cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index cj.myfreeforum.org
NEWS, prophecy, dreams, ZionsCRY, Bible, teaching, visions
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

HomoeriKKKa, Ameristan to Outlaw Christianity
Page 1, 2, 3 ... 52, 53, 54  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> America NEWS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:13 am    Post subject: HomoeriKKKa, Ameristan to Outlaw Christianity  Reply with quote

       HomoeriKKKa

If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?
Psalm 11:3

]Rush Limbaugh: Regardless of Supreme Court Ruling Gay Marriage Is 'Inevitable'
3/28/13  In his radio show today, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh said defenders of traditional marriage have lost the battle, even though the Supreme Court won't hand down its decisions for another few months.
"I don't care what the Supreme Court does, this is now inevitable," Limbaugh said, "and it's inevitable because we lost the language on this."

Limbaugh took issue with the idea that the word marriage was already applied to gay couples. Therefore, he asserted, modifiers like "hetero" or "opposite-sex" are now at times added to denote a union between a man and a woman.

"I maintain to you that we lost the issue when we started allowing the word 'marriage' to be bastardized and redefined by simply adding words to it - because marriage is one thing, and it was not established on the basis of discrimination. It wasn't established on the basis of denying people anything," the radio host said. "Marriage is not a tradition that a bunch of people concocted to be mean to other people with. But we allowed the left to have people believe that it was structured that way."

On Wednesday, he made a similar prediction, saying that gay marriage would soon become legal " nationwide."
Earlier this year, Limbaugh compared homosexuality to pedophilia.
Today, he claimed discrimination against gay couples "is not an issue."

"No one sensible is against giving homosexuals the rights of contract or inheritance or hospital visits. There's nobody that wants to deny them that. The issue has always been denying them a status that they can't have, by definition. By definition - solely, by definition - same-sex people cannot be married. So instead of maintaining that and holding fast to that, we allowed the argument to be made that the definition needed to change, on the basis that we're dealing with something discriminatory, bigoted, and all of these mystical things that it's not and never has been."
http://news.yahoo.com/rush-limbau...234407342--abc-news-politics.html


Hooking kids on sex starts in kindergarten
http://communities.washingtontime...start-saturation-process-kinderga

US Supreme Court raping AmeriKKKa!
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about4101.html


How Obama Decided God Was OK With Marriage Equality
http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan...god-was-ok-with-marriage-equality

Pastor: Jesus Was Wrong About Marriage
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Jour...astor-Jesus-Didnt-Know-Everything
"If Jesus were alive today, he would be more inclined to say, 'you know, I didn't know it all...'" - Rev. Oliver White, Sean Hannity Show, March 27, 2013

Senate gay-marriage pool update: GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski says her views are “evolving”
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/0...wski-says-her-views-are-evolving/

‘Marriage equality’ or ‘marriage extinction’? Next: equal rights for incest and bestiality
http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/...r-polygamy-incest-and-bestiality/

HARBINGER  WARNINGS - Isaiah 9 prophecy
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/about2307.html


              Posted   <*)))><   by  

ZionsCRY NEWS with Prophetic Commentary  
http://cj.myfreeforum.org/forum10.php


 


Last edited by CJ on Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:29 pm; edited 6 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Disclaimer - the writer of this article is NOT a Christian. But nonetheless, he does a very good job explaining all of the
chaos and confusion handed down from generations of same-sex parents to their children.

Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children’s View
8/6/12  The children of same-sex couples have a tough road ahead of them—I know, because I have been there. The last thing we should do is make them feel guilty if the strain gets to them and they feel strange.

Between 1973 and 1990, when my beloved mother passed away, she and her female romantic partner raised me. They had separate houses but spent nearly all their weekends together, with me, in a trailer tucked discreetly in an RV park 50 minutes away from the town where we lived. As the youngest of my mother’s biological children, I was the only child who experienced childhood without my father being around.

After my mother’s partner’s children had left for college, she moved into our house in town. I lived with both of them for the brief time before my mother died at the age of 53. I was 19. In other words, I was the only child who experienced life under “gay parenting” as that term is understood today.

Quite simply, growing up with gay parents was very difficult, and not because of prejudice from neighbors. People in our community didn’t really know what was going on in the house. To most outside observers, I was a well-raised, high-achieving child, finishing high school with straight A's.

Inside, however, I was confused. When your home life is so drastically different from everyone around you, in a fundamental way striking at basic physical relations, you grow up weird. I have no mental health disorders or biological conditions. I just grew up in a house so unusual that I was destined to exist as a social outcast.
My peers learned all the unwritten rules of decorum and body language in their homes; they understood what was appropriate to say in certain settings and what wasn’t; they learned both traditionally masculine and traditionally feminine social mechanisms.
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/08/6065
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jenna Wolfe & Partner Stephanie Gosk Expecting Baby Girl
3/27/13  Jenna Wolfe shared a double dose of exciting news this week!
"Today" show weekend anchor announced she is pregnant on the "Today" show, and also revealed she is in a relationship with NBC News correspondent Stephanie Gosk.
"I'm pregnant. Quite pregnant, actually," Jenna told Matt Lauer on the show, adding that the couple is expecting a baby girl.
http://news.yahoo.com/today-shows...nie-gosk-expecting-182707668.html


It seems like all of the Hegelian Dialectic rhetoric this go-around is "Should it be states rights or not?". Even the so-called "evangelical"/conservative arm of the GOP is talking this rhetoric. So pretty much they're using this rhetoric to MAKE EVERYONE THINK that "preserving states rights will help preserve marriage, and in turn will help preserve the Constitution...". This was NOT the argument they were using back in 2004-2006 when they were pushing to ban gay marriage. Also, it was a huge deal when CA voted for Prop 8 to ban bay marriage then, but now from what the justices have been hinting in this week's court proceedings, they're like "b/c we have to respect what California wants, this means states rights should be respected...".

See where this is going? They may not give a broad ruling in favor of making gay marriage legal, but over the long haul, b/c of what the rhetoric they're using, don't be surprised to see more of these states that passed anti-gay marriage laws to say "California's allowed to do what they want, so why don't we have these same rights?"(while potentially more "conservatives" and maybe even "evangelicals" coming out endorsing it).

A house built upon a sand shall not stand...
Hegelian Dialectic = control both sides
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How gay rights tipped so quickly
March 26, 2013 In some ways, today's Supreme Court arguments over California's Proposition 8 were overshadowed by the decision of several Democratic senators from red or purple states to openly and actively support marriage equality. Actually, even that pales in comparison to Richard Land, the key Southern Baptist political evangelist, who just said, basically, "never mind," when it comes to the next generation of evangelicals being uncomfortable about gay rights. To be sure, he still opposes gay rights, still thinks that gay marriage will lead to polygamy, and believes that anti-gay leaders are being ostracized from polite society. On that last part, he's kind of correct. The zone of tolerance for acceptable viewpoints has narrowed very quickly.

Why has the structure of the gay rights debate shifted so quickly? The Week's Peter Weber has found six reasons. I have some guesses, a few obvious ones, and a few not-so-obvious, and I'm going to try to put them in order of importance.

First: Harvey Milk had it right. All politics is personal. Self-identified gays make up about three and a half percent of the population. That means that almost everyone with a social life in America knows someone who is gay. In fact, nearly 60 percent of Americans surveyed say that someone close to them is gay. (Sarah Palin's best friend is gay.) Of those who've changed their minds on the issue, the plurality say that they expanded their circle of empathy simply because their circle came to include gay people.

But here's the important point: In order for this to happen, gay people had to take risks and come out. So: The pressure within the gay community to stigmatize "the closet," a pressure that can be pretty intense at times, has paid off.

It follows that people still won't come out if the social and personal penalties for doing so are high. But concerted efforts by gay rights activists and by Hollywood, working separately, have made the environment everywhere more hospitable for gay people, even in places where anti-gay prejudice remains high. Hollywood's pro-gay tilt is not a conspiracy. It is, just like Hollywood's pro-military tilt, an indelible fact driven by personal political orientation as well as economics. In conjunction, gay politics got smarter after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court instituted gay marriage in that state, which provoked a revanchist backlash in a number of states.  
http://theweek.com/article/index/.../how-gay-rights-tipped-so-quickly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?
Psalm 11:3

SCOTUS-induced chaos on gay marriage?
31 Mar 2013
If there is a narrow ruling against Prop. 8 and DOMA is struck down, expect a legal and political mess.
If the Supreme Court decides the two gay marriage cases it heard last week the way most court watchers believe it will, expect legal and political chaos.

The court seems ready to strike down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, while ruling quite narrowly on California's Proposition 8, allowing a lower-court decision to stand. Such an outcome would make gay marriage legal in California without deciding whether state bans on same-sex marriage are constitutional.

And that would allow more of what we've seen up to now: a growing number of liberal blue states moving to legalize gay marriage, and a growing number of conservative red states enacting bans.
But there will be one big difference: Gays who live in states that allow gay marriage may have an array of federal privileges unavailable to those living in states that ban such marriages. And that raises complex questions.

What happens to two gay men who marry in New York and then move to Salt Lake City? Will they still be married? If they have children, will the kids have two parents under Utah law? And will their federal benefits, such as survivors' Social Security benefits, travel with them, even though they've moved to a state where their marriage isn't valid? Will they file their federal tax returns jointly but state returns separately? And don't even think about the issue of divorce.

This kind of legal patchwork virtually guarantees that politicians in states that don't recognize gay marriage will be debating and legislating the issue for years, making for an even more confusing situation. The ensuing chaos could harm more than just gay couples; the Republican Party stands to lose too.

Gay marriage has been embraced by a substantial majority of Democrats and Democratic politicians. In blue states, the trend lines suggest that opinion among Democrats will soon be so one-sided that it will cease to be an issue.

It's different in the GOP. Most Republicans still oppose same-sex marriage by a wide margin, with only about a quarter in favor in a recent Pew Research Center poll. But the survey also suggests that the issue will grow as a wedge that divides the party, in part because of a big generational divergence: 76% of Republicans over 65 oppose gay marriage, while only 54% of those under 30 do.

And when the question is changed from marriage to equal rights, the wedge potential is even clearer: Republicans divide right down the middle as to whether homosexual couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples, 49% to 48%, with young people again more permissive than older voters.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opini...e-chaos-20130331,0,7749021.column
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:
That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience.
Titus 2

Senior Catholic clerics weigh in on gay marriage
3/31/13
Religion plays a big role in individual and institutional decisions about same-sex marriage. Senior Roman Catholic clerics spoke out Sunday on TV news shows – expressing love and compassion but holding to the church's opposition to gay marriage.
On several TV news shows Sunday morning, senior Roman Catholic clerics weighed in on the debate over gay marriage.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the Archbishop of New York, says his church needs to be more welcoming of gay and lesbian Catholics.
"We gotta do better to see that our defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people,” he said on ABC's "This Week.” “And I admit, we haven't been too good at that.”
“Our major challenge is to continue in a credible way to present the eternal concerns to people in a timeless attractive way,” Cardinal Dolan said. “And sometimes there is a disconnect – between what they’re going through and what Jesus and his Church is teaching. And that’s a challenge for us.”

Asked what he’d say to a gay couple professing love for the church as well as for each other, Dolan replied:
“Well, the first thing I’d say to them is, ‘I love you, too. And God loves you. And you are made in God’s image and likeness. And we want your happiness. And you’re entitled to friendship.’ But we also know that God has told us that the way to happiness, especially when it comes to sexual love – that is intended only for a man and woman in marriage, where children can come about naturally.”

"The Catholic Church welcomes everyone," Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the Archbishop of Washington, said on "Fox News Sunday."
But Cardinal Wuerl acknowledged what may be a growing problem for the church.

"The only thing I worry about is someone saying to me, 'You, because you believe that sex is intended for marriage and because you believe that marriage is indissoluble and because you believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,' that somehow you don't belong here. That somehow, this is bigotry or this is hate speech,” he said. “That's what I worry about.”
"There has to be room enough in the society as large, as free and as pluralistic as America to make space for all of us," Wuerl said.

Appearing on Bloomberg’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” retired Archbishop of Washington Cardinal Theodore McCarrick said he has “no problem” with civil unions for gay couples that confer the same rights as marriage.”
“I certainly would prefer that” to what I could call ‘a marriage,’ in quotes,” Cardinal McCarrick said.
“Same-sex marriage is not at this point prevalent in our society, and probably won’t be” because gays are a minority, McCarrick told Bloomberg. Children whose parents divorce or are born out of wedlock, he said, “find themselves out on a limb,” which “is a serious problem in our society.”
http://news.yahoo.com/senior-cath...weigh-gay-marriage-185819959.html

BornAgain2 posted
As you can see, pure Jesuitical talk going on here - "This way, no that way, no the other way...", it's a lot like when you're traveling and you get lost, and the last thing you should do is go around asking some average joe the directions(b/c they almost always give you the wrong directions).


Cardinal Dolan says Catholic Church must embrace Sodomy SIN
3/31/13  Prominent U.S. Cardinal Timothy Dolan acknowledged Easter Sunday that the Catholic Church needs to forge a better relationship with the gay and lesbian community.
“We gotta do better to see that our defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people,” Dolan said. “And I admit, we haven’t been too good about that. We try our darndest to make sure we’re not anti-anybody.”

Dolan, the charismatic Archbishop of New York, made his comments on ABC’s “This Week” nearly one week after the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments for and against Proposition 8, California’s gay marriage ban, and the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law that blocks federal recognition of gay marriages.
Dolan called for a more conciliatory approach to gay and lesbian Catholics who may feel alienated by Church doctrine, which is traditionally opposed to homosexuality.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2...ans?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems like a lot of politicians' quotes in new articles I've been reading lately, they have this attitude of
"I'm not a same-sex marriage supporter, BUT..." OR "I'm against same-sex marriage but for DIFFERENT reasons"
This I think is part of their Jesuitical/Hegalian Dialectical talk. Also, there have been movie plots in recent years(especially during the
pre-Obama years when almost no one thought it would be legalized one day) with these themes...

Georgia GOP chair's gay marriage scenario sounds a lot like I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry
04/01/13  Sue Everhart warns that straight people could enter sham gay marriages to gain benefits
For those of you fortunate enough not to have seen I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry, here is the plot: Adam Sandler and Kevin James play two straight firefighters who, in a scheme to gain domestic partnership benefits, pretend to be gay and get married. For your consideration:

Now here is the gay-marriage scenario put forth by Sue Everhart, chairwoman of the Georgia Republican Party, according to the Marietta Daily Journal:

You may be as straight as an arrow, and you may have a friend that is as straight as an arrow. Say you had a great job with the government where you had this wonderful health plan. I mean, what would prohibit you from saying that you’re gay, and y’all get married and still live as separate, but you get all the benefits? I just see so much abuse in this it’s unreal. I believe a husband and a wife should be a man and a woman, the benefits should be for a man and a woman. There is no way that this is about equality. To me, it’s all about a free ride. [Marietta Daily Journal]
Is this a realistic scenario? Will straight men and women soon be flocking to preachers that look like Rob Schneider in the hopes of riding the gravy train that is gay marriage?

The problem with Everhart's logic, according to Steve Benen at The Maddow Blog, is that "if this is an argument against same-sex marriage, isn't it also an argument against opposite-sex marriage? After all, what's to stop a man and a woman who are friends from pulling the same scam?"

The federal government is already extremely serious about cracking down on marriage fraud. The Chicago Tribune reports that individuals in sham marriages for immigration purposes face up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Comparable cases involving gay marriage are difficult to find because, as the Huffington Post's Luke Johnson points out, "There isn't any evidence of widespread fraud following the adoption of gay marriage in nine states and the District of Columbia."
Philip Bump at The Atlantic says that if you are going to ban a practice for fear of fraud, you would have to move beyond marriage:

You know who else commits fraud in the state of Georgia? People who take out mortgages. Last year, a report suggested that the state was the nation's sixth-worst for fraudulent home loans. Since mortgages are such an enticement for abuse, then, it's only fair that the state ban borrowing to buy a home. [The Atlantic]
http://news.yahoo.com/georgia-gop...cenario-sounds-lot-154500711.html


Georgia GOP Chair Worries Married People Are Getting a 'Free Ride'
04/01/13  Sue Everhart, chairwoman of the Georgia Republican Party, has drawn a line deep in the sand. Gay marriage, she told the Marietta Daily Journal, is simply a tool for defrauding the government of public benefits. And obviously any situation in which fraud could occur should be banned.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/po...-gay-marriage-because-fraud/63738

I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry(2007)
Charles Todd "Chuck" Levine and Lawrence Arthur "Larry" Valentine (Adam Sandler and Kevin James) are two veteran FDNY fire fighters. Chuck is a bachelor and womanizer and Larry is a widower who tries to raise his two children. During a routine sweep of a burned building, a segment of floor collapses and Chuck almost dies. Larry eventually rescues Chuck by shielding him from the falling debris. As he and Larry are awaken at a hospital later, Chuck vows to repay his debt in any way possible. The incident prompts Larry to realize the fact that death can come for him at any moment, but he has difficulties naming his children as primary beneficiaries in his life insurance policy. One of the ways suggested for him to do so is to get married. Inspired by a newspaper article about domestic partnerships, Larry asks Chuck to enter a civil union with him. Although at first Chuck declines, he is reminded of his debt to Larry and finally agrees. Chuck and Larry become domestic partners and Chuck becomes Larry's primary beneficiary in the event of his death. Soon, New York City investigators arrive to inquire about their partnership, suspecting fraud. Chuck and Larry decide to enlist the help of a lawyer, Alex McDonough (Jessica Biel), who suggests that they get married. Chuck and Larry then marry in Canada and move in together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Now_Pronounce_You_Chuck_and_Larry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems like everywhere you turn in the media, the LGBT agenda is being the most buzzed about...positively, yes, but even the "anti" side has watered down their rhetoric to "but it should be the states that should decide". And not to mention too some of the stuff they're putting out is WAY more than I ever imagined in my lifetime. Guess it should be no surprise that none of the USSC justices(nor the American public) are making a big deal over giving CA "rights" to gay marriage, when it was only 3 years ago when the masses were angry over Vaughn Walker ruling to strike down Prop 8.

Also, look at some of the stuff the media has been conditioning the public with years ago...

My Catholic HS "Religion" class was shown this in 1989
Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Truth_About_Alex

The Truth About Alex is a 1986 short made-for-television film. Based on the book Counterplay by Ann Snyder, The Truth About Alex tells the story of Alex Prager, a high school student who is inadvertently outed as gay and the difficulty his best friend Brad has in coming to terms with it. The telefilm stars Scott Baio as Brad and Peter Spence as Alex.


A popular sitcom when I was a teenager
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Two_Dads
My Two Dads(1987-1990)

The show begins when Marcy Bradford (Emma Samms), the mother of twelve-year-old Nicole Bradford (Keanan), dies. The two men who had competed for the woman's affections before Nicole was born — Michael Taylor (Reiser), a successful financial advisor; and struggling artist Joey Harris (Evigan), former friends who hated one another because of their mutual interest in Marcy — are awarded joint custody of Nicole.

The mix-ups of two single men raising a teenage daughter provided the story each week. Judge Margaret W. Wilbur (Florence Stanley), a family court judge who awarded custody of Nicole to Michael and Joey, would frequently visit the new family and served as Nicole's mentor. This was because she had bought the building in which Joey lived and was now the live-in landlord. Michael had originally had his own condo uptown, but had been evicted from it, due to Joey's painting of the walls, and as such, moved into Joey's artist's loft.

Nicole's actual paternity was never revealed on the show. In the episode "Pop, the Question", Michael and Joey — after a falling out — had a DNA test run to determine which of them was Nicole's biological father. The test was conducted against Nicole's wishes, who destroyed the results before opening them since she was happier not knowing who the father was. Michael and Joey later resolve their differences and reconcile. Judge Wilbur looked at the results, but threw them away without revealing them to the audience.


Ultimately, the seeds get planted when they expose the masses, in particular the youth to all of this, b/c they will get a surprise reaction to the point where they will start debating and discussing at length among themselves. And the more it drags on over the years, the more it will lead to tolerance, and eventually acceptance. When my HS class saw "The Truth about Alex" - as largely as my class saw the gay agenda for what it is(evil), nonetheless we were all so shell-shocked that we ended up discussing both ends of the spectrum at length.

2Tim 3:14  But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
2Ti 3:15  And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.


* posted by bornagain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CJ
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 32196



PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SINator Kirk Announces Support for Gay Marriage
4/2/13  GOP Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois said Tuesday he supports gay marriage, becoming the second sitting Republican senator to make such an announcement in recent weeks.
Kirk, who previously opposed a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, said in a post on his blog that "same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage."
"Our time on this Earth is limited, I know that better than most," said Kirk, who suffered a stroke in January 2012. "Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back — government has no place in the middle."

Kirk went through months of rehabilitation before returning to work in Washington this January. He said in his blog post that when he went back to the Senate he promised himself he would return "with an open mind and greater respect for others."
Kirk is Illinois' ranking Republican lawmaker. His announcement comes less than three weeks after Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio became the first Republican in the Senate to say he supported gay marriage and one week after the U.S. Supreme Court held two days of oral arguments on the subject.

It also comes as the Illinois Legislature is giving final consideration to a measure that would make Illinois the 10th state in the nation to allow same-sex marriage.
The Illinois Senate voted in February to lift a state ban on same-sex marriage. The legislation also was approved by a House committee, but has yet to be called for a floor vote. Speaker of the House Michael Madigan said recently he believes supporters are a dozen votes short of what they need for the bill to pass.

Gov. Pat Quinn, a Chicago Democrat, has said he would sign the measure.
Kirk's announcement could give political cover to Republicans in the Illinois House who are considering a yes vote but are fearful of a backlash — or a primary challenge — from social conservatives.
The news was greeted with enthusiasm by supporters.

"We continue to see the momentum behind marriage equality grow, especially among Republicans." said Rick Garcia, Director of the Equal Marriage Illinois Project and Policy Director for The Civil Rights Agenda, Illinois' largest gay rights advocacy organization. "The momentum is stunning and we welcome it."

Kirk served five terms in Congress representing Chicago's northern suburbs before he won the 2010 race for President Barack Obama's vacated Senate seat.
He previously voted to end the policy barring gays from openly serving in the military, known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and is a lead co-sponsor of a bill to ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.
He also supported Illinois GOP Chairman Pat Brady after Brady announced his support for same-sex marriage earlier this year, drawing the ire of his party's social conservative wing. When some members of the state central committee attempted to oust Brady, Kirk said Brady had his full support.
http://news.yahoo.com/gop-us-sen-...rting-gay-marriage-161815047.html

BornAgain2

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    cj.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> America NEWS All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1, 2, 3 ... 52, 53, 54  Next
Page 1 of 54

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum