tax benefits, as well as any other federal rights, afforded other married couples. But a court could eventually reject that standing.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Supreme Court puts Utah same-sex marriages on hold" by Richard Wolf, USA TODAY 1/6/14

The Supreme Court put a stop to same-sex marriages in conservative Utah on Monday while the state appeals a federal district court's ruling that had legalized the unions.

The justices, acting on a petition sent to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, ruled that gay marriages cannot continue during the appeals process. The case is pending before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby ruled Dec. 20 that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay and lesbian couples' constitutional rights. Since then, more than 900 same-sex couples in the state have wed.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Same-sex marriages in Utah legal under federal law, Attorney General Holder says" by Sari Horwitz, Washington Post 1/10/14

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. intervened in the legal battle over gay marriage in Utah on Friday and announced that same-sex marriages that took place in Utah are considered legal under federal law even though state officials will not recognize those unions.

On Jan. 6., the Supreme Court halted Utah’s same-sex marriages, staying Shelby’s decision pending appeal and putting the marriages in legal limbo. On Wednesday, Utah Gov. Gary R. Herbert’s office sent a memo to state officials saying Utah would not consider same-sex marriages lawful, as it appealed Shelby’s ruling.

“It is outrageous that the Justice Department would move so brazenly and publicly to undermine Utah’s standing constitutional provision regulating marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” said Brian Brown, [National Organization for Marriage] president. “It is the right of the states to determine marriage, and the voters and legislature of Utah have done just that.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Utah’s decision to freeze same-sex marriages debated in court" by Brooke Adams, The Salt Lake Tribune 3/13/14

Assistant Utah Attorney General Kyle J. Kaiser told U.S. District Court Judge Dale A. Kimball that couples who married after Utah’s Amendment 3 was found unconstitutional on Dec. 20 knew the state was seeking to stay the ruling and planned to appeal it.

Assistant Utah Attorney General Joni J. Jones told Kimball that the couples "had no rights under Utah law" until the Dec. 20 decision and once the ruling was stayed, they did not retain vested rights.

Jones said the state is merely not recognizing the marriages while the question of whether same-sex couples have a fundamental right to marriage is resolved, she said

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Opponents in gay marriage lawsuits clash over impact on kids" by Kirk Mitchell, The Denver Post 3/31/14

In hundreds of pages of filings in a federal appeals court, Utah, Oklahoma and their allies are arguing that children belong in homes with a father and mother. They also express concerns that same-sex marriages could result in a declining birth rate.

That blueprint is being followed around the country, as states claim that gay-parent homes are weaker incubators for kids than homes run by heterosexuals. Allowing same-sex marriages threatens to shift the focus of marriage from being "child centric" to "adult centric," they argue.

In Bishop vs. Smith, the Oklahoma gay marriage case, defendants argue in their brief that many social-science studies confirm that children do best when raised by both biological parents. It cited Supreme Court decisions stating that a constitutional "liberty interest" exists for the "natural" family and that children have a right to know their natural parents.

The Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear oral arguments in both cases in April.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 7/28/14: From "Bush-and-Obama-Appointed Judge: It's 'Dubious Proposition That Same-Sex Couples are Less Capable Parents'" by Terence P. Jeffrey, CNSNews.com

[U.S. 4th Circuit Appeals Court Judge Henry F.] Floyd made the [headline, above] remark while declaring same-sex marriage a constitutional right and dismissing the argument made in favor of Virginia's marriage amendment that it safeguards the need of children to be raised by both a mother and a father.

"The proponents aver that 'children develop best when reared by their married biological parents in a stable family unit,'" wrote Floyd. "They dwell on the importance of 'gender-differentiated parenting' and argue that sanctioning same-sex marriage will deprive children of the benefit of being raised by a mother and a father, who have 'distinct parenting styles.' In essence, the proponents argue that the Virginia Marriage Laws safeguard children by preventing same-sex couples from marrying and starting inferior families."

. . . said Floyd. "For example, as the American Psychological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, and Virginia Psychological Association (collectively, the APA) explain in their amicus brief, 'there is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation,' and 'the same factors'—including family stability, economic resources, and the quality of parent-child relationships—'are linked to children’s positive development, whether they are raised by heterosexual, lesbian, or gay parents.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Gay Agenda will be Complete when Christians are Muzzled, Say Homosexualists as well as Senator Ted Cruz Says the Gay Agenda Ends Christian Liberty

In addition, read American Decline: President Obama's Gay Agenda vs. Christians