The Lisa Miller Case:Cultural Revolution, Judicial Tyranny and Our National Future
This tragic custody case sets up a conflict of laws issue as a part of a homosexual advocacy agenda.
Photo: Janet Jenkins, left, Lisa Miller, right.
It was during “therapy” that Lisa claims she was first exposed to the prospect of being a lesbian. In a candid interview with LifeSite news in October of 2008 she told a sad and troubling story of what amounts to recruitment into what many are pushing as an alternative lifestyle. She maintained that she was encouraged in counseling sessions to try lesbian relationships. This happened not just once, but twice; both times within the context of “therapy” as she tried to free herself from the pain and wounds of a difficult life.
After a continuing sad spiral of events which ended with the death of her mother she met Janet Jenkins, who was living a lesbian lifestyle. Janet befriended her. Lisa maintains that she also seduced her into a lesbian relationship. That relationship became abusive and was filled with trauma. However, even after leaving Janet in the late nineties, Lisa went back. She followed the pattern often demonstrated by a victim of abuse.
The two traveled to Vermont in order to obtain a Vermont same-sex civil union license after Vermont passed the law in 2000. They immediately returned to Virginia. The relationship, troubled from the start, did not change. As is becoming increasingly common in same sex relationships, the two determined they should have a child together.
Of course, that is not a physical possibility and it never will be. So Lisa sought the services of a “fertility specialist” in Virginia.
This medical “professional” inseminated her with sperm from an anonymous donor. He followed the growing approach of treating children as a commodity and their creation as an act of medical manufacturing. So Isabella was born in Virginia as the “product” of the misuse of fertility technology, with no father whom she will ever know. However, Isabella is a wonderful child. Lisa Miller now clearly understands that she is also a gift from God for whom she bears a serious responsibility.
Four months after Isabella was born, Lisa, Janet and Isabella relocated to Vermont. While in Vermont, as a result of serious soul searching, Lisa became a Christian. She had a genuine Christian conversion. As a result of this conversion, she began to see all of her life differently as the pieces began to come together. According to Lisa, Janet became increasingly abusive. So, to protect herself and her daughter she left the living situation. She also left the lesbian lifestyle.
She began to change her life and received helpful counseling from people without an agenda. They assisted her in coming to understand her painful past and the effect it had upon her behaviors, her choices, and her addictions. Lisa became increasingly concerned for her daughter and returned to her home state of Virginia to make a new life. Janet remained in Vermont where she remains in an active lesbian lifestyle. Isabella was 17 months old at the time. She did not even know Janet.
Lisa later sought to dissolve the civil union in Vermont because it was the only place she could dissolve it. Virginia’s statutory law and State constitution affirm what the Natural Law reveals; marriage is between one man and one woman. Virginia does not recognize “same-sex” marriage or homosexual civil unions. Janet, who is neither the biological nor adoptive parent of Isabella then sought to obtain custody of Lisa’s daughter.
This tragic case sets up what is called a conflict of laws issue, pitting the law of one State against another. This specter hangs over many such homosexual relationships as the patchwork of court enforced schemes of calling them a “marriage” unfolds. It is a deliberate result of the strategy of cultural revolutionaries in the Homosexual Equivalency movement who are setting up what they hope will be their vehicle for enforcing their cultural revolution Nationally through the Courts.
The Homosexual Equivalency movement seeks to force legal recognition of homosexual relationships as the equivalent of a marriage. In so doing, they end up opposing marriage. Oh, they are verbal engineers, using Orwellian language, calling for “marriage equality” and the “freedom to marry”. It is simply a verbal slight of hand similar to the use of the word “choice” by those early abortion advocates. Such wordsmithing simply constitutes verbal engineering. It is an effort to cover over ...
Rate This Article
Leave a Comment
More U.S. News
- SHOCKING: Senator says IRS set to pay out $70 million in employee bonuses
- Agents think they'll find out what happened to Jimmy Hoffa - after 40 years
- Did Pocahontas save explorer John Smith here? Native American site of Werowocomoco fascinating regardless
- Poorly prepared teachers steering nation's classrooms
- Cheers Star: We Didn't Need Surveillance When We Were Kids - 'We Had God'
- IN SEARCH OF SUNKEN TREASURE: Divers plunge into Lake Michigan to search for 17th Century ship
- No-one Can Change the Truth About Fatherhood. Love Your Father. Be a Good Father
- Archbishop Chaput Cuts Through the Double Talk About Religious Liberty
- Courageous Cardinal George of Chicago Defends Marriage, Calls for Public Conversion
- Fr. Paul Schenck: Finding Living Faith on Catechetical Sunday
- The Movie Yellow: Incest as 'Normal' and Cassavates's Slides Into the World of Woes
- The Chicago School Teachers Strike Reveals the Need For School Choice
- The Sexual Barbarians and the Dissolution of Culture
- The Happy Priest Challenges Us to Ask: Who is Jesus to Me?
- Michael Coren on Canadian Public Schools: Teachers, leave those kids alone
- We Cannot Ignore Our Consciences: Cardinal Dolan On Religious Liberty
- In the Face of Danger, Successor of Peter Travels to Lebanon as a Messenger of Peace
- Reflections on the Dignity and Vocation of Women: Who or What?