Illinois Fines Business $80K for Being Christian

Jim and Beth Walder, the owners of Timber Creek Bed & Breakfast near Paxton, Illinois, have been fined $80,000 by the state Human Rights Commission after being singled out in 2011 by homosexual men demanding their same-sex ceremony be officiated in the Walder's facility.  The Commission ordered the Walders to "cease and desist" from quoting the Bible to same-sex couples and welcome ceremonies of abomination in their facility in accordance with the Human Rights Act and pay the homosexuals $30,000 plus another $50,000 to the ACLU for legal fees.

"To be absolutely clear, we cannot host a same-sex wedding even though fines and penalties have been imposed by the Illinois Human Rights Commission. Our policy will not be changing. . . . We are not looking for a fight, but when immoral laws are purposely passed (or deemed constitutional) that blatantly conflict with God's Word and when the heavy hand of government tries to force us as Christians to embrace sinful behavior, we have a moral obligation to resist and stand for Biblical truth:  'It is better to obey God than men.' Acts 5:29."
-- Jim Walder

For background, read the history of homosexualists targeting Christians in Illinois in this manner.

Click headlines below to read previous articles:

ACLU Sues Christians for Refusing 'Gay Marriage'

Pastors Face Fines, Jail for Refusing 'Gay Wedding'

Homosexuals Force Closure of Iowa Christian Wedding Chapel

New York Christian Farmers Guilty & Fined over 'Gay Wedding'

Homosexualist Oregon Persecutes Christian Judge

Lesbians Attack Ohio Christian Videographer over 'Gay Wedding'

Christian School Sued by Homosexuals in New Mexico

Michigan Christian Business Trashed by Homosexualists

Also read Houston Lesbian Mayor Subpoenas Pastors' Sermons




-- From "Illinois inn fined for refusing to host gay civil union ceremony" by Reuters 3/29/16

[Michael R. Robinson, an] administrative law judge with the [Illinois] commission ordered TimberCreek Bed & Breakfast to pay $15,000 each to Todd and Mark Wathen for emotional distress.

TimberCreek, located about 100 miles south of Chicago, must also pay $50,000 in attorneys' fees and $1,218.35 in costs.

The Wathens had contacted TimberCreek in 2011 as they looked for possible locations for the ceremony.

TimberCreek owner Jim Walder had responded to the Wathens' inquiry with an email that said "homosexuality is immoral and unnatural," according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "B&B ordered to pay $80,000 over refusal to host civil-union ceremony in 2011" by Will Brumleve, Editor, Ford County Record, posted at Champaign/Urbana News-Gazette 3/29/16

In September, [Judge] Robinson ruled that Jim Walder violated the civil rights of the Wathens when he denied them the opportunity to hold their civil-union ceremony at the B&B he co-owns with his wife — the TimberCreek Bed-and-Breakfast west of Paxton.

The landmark ruling marked the first time that the Human Rights Commission made clear that businesses in Illinois must serve the entire public and cannot pick and choose based on their personal religious views.

Following a public hearing held last November in Springfield to consider damages to be awarded to the couple, ACLU attorneys for the Wathens filed briefs to support the couple's request for a "cease and desist" order and for Walder to pay damages for emotional distress, attorneys' fees and costs. Lawyers for the B&B failed to respond in a timely matter, leading to the judge's ruling.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "B&B ordered to pay damages to same-sex couple, stop discriminating" by Will Brumleve, Ford County Record 3/29/16

The Wathens said they never contacted another B&B [other than Walder's]. They ended up being wed in a small ceremony on June 4, 2011, in their back yard . . .

Walder said in an emailed statement Tuesday that his B&B will not host civil-union ceremonies or same-sex weddings, regardless of last week’s ruling.

“Evidently, religious freedom does not exist within the Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act or the Illinois Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act.

“In our opinion, neither the state of Illinois nor the U.S. Supreme Court has the authority to tamper with the definition of marriage. God alone created marriage and declared thousands of years ago that it was to be between a man and a woman. Not two men. Not two women. We may be out of step with an increasingly anti-Christian culture, but we are in compliance with God’s design, and that is what ultimately matters.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Further refusals could cost B&B owner more; he won't change stance" by Nicole Lafond, Champaign/Urbana News-Gazette 4/1/16

University of Illinois law Professor Robin Wilson, an expert on the intersection of religious freedom and same-sex marriage, said the penalties the state could impose upon TimberCreek Bed-and-Breakfast owner Jim Walder include placing a lien on his personal estate.

"Every time he refuses," Wilson said, "the state can fine him again."

If Walder opts to fight the state ruling, Wilson said, he must file an appeal within 14 days. Since it was made by a single judge, Walder could request a rehearing by either a three-person panel or the full commission within 30 days. If six of the 13 commissioners grant a rehearing, the original order is nullified, pending the results of the rehearing.

If that doesn't go well, Walder "can jump right back over to the appellate court," Wilson said. In either case, though, "he's got hanging around his neck factual findings that they are going to assume are true," she said.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Discrimination Charge" posted at Timber Creek Bed & Breakfast

We politely disagree.  God is not confused.  His Word clearly illustrates and declares that marriage is between one man and one woman.  It also labels homosexuality as an abominable sin throughout the Old and New Testaments.  God's Word is the ultimate authority, infallible, and unchanging.  It is the same yesterday, today, and forever.  His Word cannot be changed by a vote of the Illinois General Assembly when it passed the Civil Unions Act or the Gay Marriage Bill.  Marriage is only appropriate God's way.  Sexuality is only appropriate God's way.

Consequently, we cannot host civil unions or gay marriages at TimberCreek Bed & Breakfast.  It is not an issue of fairness or equality, but an issue of right and wrong.  We cannot be part of what God condemns.  Be assured that we are not lawless, hateful, judgmental, bigoted, or activists by any definition.  We did not initiate the present controversy.  We are not the ones who voted to change the 6,000 year-old definition of marriage.  We are just small business owners trying to be consistent in following God's Word and living it out practically in our lives.  And we are not alone. . . .

To read the entire statement above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Gay Agenda will be Complete when Christians are Muzzled, Say Homosexualists

Court Rules NO 'Gay Marriage' Obligation on States

Although many European nations have blazed the trail for "gay rights," of the 47 nations that comprise the Council of Europe, only eleven recognize same-sex "marriage," and a recent ruling by the European Court of Human Rights has struck a new blow to advancement of the Gay Agenda.

For background, read 'Gay Marriage' Flops in Expanding European Union

Also read Russia Outlaws Homosexual Propaganda, Kissing as well as Supreme Court Rules Homosexual Behavior Illegal in India

-- From "European court strikes down transgender marriage case" by Nikolaj Nielsen, EU Observer 7/16/14

A Finnish citizen who wanted the state to recognise her new gender after surgery and remain legally married to woman at the same time lost her case at the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights on Wednesday (16 July).

Heil Hamalainen underwent male-to-female gender reassignment surgery in 2009, years after she married her partner.

But Finnish law does not recognise same-sex marriages.

State authorities said that for Hamalainen to have her new gender recognised, she would need to turn the marriage into a civil partnership or get a divorce - something the couple refused.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "European Court Of Human Rights Deals Blow To Trans Rights And Marriage Equality" by J. Lester Feder, BuzzFeed Staff 7/17/14

. . . After losing challenges in Finnish courts, they took the fight to the European Court of Human Rights, which has jurisdiction over the 47 states that have agreed to the European Convention on Human Rights including countries outside the European Union like Turkey and Russia.

. . . The ruling is not only a blow to the couple, but could have important implications for trans rights and marriage equality movements across Europe. The Italian Constitutional Court ducked a chance to rule in favor of marriage equality last month in a similar case, instead ordering parliament to create “a different form of registered partnership” that is “not the same as marriage” that would also allow trans people to keep legal protections for their unions after undergoing gender reassignment.

. . . The ruling also signals that the court is unlikely to revisit previous rulings that same-sex couples have no right to marry under European human rights law.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Court: ‘No Obligation’ Under European Convention to Allow Same-Sex Marriage" posted at CNSNews.com 7/21/14

The European Convention on Human Rights “enshrines the traditional concept of marriage as between a man and a woman,” and there is ”no obligation on Contracting States to grant same-sex couples access to marriage,” the European Court of Human Rights ruled last Wednesday.

Article 12 of the European Convention, which governs the Council of Europe, states that “men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right.”

“While it is true that some Contracting States have extended marriage to same-sex partners, Article 12 cannot be construed as imposing an obligation on the Contracting States to grant access to marriage to same-sex couples,” noted the majority opinion in Hämäläinen v. Finland.

The Court ruled that since a registered partnership “was a genuine option which provided legal protection for same-sex couples that was almost identical to that of marriage,” Hämäläinen’s rights had not been violated.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Parents in Germany Allow Babies to Choose Gender From Birth

Pope Open to Homosexual Civil Unions, Media Report

Once again, the mainstream media leaped to put words in Pope Francis' mouth.  Numerous reports explicitly claim that the Pope supports same-sex civil unions as well as legally-sanctioned heterosexual cohabitation, when he never said any such thing, and again media are reporting that the Pope is evolving toward women clergy.

"I see a glimmer of hope that I'm hoping will open up into a floodlight into this conversation . . ."
-- Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice

For background, read Liberal Media Say Pope Francis OKs Gay & Women Priests but actually the Pope Said the Gay Agenda is the Work of the Devil, and also the Pope Disappoints Liberals by Opposing 'Gay Adoption.'

Also read Pope's New Spanish Cardinal Says 'Gay Gene' is a Defect

In addition, read Pope Francis Decries Abortion; Vatican Says Media Distort Him

-- From "Pope Francis: Church could support same-sex civil unions" by CNN, posted at WPIX-TV11 (NY) 3/5/14

Pope Francis reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s opposition to gay marriage on Wednesday, but suggested in a newspaper interview that it could support same-sex civil unions.

For instance, civil unions provide financial security to cohabitating couples, “as for instance in medical care,” the Pope said in a wide-ranging interview published Wednesday in Corriere della Sera, an Italian daily.

A number of Catholic bishops have supported civil unions for gay couples, including Pope Francis when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2010, according to reports in National Catholic Reporter and The New York Times.

On the role of women in the church, an issue of particular concern to Catholics in the United States, the Pope hinted that changes could be in the works.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From  "Did Pope Francis open the door to same-sex civil unions?" by Joshua Normanm, CBS News 3/5/14

Pope Francis has famously declared a cessation of hostilities in the culture wars on same-sex marriage, contraception, and abortion that had defined the Catholic Church for much of the modern era.

On Wednesday, he signaled a new direction in that regard when discussing civil unions in a short but wide-ranging interview . . . he explained why he thought civil unions were created in the first place. . . . in a translation of the interview provided by John Thavis, the former Rome bureau chief for Catholic News Services (CNS.)

The Vatican has as recently as January said the pope and the Catholic Church are not open to same-sex civil unions, and Thavis told CBS News the pope's wording was deliberately vague in the most recent interview.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pope, in interview, suggests church could tolerate some civil unions" by Francis X. Rocca, Catholic News Service 3/5/14

"Matrimony is between a man and a woman," the pope said, but moves to "regulate diverse situations of cohabitation (are) driven by the need to regulate economic aspects among persons, as for instance to assure medical care." Asked to what extent the church could understand this trend, he replied: "It is necessary to look at the diverse cases and evaluate them in their variety."

Asked if the church's teachings on sexual and medical ethics represented "non-negotiable values," a formulation used by Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Francis said he had "never understood the expression 'non-negotiable values.'"

"Values are values, period," he said. "I cannot say that, among the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than another. That is why I cannot understand in what sense there could be negotiable values."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Catholic Church on Homosexual Acts: ‘Under No Circumstances Can They Be Approved’" by Michael W. Chapman, CNSNews.com 3/5/14

When asked how the Church could address the issue, Pope Francis said, “It is necessary to look at the diverse cases and evaluate them in their variety.”  The Pope did not say that civil unions – “diverse situations of cohabitation” – were impermissible, but that the “diverse cases” could be evaluated “in their variety.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that “homosexual persons are called to chastity.” (2359) The Catechism further says, “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (2357)

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Women Could Have Greater Role in Church, Says Pope" by Deborah Ball, Wall Street Journal 3/5/14

The Vatican could soon make significant changes to the role of women in the Catholic Church and to its approach to divorcées, Pope Francis said in a newspaper interview.

Some Vatican experts have raised the possibility of the pope appointing women to senior positions in the Vatican bureaucracy, perhaps as the head of one of its powerful departments.

But the pope suggested even bigger changes could be in store, with a senior cardinal now consulting female experts in considering possible options.

Some church leaders advocate making women deacons, ordained ministers who can assist at Mass or perform baptisms, although the pope made no reference to such a possibility.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Pope Francis Cracks Down on American Liberal Nuns, Priests

Pope Decries Abortion; Media Distort Him: Vatican

The Vatican has apparently decided to confront the liberal media spin of Pope Francis by issuing statements correcting reports implying that Roman Catholic doctrine is evolving.  Perhaps the Pope's comments today concerning abortion is the vanguard of clarifying statements to come.

“Every unborn child, though unjustly condemned to be aborted, has the face of the Lord, who even before his birth, and then as soon as he was born, experienced the rejection of the world.”
-- Pope Francis I

For background, read Pope Disappoints Liberals, Opposes 'Gay Adoption' and also read Liberal Media Say Pope Francis OKs Gay & Women Priests as well as Pope Removes Democrat Party Antagonist, Media Crow

UPDATE 3/6/14: Again, Media Distort Pope, Reporting He's Open to Homosexual Civil Unions

-- From "Pope says abortion evidence of ‘throwaway culture’" by The Associated Press 1/13/14

“We cannot be indifferent to those suffering from hunger, especially children, when we think of how much food is wasted every day in many parts of the world immersed in what I have often termed ‘the throwaway culture,’” Francis said.

That culture, he said, also affects the unborn child.

“For example, it is frightful even to think that there are children, victims of abortion, who will never see the light of day,” he said. Francis has generally limited his exhortations about abortion, saying church teaching is well known and that he prefers to speak less about the church’s moralizing rules and more about its positive, welcoming message.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pope Francis: Abortion Kills Children 'Who Will Never See the Light of Day'" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 1/13/14

Last September, a day after an interview the mainstream media used to claim Pope Francis is backing down on the Catholic Church’s pro-life teachings, the Pope condemned abortion in strong terms, saying unborn babies are “unjustly condemned” when killed in abortions.

In the text of a message the Pope delivered to a group of Catholic doctors this morning, as distributed by the Vatican today, Pope Francis soundly condemned abortion . . . [and] the “throwaway culture” abortion promotes, saying, “Our response to this mentality is a ‘yes’ to life, decisive and without hesitation. ‘The first right of the human person is his life. He has other goods and some are precious, but this one is fundamental –- the condition for all the others’”.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Vatican denies pope is open to recognition of gay civil unions" by Philip Pullella, Reuters 1/5/13

Francis, in a conversation with leaders of religious orders published by a Jesuit journal on Friday, said the Catholic Church had to try not to scare away children who live in complex family situations, such as those whose parents were separated and those living with gay couples.

"The situation in which we live now provides us with new challenges which sometimes are difficult for us to understand," the pope said, according to the transcript of the conversation.

"How can we proclaim Christ to these boys and girls? How can we proclaim Christ to a generation that is changing? We must be careful not to administer a vaccine against faith to them," he said.

The Vatican has stressed the pope's words did not change Church teachings that homosexual tendencies are not sinful but homosexual acts are.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Fr. Lombardi: Papal comments on education 'manipulated' by media" posted at Vatican Radio 1/6/14

The Director of the Holy See’s Press Office, Fr. Federico Lombardi has issued an explanatory note following extensive debate in the Italian media after the publication by the Jesuit journal Civiltà Cattolica of a conversation between Pope Francis and religious superiors on November 29th. Many comments focused on gay unions.

The Pope had “absolutely not expressed” his opinions on a debate that was ignited in Italy one month later, Fr. Lombardi says, and “those who remember the positions he expressed earlier in Argentina during similar debates know that they were completely different from what some people are now trying surreptitiously to attribute to him.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Vatican: Media Uses ‘Manipulation’ of Pope’s Statements to Fit Agenda" by Barbara Boland, CNSNews.com 1/9/14

The Vatican statement was in response to media reports about informal comments by the pope that they said indicated a change, a move by the church towards accepting civil unions for homosexuals.

From the Pope’s remark, AFP ran a story with the headline, “Pope Calls for Fresh Church Approach to Children of Gay Parents.”

An article with a very similar title appeared on NBC News, “Pope Calls for New Approach To Kids of Gay, Divorced Parents.”

A story with the pope’s quote also appeared in The Australian titled “The Pope’s Plea on Gay Kids” and the same theme was featured in The Hindu’s article, “Pope’s Inclusive Remarks on Homosexuality Surprise Many.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "It's official: Pope has not abolished sin, says Vatican" by Philip Pullella, Reuters 12/31/13

The Vatican felt compelled on Tuesday to deny that Pope Francis had "abolished sin", after . . . Eugenio Scalfari, an atheist who writes opinion pieces for the left-leaning La Repubblica newspaper, published an article titled "Francis' Revolution: He has abolished sin".

Scalfari, who held a long private conversation with the pope earlier this year and wrote about it several times, concluded in the complex, treatise-like article that Francis believed sin effectively no longer existed because God's mercy and forgiveness were "eternal".

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi told Vatican Radio that "this affirmation that the pope has abolished sin" was wrong.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

In addition, read Pope Francis Says Gay Agenda is Work of the Devil and also read Pope Francis Cracks Down on American Liberal Nuns, Priests

Pope Disappoints Liberals, Opposes 'Gay Adoption'

Suddenly the liberal media's "person of the year," Pope Francis, has silenced their wagging tongues by instructing Bishop Charles Scicluna of Malta to vehemently oppose the legalization of homosexual unions and/or adoption on the Mediterranean island nation.

For background, read Liberal Media Say Pope Francis OKs Gay & Women Priests as well as Pope Removes Democrat Party Antagonist, Media Crow

UPDATE 3/6/14: Again, Media Report Pope Open to Homosexual Civil Unions

In addition, read Pope Francis Says Gay Agenda is Work of the Devil and also read Pope Francis Cracks Down on American Liberal Nuns, Priests




-- From "Report: Pope Francis ‘Shocked’ by Same-Sex Adoption Proposal" by Noah Rayman, Time Magazine 12/30/13

Pope Francis, who ascended to the Papacy in March, has drawn attention for a reformist platform that includes a softer tone on issues like homosexuality. He was was named TIME’s Person of the Year this month and was on the cover of leading LGBT magazine The Advocate.

“Francis signals great change while giving the same answers to the uncomfortable questions,” TIME wrote in naming Pope Francis the Person of the Year.

But the Pope still opposes same-sex marriage and gay adoption . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pope Francis 'shocked' by gay adoption. Will Time take back its Person of the Year award?" by Damian Thompson, UK Telegraph 12/29/13

. . . Bishop Scicluna met Pope Francis on December 12. The bishop later told the Times of Malta: “We discussed many aspects… and when I raised the issue that’s worrying me as a bishop [the right for gay couples to adopt] he encouraged me to speak out."

What we can say, I think, is that the media read far too much into the Pope's "who am I to judge?" comment about gay Christians in his impromptu interview on the way back from Rio. If Time magazine gave Francis its Person of the Year on the basis of his relaxed attitude to homosexuality, it should have done its homework more thoroughly.

To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pope Francis was ‘shocked’ by civil unions/gay adoption bill, urged me to fight it: Malta bishop" by Patrick B. Craine, LifeSiteNews.com 12/31/13

Bishop Charles Scicluna, who is being criticized in the media for defending traditional marriage in his Christmas homily last week, said the pope told him at a meeting December 12th to be vocal in opposing the Civil Unions Bill. The bill is currently being considered by the Maltese legislature and would give same-sex couples the same rights as married couples, including adoption.

The mainstream media has widely reported that the pope is softening the Church’s stand on homosexuality, basing the claim on a remark he gave on the plane home from World Youth Day in July.

Bishop Scicluna says the pope reiterated his opposition to homosexual adoption when he informed the pontiff that his critics were quoting Francis’ remarks.

“I said Holy Father they’re quoting you now, and not as Cardinal Bergoglio from 2010,” the bishop said. “But he reiterated that gay adoptions are ‘un rigresso antropologico’ [an anthropological regression]... I have to say the Pope himself was quite shocked.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Bishop: Pope ‘Shocked’ By Gay Adoption, ‘Encouraged Me to Speak Out’" by Michael W. Chapman, CNSNews.com 12/30/13

In his Christmas Day homily, [Bishop Scicluna] had said . . .

“God, who generated his Son as a human being without the participation of a man, did not want his Son as man to be brought up without the participation of a man. The silent and essential mission of Joseph was to ensure that the boy Jesus, in his upbringing as a man, was not deprived of a father’s affection and example.

“In the upbringing of his Beloved Son, God himself ordained and chose to be subjected to the wisdom and law of creation according to which a baby should be reared by a mother and father, by a couple made of a man and a woman and not by a couple made of woman and woman or a couple made of man and man.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

UPDATED 12/31/13: From "It's official: Pope has not abolished sin, says Vatican" by Philip Pullella, Reuters

The Vatican felt compelled on Tuesday to deny that Pope Francis had "abolished sin", after . . . Eugenio Scalfari, an atheist who writes opinion pieces for the left-leaning La Repubblica newspaper, published an article titled "Francis' Revolution: He has abolished sin".

Scalfari, who held a long private conversation with the pope earlier this year and wrote about it several times, concluded in the complex, treatise-like article that Francis believed sin effectively no longer existed because God's mercy and forgiveness were "eternal".

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi told Vatican Radio that "this affirmation that the pope has abolished sin" was wrong.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Catholic Supreme Court Justice Decides Satan vs. God as well as Exorcism for Illinois Catholic Governor's Homosexual Sin

IL Black Churches, RC Diocese Block 'Gay Marriage'

After the Illinois legislature, packed with Democrats, were unable to pass a same-sex "marriage" bill in May 2013 (for which the Democrat governor has pleaded), homosexualists targeted this past week for passage of the bill.  However, once again, Illinois church leaders stood in the way of abomination (a.k.a. ObamaNation), and God has blessed the effort (2 Chron. 7:14).

For background, read Illinois Democrats Figure to Lock-in 'Gay Marriage' but they didn't figure this: God Intervenes to Preserve Marriage in Illinois

In addition, read Illinois Democrats Declare One-Man-One-Woman Marriage Law Unconstitutional

UPDATE 11/6/13 - Homosexualists Win: Democrat machine pressures black legislators, promises them money to defeat black Christians in primaries



-- From "Gay marriage opponents at Illinois Capitol invoke God, free speech" by Kerry Lester, Associated Press 10/23/13

Pastors, Christian activists and others addressed a crowd clustered on the first floor of the Capitol rotunda, some peering down from the second and third floor rails, a day after gay marriage proponents held their own event to urge lawmakers to approve it.

"Defend Marriage Lobby Day" —sponsored by the Illinois Family Institute began Wednesday with a morning prayer service outside the state Capitol. The secretary of state's police put number of attendees at 2,500—slightly smaller than the estimate from Tuesday's event.

Pastors from several of the area's black mega-churches are trying to help blunt gay marriage advocates' work to clinch a handful more "yes" votes to secure passage of the measure in the House.

Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan said just weeks ago that about a dozen votes were still needed for the legislation's passage.

On Tuesday, [Springfield's Catholic] Diocese head, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, barred any pro-gay marriage activists wearing rainbow sashes from attending a Mass. [Diocese Monsignor Carl] Kemme called Springfield a "fearless defender of the traditional definition of marriage."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Traditional marriage advocates pack Capitol rotunda" by Bernard Schoenburg, The State Journal-Register (Springfield, IL) 10/23/13

“May all recognize that marriage between one man and one woman is the foundation of our society and that marriage as such is essential for the common good,” said Monsignor Carl Kemme of the Springfield Catholic Diocese, as he led a prayer at the rally that filled the rotunda and had people watching over railings from the second and third floors of the building.

Senior Pastor Mark Johnson of Calvary Temple Christian Center in Springfield got applause when he said, "I am against same-sex marriage because I love people."

The rally came a day after a rally and march outside the capital by advocates of making same-sex marriage legal in Illinois. Advocates of that change, a form of which passed the Senate in February, hope for a House vote during this fall’s veto session.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Bishop Stops Gay Activists at Cathedral: ‘Praying for Same-Sex Marriage’ is ‘Blasphemous’" by Michael W. Chapman, CNSNews.com 10/24/13

“The Rainbow Sash Movement has encouraged Roman Catholics to come to Springfield to ‘have a loud Catholic presence for marriage equality,” said Bp. Paprocki in the video.  “They have announced plans to gather at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception at 4:30 p.m., just before the 5:15 p.m. Mass [on Oct. 22], to stand in the Cathedral and indicate that they are there to pray the rosary for ‘marriage equality.’”

“It is blasphemy to show disrespect or irreverence to God or to something holy,” said the bishop. “Since Jesus clearly taught that marriage as created by God is a sacred institution between a man and a woman (see Gospel of Matthew 19:4-6 and Mark 10:6-9), praying for same-sex marriage should be seen as blasphemous, and as such will not be permitted in the cathedral.”

In closing his video statement, Bishop Paprocki said, “Of course, our cathedral and parish churches are always open to everyone who wishes to repent their sins and ask for God’s forgiveness.”

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage was set by nature and God as being between one man and one woman. “Marriage is a basic human and social institution,” states the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).  “Though it is regulated by civil laws and church laws, it did not originate either from the church or the state, but from God. Therefore, neither church nor state can alter the basic meaning and structure of marriage.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 11/1/13: From "How Illinois gay marriage fight pitted Obama against black pastors in Chicago" by Peter Wallsten, Washington Post

. . . On its face, the [gay marriage legislation] seemed like a sure bet in Democrat-dominated Springfield. Gay rights activists filled the House chamber on the legislature’s final day in session in May anticipating a historic victory. Obama, the former Illinois senator, had mentioned the pending House vote during a fundraising stop in Chicago that week, saying: “I just want to say for the record it’s something that I deeply support.”

“There is all due respect to the president, but your influence only goes so far,” one skeptical lawmaker, Rep. Monique Davis (D), said over the summer, “especially when the caucus perceives that it, too, has some big issues no one is thinking about. Their children are dying [in widespread Chicago violence].”

Obama “has tremendous sway in Chicago,” [mega-church pastor James T.] Meeks said in an interview over the summer. “However, on this issue, I think people had made up their minds.”

Obama’s largely passive role in the Illinois debate was an early indicator that his declining clout may have been extending even into the state capital where his political career was born.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Obama Grants 'Reparations' to Homosexuals

The Obama administration has embarked on massive taxpayer-funded benefits to homosexuals who agree to "marry," such as vacations for members of the military and special rights to non-citizen homosexuals:  Foreigners who enter into same-sex "marriage" get faster visas, and those living in the U.S. with expired visas will be forgiven if they "marry" a same-sex partner.

UPDATE 9/6/13: President Obama Shifts VA Money to Homosexuals, Breaking Law

UPDATE 2/8/15: President Obama Floods Gay Agenda with Taxpayers' Money

For background on how President Obama is using the military to fight for the Gay Agenda, read President Obama Shifts Defense Funds to Homosexuals as well as Obama's Military Fights Christians, NOT Jihadists

Also read Countering Obama's Military Attack on American Culture

In addition, read President Obama Creates Homosexual Path to Citizenship

-- From "The Military Endorses Same-Sex Marriage" by Mark Joseph Stern, Slate 8/14/13

Today, the Pentagon has announced that it will grant the exact rights and benefits to married same-sex couples that it does to married straight couples, including housing and healthcare, a vast expansion of its previously announced plans to extend only meager perks to gay couples. Even more surprisingly, the military will offer a 10-day leave to gay couples stationed in a non-marriage state to travel to the 13 states plus Washington, D.C., to be legally wed.

Make no mistake: This is huge news, the biggest military-related LGBT victory since the repeal of Don’t Ask Don't Tell. . . . To allow gay couples to leave the homophobic states [sic] in which they are stationed to gain equal rights—to encourage it, actually, by tethering it to a holiday—is a bold endorsement of marriage equality by the military.

And that endorsement will have broad repercussions throughout society. . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Military to allow leave for gay weddings" by David S. Cloud, Los Angeles Times 8/14/13

In a sign of how quickly society is changing, the Pentagon said Wednesday it would grant special leave to thousands of military personnel in same-sex relationships so they can get married in the 13 states where such unions are legal — making them eligible for the first time for full benefits provided to other military families.

The decision, which the Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously backed, places the military in the forefront of the still-contentious national debate over same-sex unions.

Same-sex marriage is still barred in 37 states, including the entire South, where many of the Pentagon's largest installations are located. Thus many gay and lesbian couples in the military will face the unusual situation of having their unions recognized by federal authorities while they are on base, but not by the states where they live.

Critics contend that the Obama administration is pushing the military into the center of a political controversy with the goal of forcing even wider acceptance of same-sex marriage in the civilian realm.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "John Kerry: Gay couple visas now issued" by Hadas Gold, Politico 8/2/13

The United States will immediately begin issuing immigrant visas to same-sex couples, Secretary of State John Kerry announced Friday.

As long as the marriage is valid in the jurisdiction, either U.S. or foreign country where it took place, it is valid for immigration purposes, the State Department said in statement. An engaged couple who cannot marry in the foreign fiancé’s country can apply for a fiancé(e) (K) visa.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "State Dept. Panel Advises Gay Foreigners in Civil Unions to Get Married" by Alissa Tabirian, CNSNews.com 8/19/13

Victoria Neilson, legal director for the LBGT group Immigration Equality, was one of three panelists fielding questions submitted through social media sites. She was asked exactly how foreign domestic partnerships will be recognized under new State Department guidelines that require visa applications based on same-sex marriages to be treated the same way as those for heterosexual marriages.

The Immigration Equality website offers the same advice Neilson did on marrying to “feel more secure that your relationship will be recognized for immigration purposes” and notes that generally, “marriage-based petitions are adjudicated quicker” than employment-based petitions.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "On-line Discussion of Visa Guidelines for Same-Sex Spouses" posted at U.S. State Department 8/8/13 - Don Heflin, Director of the Visa Office at the State Department Bureau of Consular Affairs and David Stewart, Minister Counselor for Consular Affairs at the U.S. Embassy in London

MR. JOHNSON: Hi there, and welcome to the Google Hangout on the Department of State’s visa processing guidelines for same-sex spouses. . . . we have Victoria Neilson, who is legal director for the LGBT group Immigration Equality.

MS. NEILSON: Great. Hi, thanks for having me here. This is a very exciting time for Immigration Equality. . . . It’s been really great to finally be able to say yes to committed [homosexual] families instead of no, which we’ve been saying for many years. We are delighted that the State Department put out its guidance last week . . .

. . . the advice that we have been giving to most [homosexual] couples is if you can get . . . married, that your rights will be much more certain at that point and the processing of an application would be more straightforward. . . .

. . . If you entered [the U.S.] legally with the visa and overstayed and you are married to a U.S. citizen, then the fact that you’re here unlawfully is forgiven and you can file that application from within the U.S. . . .

To read the entire transcript of the on-line discussion above, CLICK HERE.

Also read President Obama's Sexually Dysfunctional Military On Trial

Homosexual 'Domestic Partners' Can't Buy FL Condo

Homosexualists are outraged the association of Casa Di Amici Condo near Venice, Florida has decided to restrict purchases to only single people or legally married (husband and wife) couples.  Such a provision is legal in Florida, the homosexualist lawyer agrees, but wants to generate public outrage nonetheless.

For background, read Media Say Law Must Force Christians into Gay Agenda and also read Gay Agenda Attacks America One Town at a Time as well as Homosexuals Sue Illinois Christians for not Celebrating Same-sex Union

In addition, read about the Colorado baker and myriad other Christians sued in states with same-sex unions/marriage laws.



-- From "Condo Association Refuses Property Sales To Any Couples ‘Living In Sin’" posted at CBS Tampa Bay 8/13/13

Any couples who are not yet married and are only parties in domestic parternships, no matter what their sexual orientation, will not be given permission to move into Casa Di Amici Condo, according to WTSP-TV.

“I could not believe what I was reading. It basically says you have to be either a single person or a husband and wife to purchase a unit here,” realtor Julia Nowak, who rents one of the condos to her parents, told the station about a document she received from the association.

Despite some taking offense to the policies, however, the restriction is reportedly not illegal based on Florida state laws.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Florida Condo Association Allows Married Residents Only: Sorry Gays" by Kyle Munzenrieder, Miami New Times 8/13/13

Julia Nowak, an openly gay realtor, discovered the new restrictions when the condo association of the Casa Di Amici Condo near Venice, Florida, adopted them in July. She owns a unit in the upscale neighborhood and rents it out to her elderly parents.

Seriously, you can read the declaration yourself on the association's comic sans-riddled website:

The sale, lease, or transfer of a Condominium Unit may be made only to an individual, to a husband and wife jointly, to the trustee or trustees of a trust, the beneficiaries of which are limited to an individual, a husband and wife, or the lineal descendants of a the husband and wife, or either of them, or to a partnership organized for the purpose of holding title to a Condominium Unit and the partners of which are an individual or husband and wife.

While Venice, Florida, has an anti-discrimination ordinance on the books, the condo units are located in unincorporated Sarasota County. So unless the county or the state of Florida passes a human-rights law that forbids discrimination, this is all perfectly legal.

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

God Intervenes to Preserve Marriage in Illinois

In a state where liberal Democrats have a stranglehold on government, and where most Republicans are liberal as well, a diverse Christian coalition convinced a majority of legislators to oppose a same-sex "marriage" bill, even though they easily passed a same-sex civil unions law just two years ago.

"Today our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ has won!  Pastor James Meeks, Bishop Lance Davis and I are so proud of the God fearing Black Caucus [Illinois legislature] members who withstood the pressure of the LGBT forces and allowed God's word concerning marriage to remain between one man and one woman in Illinois."
-- Bishop Larry Trotter, co-chairman of the African American Clergy Coalition

For background, read Illinois Democrats Maneuver Lock on 'Gay Marriage'

For national background, read Obamanation: Gay Agenda Carries in 4 More States and also read 'Gay Marriage' Sweeps New England. D'ya Notice? as well as Media Say Law Forces Christians into Gay Agenda

In addition, read about the Colorado baker and myriad other Christians sued in states with same-sex unions/marriage laws.



-- From "House adjourns without voting on same-sex marriage bill" by Lauren Leone-Cross, The State Journal-Register (Springfield, IL) 5/31/13

The Illinois House adjourned Friday without voting on same-sex marriage legislation, meaning gay and lesbian couples in Illinois anxious to tie the knot will have to keep waiting.

Supporters had all the reason to be optimistic back when the historic measure passed out of the Senate 34-21 on Valentine’s Day. Since then, however, the bill remained stalled in the House . . .

The upset for gay-marriage supporters comes just two years after lawmakers narrowly approved civil unions in 2011, giving same-sex couples state-level legal recognition and health care benefits similar to those of married couples.

While civil unions give couples some benefits, such as automatic hospital visits, and adoption and parental rights, gay and lesbian couples have argued they remain second-class citizens in the eyes of the state without the right to marry.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.



From "House declines same-sex marriage vote" by Mike Riopell and Doug T. Graham, Daily Herald (suburban Chicago) 5/31/13

. . . emotion displayed itself on the House floor via a tearful speech by the legislation's sponosor, [proudly homosexual] Democratic Rep. Greg Harris [Chicago], and loud yells from onlookers.

Harris announced he'd put off a vote until November. He said lawmakers appear to be more likely to sign off then.

Both Republicans who have said they'll support it — state Reps. Ed Sullivan of Mundelein and Ron Sandack of Downers Grove — have faced immense pressure from religious groups after they went public with their opinions.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "No same-sex marriage vote until November: ‘I’ve never been sadder,’ sponsor says" by Dave Mckinney and Natasha Korecki, staff reporters, Chicago Sun-Times 5/31/13

Stubborn resistance within the House Black Caucus, a 20-member bloc of African-American lawmakers who have faced a withering lobbying blitz against the plan from black ministers, has helped keep Harris’ legislation in check, with several House members still undecided.

“The sense I have is blacks are tired of being lobbied or targeted. They’ve kind of turned back on some of the advocates and lobbyists and are asking, ‘Why don’t you get some Republicans?’” one high-level Democratic insider said Friday.

Two House Republicans have publicly endorsed the legislation, Rep. Ed Sullivan (R-Antioch) and Rep. Ron Sandack (R-Downers Grove). A likely third GOP supporter, Rep. Jim Durkin (R-Westchester), switched to a no as he contemplated a possible run for House Republican leader.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Gay marriage bill fails to go to vote in Illinois House" by Monique Garcia, Rex W. Huppke and Cynthia Dizikes, Chicago Tribune reporters 6/1/13

Illinois had appeared poised to become the 13th state to approve same-sex marriage. Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn promised to sign the bill. Democrats held veto-proof majorities in the House and Senate. President Barack Obama called for its passage during a Thursday night fundraiser in his home city, and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel was a major backer as well.

While advocates have brought forth a lengthy lineup of religious [leftist] leaders who endorse gay marriage, Catholics and conservative African-American church groups have provided fierce opposition. They argue that same-sex marriage violates the basic tenets of the Bible, which call for marriage to be only between a man and a woman.

"This was a recipe for disaster from the beginning, because when Rep. Harris introduced the bill, there were no African-American or Latino co-sponsors on it," said Rick Garcia, political director of the Civil Rights Agenda. "And the problem we have now was among the black caucus."

But Democratic Rep. Ken Dunkin, chair of the Legislative Black Caucus, said the blame shouldn't fall on a bloc of 20 legislators, arguing that more support must come from Downstate, rural and suburban lawmakers.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Ill. House adjourns without vote on gay marriage" by The Associated Press 5/31/13

[President] Obama exhorted legislators to approve the measure at a fundraising event Wednesday [in Chicago].

"Here in Illinois, we've got a vote on same-sex marriage that's going to be coming up in the state Legislature," Obama told the attendees. "And I just want to say for the record it's something that I deeply support."

Opponents of the legislation — which included some of the most powerful religious leaders in the state — have said the bill would force religious organizations to allow same-sex marriage ceremonies in their fellowship halls, parish centers and sanctuaries. The bill, however, states that churches are immune from being sued should they refuse to provide their religious facilities to celebrate a same-sex wedding. Yet, businesses, health care and educational facilities, and social service agencies are not exempt.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Homosexuals Sue Illinois Christians for not Celebrating Same-sex Union

Illinois' proud homosexual legislators Greg Harris and Deborah Mell lament defeat of the same-sex "marriage" bill on the House floor (video):

1 Mom, 2 Dads & Baby: ABC News Promotes Polyamory

Now that the media and political correctness police have declared victory for the Gay Agenda (much thanks to President Obama and, of course, Hollywood/TV), they're now moving on to polyamory, polygamy, and more.  It's amazing how rapidly the sexual revolutionaries believe the desensitized, gullible public is ready for the next phase of indoctrination.

If two men or two women should be allowed to get married simply because they “love” one another, then why limit marriage to just two people? Why not three people? Why not 10 people? Why not [allow] nieces and aunts to marry?
-- Sen. Rick Santorum, August 2011

UPDATE 3/24/15: 'Husband' Impregnates Both 'Married' Lesbian Wives (Polyamory)

For background, read Homosexual 'Marriage' Not Enough; Next Goal and also read 'Gay Marriage' Enables Polygamy Court Challenge as well as 'Civil Union' Joins a Man & Two Women in Brazil



-- From "Polyamory – an Anti-Scarcity Relationship Model for the Future" by Melanie Swan, posted at Institute for Emerging Ethics & Technologies 2/18/13

The first International Academic Polyamory Conference was held in Berkeley CA February 15-17, 2013 with approximately 100 attendees. Polyamory is the practice, desire, or acceptance of having more than one intimate relationship at a time with the knowledge and consent of everyone involved. It is not new or revolutionary that individuals may be involved with more than one other party; what is new is the openness, acknowledgement, and support and encouragement of the situation.

A number of academic studies were presented by researchers from around the world regarding the practice of polyamory. Polyamory is a niche, but increasingly becoming a defined field of sociology research. Theory papers and discussion drew on social movement theory, queer theory, intimacy theory, performance theory, and other aspects of philosophy and sociology. Other conference tracks discussed public education, experiential aspects, and legal and political issues. Some common themes were the notion of plurality and choice in relationship models and a superior level of communications mastery and emotional intelligence.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "New Sexual Revolution: Polyamory May Be Good for You" by Stephanie Pappas and LiveScience 2/14/13

. . . an estimated 4 to 5 percent of Americans are looking outside their relationship for love and sex — with their partner's full permission.

These consensually nonmonogamous relationships, as they're called, don't conform to the cultural norm of a handholding couple in love for life. They come in a dizzying array of forms, from occasional "swinging" and open relationships to long-term commitments among multiple people. Now, social scientists embarking on brand-new research into these types of relationships are finding that they may challenge the ways we think of jealousy, commitment and love. They may even change monogamy for the better.

The study of consensual nonmonogamy is a relatively new field. In the 1970s, partner-swapping and swinging (recreational sex outside of a relationship) came into the public eye, and psychologists conducted a few studies. But that research was limited to mostly white, heterosexual couples who engaged in swinging for fun, according to Elisabeth Sheff, a legal consultant and former Georgia State University professor, writing in 2011 in the Journal of Contemporary Ethnography.

While there are no national statistics on consensual nonmonogamy, University of Michigan psychologist Terri Conley has estimated that about 5 percent of Americans are in one of these types of relationships at any given time. From the little data collected, scientists know lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals are slightly more likely than heterosexuals to enter nonmonogamous relationships, said Amy Moors, a graduate student in Conley's lab. So, it seems, are people high in the personality trait of openness, which indicates high interest in new experiences.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "5 Myths About Polyamory" by Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience Senior Writer 2/14/13

Myth #1: Poly people are unsatisfied

When someone goes outside a relationship looking for companionship or sex, it's natural to assume there's something missing from their romance. But that doesn't appear to be the case for polyamorous individuals. . . .

Myth #2: Polyamorous people are still paired up

Many polyamorous people do form relationships that orbit around a committed couple, with each person having relationships on the side. But the primary partner/secondary partner model is an oversimplification for many poly relationships, said Bjarne Holmes, a psychologist at Champlain College in Vermont. . . .

Myth #3: Polyamory is a way to avoid commitment

. . . Joining a polyamorous relationship and thinking it's going to be a commitment-free breeze would likely be a huge mistake. . . .

Myth #4: Polyamory is exhausting

. . . Polyamorous people report feeling energized by their multiple relationships and say that good feelings in one translate to good feelings in others. . . .

Myth #5: Polyamory is bad for the kids

One big question about polyamory is how it affects families with children. The answer to that is not entirely clear — there have been no large-scale, long-term studies on the outcomes of kids growing up with polyamorous parents. . . .

Some teens indicated that they'd consider polyamory for themselves; others weren't interested at all.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

For related articles, click headlines below:

Family Demise; 1/3 of Households are People Alone

Cohabitation Soars, Children Suffer: Study

American Trend: Fewer Children, More Animals/Pets

Obamanation: Secularized Like Europe, Spiritualized Like Oprah

ABC News 20/20: April 20, 2012 "Two Marriages, Many Lovers" (video)

To view the entire ABC News 20/20 episode (4/20/12) "Strange Arrangements: The New Sex," CLICK HERE.

Pres. Obama Shifts Defense Funds to Homosexuals

As huge budget cuts are made in the U.S. military to counter the ever-increasing federal government deficit spending, President Obama has bypassed Congress to bestow new entitlements to deviant sex partners of members of the military.  This new government spending will be paid from taxpayers' money that otherwise would have been used to defend Americans.

The president says that the "unconstitutional and unfair" Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 is limiting how much money he can divert to the homosexuals.

"President Obama continues to expand the government's financial obligations to support his liberal social agenda during a time when this Administration has imposed drastic budget cuts to our military readiness and national security."
-- Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)

UPDATE 2/8/15: President Obama Floods Gay Agenda with Taxpayers' Money

For background, read Congress Battles Obama: Military & Defense of Marriage and also read Obama's Military Fights Christians, NOT Jihadists and read the saga of President Obama's War on Marriage via Judges

UPDATE 2/19/13 Clarification: Only homosexuals are eligible for extended benefits, not heterosexuals

-- From "Pentagon announces extension of benefits to same-sex partners" by Lucy Madison, CBS News 2/11/13

Just weeks after lifting the ban on women in combat, the Defense Department announced yet another groundbreaking decision today, making official the extension of some military benefits to same-sex partners previously denied them.

In a statement, outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the military would no longer provide some benefits to heterosexual couples while denying them to same-sex partners in the military.

"Seventeen months ago, the United States military ended the policy of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'" Panetta said today in a statement announcing the decision. "At the time of repeal, I committed to reviewing benefits that had not previously been available to same-sex partners based on existing law and policy. It is a matter of fundamental equity that we provide similar benefits to all of those men and women in uniform who serve their country."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Leon Panetta expands gay pairs' benefits" by Carolyn Lochhead, San Francisco Chronicle 2/11/13

The 20 benefits include education, hospital visitation, casualty notification, travel, transportation, identification cards, family counseling, relocation assistance, recreation programs and other benefits that will be available to gay and lesbian couples who sign a declaration attesting to their committed relationship.

[Secretary Panetta said Monday,] "Taking care of our service members and honoring the sacrifices of all military families are two core values of this nation. Extending these benefits is an appropriate next step under current law to ensure that all service members receive equal support for what they do to protect this nation."

Panetta said additional benefits for same-sex couples "will require substantial policy revisions and training" but will be available "as expeditiously as possible."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Partners of Gays in Service Are Granted Some Benefits" by Thom Shanker, New York Times 2/11/13

Full benefits would require the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The Pentagon lifted the ban on openly gay men and lesbians serving in the armed forces, but it cannot recognize their marriages, even if they are legal in some states, because military personnel are federal employees covered by the marriage law.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule this summer on whether the law is constitutional.

“Additional benefits, such as health care and housing allowances, are by statute currently only available to spouses and therefore cannot be made available to same-sex domestic partners of service members under current law,” Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta wrote in a letter released by the Pentagon.

“In the event that the Defense of Marriage Act is no longer applicable to the Department of Defense, it will be the policy of the department to construe the words ‘spouse’ and ‘marriage’ without regard to sexual orientation,” he added, “and married couples, irrespective of sexual orientation, and their dependents will be granted full military benefits.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Same-sex military couples to get expanded access to benefits, Pentagon says" by Ernesto Londoño and Craig Whitlock, Washington Post 2/11/13

The Pentagon estimates that about 5,600 active-duty and roughly 3,400 National Guard servicemembers have same-sex spouses [sic].

The biggest lingering question is whether the department might be able to offer on-base housing to same-sex couples. The Pentagon decided not to do so for the time being because on-base housing is scarce and because legal experts worried that doing so could have contravened the “spirit” of the federal marriage law, a defense official told reporters.

News last week about the impending announcement generated supportive statements from Capitol Hill and did not appear to draw significant criticism from groups that have in the past raised concerns about allowing openly gay people to serve in the armed forces.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Senator: DoD Giving Benefits To Same-Sex Partners Creates Costly 'New Class of Beneficiary'" by Craig Bannister, posted at CNSNews.com 2/11/13

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) [said] . . . "The Department of Defense is essentially creating a new class of beneficiary that will increase costs and demand for limited resources that are currently available for military families, active and reserve forces, and retirees."

Inhofe also suggested Obama used semantics to merely give the appearance of respecting the Defense of Marriage Act:

"In a weak attempt to not violate the Defense of Marriage Act, the Administration is using a play on words by saying 'same sex domestic partners' can have access to benefits instead of 'spouses.' We are on a slippery slope here. Why would the DoD extend benefits to same-sex partners and then deny cohabiting heterosexual couples the same benefits?"

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Justice Scalia: No Right to Same-sex 'Marriage'

Dem. Senator Says Christians Belong in Monastery

As Colorado Democrats ram through same-sex unions legislation (Senate Bill 11) over voters' objection, and Republicans' attempt to include freedom of religion provisions, openly homosexual bully Sen. Pat Steadman quoted Shakespeare, saying "get thee to a nunnery" and further said that anyone who believes homosexual behavior is sinful should live in confinement.

For background, read Colorado Same-sex Unions Trample Religious Liberty and also read Homosexuals Sue Christians for Refusing Accommodation as well as Oregon: Christian Baker Must Do Lesbian 'Wedding'

And read about the Colorado baker and myriad other Christians sued in states with same-sex unions/marriage laws.

UPDATE 3/22/13: Gov. signs civil unions into law


-- From "Civil Unions Gets Initial Nod In CO Senate" by The Associated Press 2/8/13

Democratic Sen. Pat Steadman sounded emotional at times when he pitched the bill he's sponsoring to his colleagues. Steadman's longtime [homosexual] partner died of cancer last year.

Senate Democrats gave initial approval to the bill Friday, with one Republican joining them. One more vote will send the bill to the House, possibly as soon as next week.

Republicans defeated the measure in the House the last two years. But Democrats now control both chambers and vow speedy approval, seven years after voters banned gay marriage.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Colorado Civil Unions Bill Passes Second Senate Hurdle; Bill Likely To Become Law" posted at Huffington Post 2/8/13

"What to say to those who claim that religion requires them to discriminate?" Steadman began, Fox31 reported. "I tell you what I’d say: 'get thee to a nunnery, and live there. Go live a monastic life, away from modern society, away from people you can’t see as equals to yourself'."

“Go some place and be as judgmental as you like, go inside your church, establish separate water fountains if you like. But don’t tell me that your free exercise of religion requires the state of Colorado to establish separate water fountains," Steadman said.

Colorado would become the sixth state to support civil unions. Currently, nine states and the District of Columbia give marriage licenses to same-sex couples and three states have pending same-sex marriage laws.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.



From "Senate Gives Initial Approval to Civil Unions Legislation" by Bente Birkeland, KUNC National Public Radio (NPR Northern Colorado) 2/8/13

Bill sponsor, Senator Pat Steadman (D-Denver) . . . [said] “Love is all that matters. Two people finding love. Senate Bill 11 is for lovers and the gifts they give to one another. If two people are lucky enough to find each other why should Colorado stand in their way.”

“Every argument I’ve hear in support of this bill has appealed to equal rights for all,” said Senator Owen Hill (R-Colorado Springs). “To continue with this bill in a way penalizes citizens who are acting in accordance with strong religious freedoms violates the very nature of the argument for the bill in the first place.”

But Democrats struck down Hill’s proposal calling it unjust and saying it would create the right to discriminate. They also defeated other GOP amendments to weaken the bill. Most Republicans object to civil unions saying they are too similar to marriage and would undermine the traditional family unit.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Colorado Senate gives initial approval to civil unions bill" by Colleen O'Connor, The Denver Post 2/8/13

Intense debate rallied over issues of violation of religious freedom, the will of the people and the ability of adoption agencies to refuse same-sex parents.

Sen. Owen Hill, R-Colorado Springs, argued for an amendment that would have included exemption for religious organizations and businesses that did not want to recognize civil unions, and talked about Religious Freedom Day, which celebrates passage of Thomas Jefferson's Statute for Religious Freedom in Virginia.

"I am a lesbian and in a committed relationship, but you also have the right to make your own decision," [Democrat Sen. Lucia Guzman] said. "I am also here asking you to be a little bit more open, to be able to walk with us on this journey that has taken so long."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read President Obama Redefines 1st Amendment Freedom of Religion even though Obama Denies Leading War Against Christianity

In addition, read 'Gay Rights' Winning, Loss of Religious Liberty Documented - Washington Post writer demonstrates it's a "zero sum" game: Winning homosexual 'rights' means Christians must lose freedom of religion.