by Lawrence Fox
The
fruitful bonding between man and woman is the most fundamental form of original
justice.
Justice
is the promotion of the proper order of things. In a just society, human beings have a harmonious
relationship with one another -- male and female, Creator and creation all work
together and flourish.
As a
result of this form of justice, society exists. Families are formed, tribal
bonds are established, and nations arise. Civilizations were created from this original
justice – the fruitful bonding between man and woman.
Several
years ago, I was listening to two lawyers debate the legality of California’s
Proposition 8, which amended the state’s Constitution in 2008 to re-affirm marriage
as a form (thing in itself) consisting of one man and one woman.
Proposition
8 was a grass root response of the voters of California to reject outlaw courts
legalizing same sex “marriage.” Thirty-three other U.S. states passed pro-marriage
amendments and legislation. All these states rejected the notion of courts
arbitrarily equating the act of sodomy between two men or two women as a form
of natural justice.
The
American people’s fervent response in favor of traditional marriage was ethnically
and religiously diverse and quite prescient. Africans, Caucasians, Hispanics,
Protestants, Catholics, and Mormons all fought side by side to preserve the
fruitful bonding between one man and one woman as an original justice.
They
recognized that courts demanding the recognition of same-sex coupling would
completely trample the consciences of individuals formed by natural law
(reason) and religion (faith). The rights of children to be conceived naturally
and raised by father and mother would be eliminated.
The
plethora of lawsuits brought forward by LGBT lawyers against photographers,
bakers, fertility specialists, and
 |
Aaron & Melissa Klein, whose bakery was closed
after they refused to bake a cake for a same sex "wedding"
ceremony, have been fined $135,000 by the state
of Oregon. The fine is a tax on their religious beliefs, and
will have to be paid out of resources intended to support
their five children. |
owners of social halls in the last several
years has proven the electorate correct. The increase in bizarre forms of
surrogacy resulting from homosexuals attempting to legitimize their lifestyles by
manufacturing children is already poisoning our society.
Throughout
human history whenever the fruitful bond between male and female was broken,
other forms of injustices grew -- patricide, matricide, infanticide, fratricide
and in some cases the complete disappearance of whole civilizations. Spartans
decided that the elements of war were perfect, and everything else subservient.
Hence they promoted homosexual unions among themselves to the denigration of
the original justice of the male female bond.
 |
No longer seen on planet earth: Spartans
Acceptance of homosexual unions destroyed their
civilization |
Shortly
after that, their society was gone. Families no longer bonded. Eugenics invaded
their thinking, and their imperfect infants were killed. Everything became the property
of the state. And then the state disappeared.
This is
what is facing America today. Same sex “marriage” is an attack on original
justice. It is an attack on the nature of man himself, and the harmonious
relations between male
and female, man and creation, and man and Creator.
It seeks
to establish as normative the unfruitful bonding of men and men to the
exclusion of women. And it establishes the unfruitful bonding of women and women
to the exclusion of men. Eventually, this attack on original justice will
permeate all of our society, changing the way man will view himself.
Everything
will be legally open to reinterpretation and abuse.
We will exit
history the same way that the Spartan did. Spartans loved war. We love
technology, which allows us to recreate ourselves. It makes us younger, changes
our gender and manufactures our children, and puts to death the unwanted
products of our lust. Our society is
rapidly approaching a state of extreme injustice – technologically savvy with
no human dignity.
Sadly, it
seems the grass root electorate supporting traditional marriage might as well
have saved their breath. They are largely ignored now as the U.S. Supreme Court
reaches a final decision on the issue of same-sex “marriage” due in June.
This is
how it came to be.
The “First
Gay President” Barack Obama (a distinction made by Newsweek Magazine) instructed
his Attorney General, Mr. Eric Holder, NOT to defend the U.S. Defense of
Marriage Act (DOMA). Defense of Marriage was passed by the U.S. Congress and
signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1996. It allows states
to refuse to recognize same-sex “marriages” granted under the laws of other
states.
The Attorney
General, who is legally required to uphold laws passed by Congress, would not
come to the defense of states whose laws were attacked by LGBT lawyers in unruly
courts. Obama, who supposedly majored in constitutional law at Harvard
University, identified the complete overthrow of traditional marriage as “justice.”
According
to David Axelrod, Obama secretly supported same sex “marriage” prior to his
running for President. He was
 |
Obama hid his support for same-sex "marriage"
when running for president
in order to gain the black vote |
advised to hide this fact so that the black
electorate in the Bible Belt would show greater enthusiasm for his candidacy.
His so called “evolving position on gay marriage” was a manufactured lie.
A court here and a court there demanded
same sex coupling. I am always dismayed by the inability of seemingly good federal
and state leadership to annunciate the absolute hypocrisy of courts on these matters.
The courts argue that they are implementing “a living document.”
Americans believe in a living
document, it is called the “Amendment Process.” Such is constitutional, and not
lawless. The states amended their constitutions to demonstrate Marriage is an
institution, which existed prior to the sodomy-driven courts. It was and is a
universally recognized institution between man and woman even in the most
remote jungles of the world. The marriage between a man and a woman has been
the foundation of surviving civilizations.
Judges do
not have the power to make any document “living.” That is one of the biggest
lies forced on Americans in the past 40 years.
Judges don’t make law. They adjudicate existing law.
Lawyers debating
the legality of Prop 8 are arguing that the amendment process is not constitutional
unless the results are rubber-stamped by lawless black robes. Irrational judges
now enslave the electorate under such a system.
One of
the lawyers I heard debating Prop 8 said marriage was expressed in diverse forms
throughout human history, including arranged marriages, polygamy, incest, common
law, and communal sharing of women within primitive tribes. It was argued that few
cultures maintained the “ideal” concept of marriage, that is a monogamous lifetime
union between one man and one woman.
Since marriage
within human history was fraught with inconsistencies, the notion that people
in California or any state for that matter would seek to preserve a standard
for marriage seemed unconstitutional to these justices; and, in fact, it seemed
like an attack on the ever-evolving “Equal Protection under the Law” in the 14th
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
It is my
understanding that a man cannot enter into a marriage with multiple wives and
that bigamy is a crime in all 50 States. Currently, a man cannot enter into a
marriage with his mother, sister, or daughter. Incest is a crime in all 50
States. It is only logical based upon the irrational musings of the lawyer
supporting same sex “marriage” that all such prohibitions against sexual
vagrancies are unconstitutional.
Every American
is free to share domestic interests with other adult persons. Marriage laws are
not unjust; instead the moral sensibilities of so many Americans have changed. The
honest observer recognizes that the demand for same-sex marriage flows -- not
from the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s -- but from the culture of death.
Under the
guise of human rights, the government promotes abortion on demand,
contraception, no fault divorce, pornography, doctor-assisted suicide, drug
legalization, and the wholesale manufacture of children apart from normative conjugal
relations between a man and a woman. The consequence of such moral collapse is
now summed up by the statement “Let everyone choose for themselves what is
marriage.”
When the
good polygamous people of Utah in 1852 asked the U.S. Government to grant them
admission to the Union, the government said that Utah had to outlaw polygamy,
fundamentally establishing the fruitful bond of one man and one woman as a
standard expression of social and moral justice. The Obama Administration, progressive
legislators, and the courts -- demonstrating an abysmal hatred for U.S. History
-- ignored such a fact.
I was
waiting with bated breath for the lawyer in support of Prop 8 to state, “Yes,
the institution of marriage has experienced various forms throughout human
history. Yet, in spite of pressures, which obscured virtue and diminished
justice, it is self-evident that the bonding of man and woman heroically
remained the essential form of marriage.”
Further,
I hoped he would say, “Arguments in favor of ‘state sanctioned sodomy’ do not
preserve equal justice under the law, but instead discriminate in marriage
against the male
(lesbian coupling); the female (homosexual coupling), and the
child, who no longer has the right to a father and a mother.”
 |
Courts bless newly "married" same sex couple and adopted child
(AP Photo) |
In other
words, I hoped the lawyer would say, “The bonding of man and woman as a micro-foundation
for the existence of society is still necessary in America and that such an
experiment as same-sex “marriage” cannot be implemented by un-elected judges,
who won’t be around to live through the consequences.”
When I
hear people argue, “Same sex marriage does not impact my marriage,” I lament
that another couple has publically admitted that they are fundamentally cohabitating,
and they wasted their money on a marriage license.
The
advocacy of this new social madness through the lawless courts has precedence.
The Supreme
Court led by Chief Justice Warren Burger in “Roe Versus Wade” legalized abortion in 1973 based
on the fact – in part -- that the Roman Empire sanctioned abortion prior to its
collapse. It never occurred to the Burger Court that the Roman Empire also
sanctioned human trafficking, human sacrifice, and the murder of philosophers
and Christians – also prior to its collapse. In other words, the court
interpreted the U.S. Constitution as embracing the barbaric practices of
ancient cultures.
It turns
out that Supreme Court Justice William Blackmun -- who wrote the Roe v Wade majority opinion in support of abortion -- was in favor of abortion
on demand due to his daughter’s college experiences: “My daughter found herself
pregnant while in college and due to the scarcity of legal abortion, her education
was interrupted,” he said. My response would have been “Judge, what does your
daughter’s pregnancy have to do with interpreting federal or state constitutions?”
The answer is nothing.
Federal
judges are overthrowing state constitutions on the issue of abortion and same
sex “marriage” because judicial interpretation in our time has nothing to do
with reality.
The foundations
of post-modern American constitutional law are rooted purely in sophistry and solipsism,
which maintains that truth exists only in the will of the subject and not in
the concrete reality of the existence of the object.
Look at this statement
made by Justice Anthony Kennedy in 1992 in Planned
Parenthood vs. Casey: "At the heart of liberty is the right to
define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the
mystery of human life."
A spoiled
child lives within Kennedy’s definition of liberty. Tragically, as the Supreme
Court listens to arguments in favor of same sex “marriage,” it is Justice
Kennedy, who will become the swing vote on the court.
This is the same court, which said in 1973 that each
person can determine for himself who has the right to live and who doesn't. Now
they are trying to define marriage the same way – allowing each person to define
marriage to utmost limits of his own imagination.
 |
Same Sex couple Jayne Rowse and April DeBoer outside the U.S. Supreme Court on April 28 when
hearings were held that will determine the outcome of Traditional Marriage in the United States. Rowse and DeBoer are one of the couples challenging Michigan's ban on same sex "marriage." |
.jpg)
