Article brought to you by: Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Segregation According to Sexuality? Legal Strategy to Force Homosexual 'Marriage'

By Deacon Keith Fournier
November 11th, 2010
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

This unmarried, heterosexual couple is a part of a revolutionary movement in British society. The members no longer want marriage to be recognized for what it is, a lifelong union between one man and one woman open to the bearing and rearing of children. They are dedicated to making the State give legal equivalency to non-marital relationships, homosexual or heterosexual. Then, they want to force the rest of society to call what can never be a marriage to be a marriage (homosexual partnerships) by using the Police Power of the State to enforce their new order.

CHESAPEAKE, VA (Catholic Online) - The Monday, November 8, 2010 edition of the Guardian featured an article by Tom Freeman and Katherine Doyle entitled "Heterosexual couple make second attempt for civil partnership." The article begins, "A heterosexual couple will request a civil partnership - available only to same-sex couples in the UK - at a register office in London tomorrow, to take a stand against a system which they say "segregates couples according to their sexuality".

This unmarried, heterosexual couple is a part of a revolutionary movement in British society. The members no longer want marriage to be recognized for what it is, a lifelong union between one man and one woman open to the bearing and rearing of children. They are dedicated to making the State give legal equivalency to non-marital relationships, homosexual or heterosexual. Then, they want to force the rest of society to call what can never be a marriage to be a marriage (homosexual partnerships) by using the Police Power of the State to enforce their new order.

Tom Freeman and Katherine Doyle are part of a campaign led by "The Equal Love campaign" and "Project OutRage". The group is dedicated to Cultural Revolution. They acknowledge that their effort "aims to challenge the twin bans on gay marriages and heterosexual civil partnerships, with eight couples filing applications at register offices and then, when they are refused, bringing a joint legal action in the courts to secure a change in the law. The campaign is being organized by the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender human rights organization OutRage!"

"Starting on Tuesday 2 November, eight couples will file applications at their local register offices. Four same-sex couples will apply for civil marriages and four heterosexual couples will apply for civil partnerships. Every week until 14 December, one couple will make an application. If the couples are turned away, as we expect they will be, we plan to take legal action. Denying them equal treatment is contrary to the Human Rights Act."

They boast  "Our legal team will argue in the courts that the bans on gay marriages and heterosexual civil partnerships are an unlawful and unjustified discrimination. In a democracy, gay and straight couples should be equal before the law. Both civil marriages and civil partnerships should be open to everyone without discrimination."

The Guardian quotes Freeman and Doyle, "We want to secure official status for our relationship in a way that supports the call for complete equality and is free of the negative, sexist connotations of marriage.We are taking this stand against discrimination and in support of legal equality for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation. The 'separate but equal' system which segregates couples according to their sexuality is not equal at all. All loving couples should have access to the same institutions, regardless of sexuality. There should be parity of access."

This is not the first time the two were turned down in their effort to form a Civil Partnership. The Council which refused to grant them "civil partnership" status before explained to the Guardian, "Like all councils, we must follow the requirements of the Civil Partnership Act 2004, which states that to qualify for a civil partnership, couples must be of the same sex. Whilst we can't legally accept the proposed civil partnership, we would be delighted to offer the couple a civil marriage."

Remember, Civil Partnerships are already legally available in the United Kingdom. What is clear is they were never the goal of the Homosexual Equivalency Activists but only a stepping stone. This campaign involves a strategic and deliberate use of the Courts to bring about a Cultural Revolution.

The Human Rights Campaign is the leading Homosexual Equivalency Activist organization in the United States. They are well funded and they are pursuing the same strategy. They state on their web site "Only marriage can provide families with true equality. However, domestic partnerships and other forms of relationship recognition, though limited, provide important and tangible protections." In reality, if you examine their strategic efforts, their cases, and their goals you discover quickly that the Civil Union strategy is a stepping stone and subterfuge. It is a stop along the way to the goal of eliminating the special status given to true marriage and the family and society founded upon it. They want to replace marriage with a counterfeit using the same word and build a new social order.  

The lawyers of the Human Rights Campaign are advocates of what I have long called the "Homosexual Equivalency Movement". I use that phrase to get the real issue across to people. This is not about discrimination against anybody, including homosexual persons. Homosexual Equivalency activists want a cultural and social revolution. They insist that we all recognize a legal equivalency between true marriages and cohabitating practicing homosexuals or face legal punitive consequences. The Human Rights Campaign uses the Courts and the legislature to force this new cultural and social order on all of us.

The efforts of the "Human Rights Campaign" to equate how one engages in non-marital sexual acts with a member of the same sex to being a member of a particular race or gender  - thereby making practicing homosexuals a "protected class" for civil rights purposes - is legally and socially dangerous enough. One is a status; the other involves a behavior and a lifestyle. However, add to this using Civil Unions as a stepping stone to enforced recognition of homosexual 'marriage' and you see the thoroughness of the legal strategy. The cases being orchestrated in the United Kingdom have their parallel in the United States. They are already in our courts or being set up.

The Homosexual Equivalency Activists have borrowed a page out of the effort used to eradicate the true Right, the Right to Life, and replace it with a so called "Right" to take innocent human life. The real goal of those early cases was to legalize abortion throughout all nine months. It was accomplished under the ruse of a "Right to Privacy". The trajectory of legal cases which brought about this evil result, ending with Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton, shows how Cultural Revolutionaries use the Courts to achieve their ends. The cases in the U.K. are a warning that we are well down another path of danger.

In 1965 the United States Supreme Court handed down Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965). The case involved a Connecticut law which prohibited contraception. The Court was persuaded to find a "Right to privacy" in the Constitution so as to protect a married couple's decision to contracept. Don't bother trying to find in it in the words of the Bill of Rights. They reached into the "penumbra" and "emanations" (their terms) and basically manufactured it.

In 1973, activists were successful in orchestrating another case through the Courts,  Eisenstadt v. Baird 405 U.S. 438 (1972). It questioned whether an unmarried couple had any less of a "right" to this right to privacy. In response to that case the Supreme Court held that to deny this "right" to unmarried couples worked an "irrational discrimination" against them and violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. One year later, the Supreme Court issued the evil opinion which unleashed the killing of children in the womb,  Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) and its companion Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973). The Court used this same "Right to privacy" to protect abortion on demand as some sort of "right". 

Make no mistake, what is happening in the United Kingdom, and in the United States, has the same kind of strategic goal of changing our culture. The recognition of "Civil Unions" is not the end. It is merely a strategic stepping stone in a Cultural Revolution. There is a legal strategy to make the same kind of Equal protection arguments, relying on Roe and its progeny, and then force this brave new world on the West. It is time to unmask the strategy.

Article brought to you by: Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)