Washington, U.S.A. — On July 10, Freedom to Marry, the campaign to win marriage nationwide, launched Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry, a new campaign to highlight and build support for the freedom to marry among young people across America who identify as conservative. The campaign launch will take place at a kickoff event in Washington, D.C.

“Freedom and family are core conservative values,” said conservative commentator, political strategist, and media personality Margaret Hoover, who is a member of the Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry leadership committee. “We have a historic opportunity to reaffirm these important values by supporting the fundamental freedom to marry for all Americans. Now is the time for a rising generation of voters and leaders to embrace these virtues and join Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry.”

Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry is part of Freedom to Marry’s campaign to demonstrate the broad and growing support for marriage across the ideological spectrum. Members of the group will make the case that the freedom to marry should not be a partisan question, and that supporting the freedom to marry fulfills basic conservative values of responsibility and community, as well as limited government and individual freedom.

Members of Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry will work to encourage more conservatives to stand up, speak out and support the freedom to marry by joining and adding new perspectives and experiences to the national conversation about marriage. They will work to end laws in the states that bar same-sex couples from marriage, as well as to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act.

“As Republicans we believe in limited government and we believe that the best way for the federal government to spur growth and jobs is to get out of the way and let small and medium businesses thrive,” said Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who is speaking at the launch event and is a Republican co-sponsor of the Respect for Marriage Act.

“We also believe in equality of opportunity rather than of outcome. Most importantly, we believe that the individual and the family are the central engines in our society. The right for individuals to lead their lives without government intrusion is a bedrock conservative principle and it is much more than just about sexual orientation. It is about the fundamental rights we all share as Americans, it is about equality for all with no exceptions.”

“The center of political gravity has shifted for good,” said Marc Solomon, National Campaign Director of Freedom to Marry. “The freedom to marry is fast becoming a bipartisan value embraced by all Americans who believe that love and commitment deserve support and protection. Freedom to Marry applauds this group of young conservatives for standing up to make the case.”

Support for the freedom to marry has been accelerating at historically dramatic rates and has grown in every group, including right-of-center voters. A March poll by NBC/Wall Street Journal shows that among Republicans, support for the freedom to marry has grown by 41%, and among moderates, by 40%, since 2009. A May poll by ABC News/Washington Post shows that 46% of self-identified Republicans aged 18-44 are in favor of the freedom to marry.

In March, the overwhelmingly Republican-controlled New Hampshire House voted down repeal of the state’s popular freedom to marry law, with a majority of the GOP voting against repeal. Last year, the GOP-led state Senate in New York advanced a freedom to marry law. A memo by Republican pollster Jan van Lohuizen highlights that “opinion is shifting across the board, including among Republicans.”

The kickoff event will feature members of the Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry leadership committee discussing their support for the freedom to marry.

“As a conservative, I find efforts to exclude same-sex couples from marriage to be both wrong and completely off-task,” says Craig Stowell, an Operation Iraqi Freedom Marine Corps veteran and a member of the Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry leadership committee. “I take freedom seriously and want my best friend and brother, who is gay, to have the same freedom as everyone else to marry the person he loves. I hope Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry will inspire other conservatives to do what is right and support loving and committed same-sex couples’ freedom to marry.”

“The more we think about and talk about this with other conservatives, the more we can understand why the denial of marriage to same-sex couples is wrong,” adds Torrey Shearer, a government relations professional in Washington, D.C. and a member of the Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry leadership committee.

“Marriage strengthens families, encourages shared responsibility, and promotes stability in our communities. There is really significant change taking place among conservatives – especially young conservatives – about the freedom to marry, and I hope my involvement in this campaign will accelerate our progress.”

Members of the Young Conservatives for the Freedom to Marry Leadership Committee include Hoover, Stowell, and Shearer, as well as:

• Tyler Deaton, a lobbyist, political consultant, and Secretary and Finance Chairman of the New Hampshire Young Republicans and the Executive Director of New Hampshire Republicans for Freedom and Equality;
• Nicole Neily, Vice President of Dezenhall Resources and the former Executive Director of the Independent Women’s Forum;
• Madeline Koch, a Manager of Government Affairs for Comcast in St. Paul, MN, former staffer at the Republican National Convention, and former press intern for former Republican Senator Norm Coleman;
• Jason Kuznicki, a Research Fellow at the Cato Institute and editor of Cato Unbound;
• Sarah Longwell, Vice President at Berman and Company, a communications firm in Washington, D.C. that defends free market principles;
• Will Rinehart, a Research Fellow at TechFreedom and former Koch Summer Fellow at the Progress and Freedom Foundation.

Freedom to Marry is the campaign to win marriage nationwide. They are pursuing our Roadmap to Victory by working to win the freedom to marry in more states, grow the national majority for marriage, and end federal marriage discrimination. We partner with individuals and organizations across the country to end the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage and the protections, responsibilities, and commitment that marriage brings.

Image Courtesy of   Gandolfo Cannatella / Shutterstock.com

The article Conservative Group Supports Same Sex Marriage appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Clinton, U.S.A. – The following is a statement by Rev. Delman Coates, Ph.D., Senior Pastor, Mt. Ennon Baptist Church:

As an African-American pastor and clergy leader, I am frequently asked how I have been able to support civil marriage protection for gay and lesbian couples. After listening to Christians debate their support of or their opposition to homosexuality, I came to the conclusion that one’s personal religious beliefs should have no bearing in determining whether other American citizens deserve equal treatment under the law.

For too long the question of equal rights for gays and lesbians has been mired in a theological debate that in my opinion is not suitable in a public policy discussion. The issue of civil marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples is an issue of public policy, not theology. The role of the State in a free democratic society is fundamentally different than the role of the Church, or any religious institution for that matter.

The role of the State in a pluralistic society is to provide for the common good and to protect the civil liberties of all its citizens. As a Christian in this country, I value my religious freedom, but I also recognize that I cannot impose my religious beliefs on others in matters of public policy.

It is completely legitimate for people of faith to debate the moral legitimacy of same sex marriage as a religious rite, but that question is more appropriate for a different arena; the theological seminary, the pulpit, or the Bible study group, for example. In the public policy arena, the issue is simply whether gay and lesbian couples deserve the same rights and civil liberties as other American citizens. For me, the answer to that question is a resounding “yes.”

As a nation, we have always held that the ideals of our Constitution supersede subjective religious beliefs and views. One’s personal religious beliefs about homosexuality should not be the basis for determining whether same gender loving couples deserve equal treatment under the law.

To do so establishes a discriminatory and dangerous public policy precedent that potentially threatens the civil liberties of all people. As a Christian minister, I believe my role is to live in my faith, not to legislate it, and as long as the State does not seek to regulate the Church, the Church should not seek to regulate the State.

Civil marriage protection for gay and lesbian couples in no way infringes upon the right of religious bodies to define religious marriage as they see fit based upon their traditions, doctrine, and scriptural interpretations. Religious institutions have always acknowledged the role of the State to provide civil marriage for all citizens regardless of their belief system or religious background. Every union acknowledged by the State, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is a civil marriage, and is not synonymous with religious marriage.

Civil marriages, therefore, do not have the power to determine, delimit, or define how religious institutions treat marriage based upon their own values, beliefs, and scriptural interpretations. Religious marriage is solely province of a community of faith, and there is no legislative act that can be imposed upon faith communities to acknowledge, sanction, or perform.

Just as the State has no jurisdiction over the theological beliefs, practices, and ordinances of any house of worship, religious institutions should not seek to restrict equal opportunity to others in matters of public policy.

While there are a range of theological views about same sex marriage, all Americans can stand united under the banner of extending civil liberties and justice to all citizens. People of faith will not allow their theological diversity on this or other issues to be exploited for political gain. The welfare of our nation rests upon growing our economy, preserving the social safety nets for the poor and the elderly, and creating a civil society of mutuality, tolerance, and respect.

The Rev. Delman Coates, Ph.D. is the Senior Pastor of the Mt. Ennon Baptist Church in Clinton, MD, click here

Image Courtesy of  Kobby Dagan / Shutterstock.com

The article The Black Church & Same Sex Marriage appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

MIAMI BEACH,U.S.A. – In his latest book, Jesus on Homosexuality (http://www.jesusonhomosexuality.com), author and researcher Michael Wood claims that for 1,900 years, Christian scholars missed an essential fact about Jesus’ teachings. He states that Jesus repeatedly taught about a well-established group of commandments called Justices, a group of commandments that established what was required for eternal life and what would matter on Judgment Day but, tellingly, did not include the prohibition on homosexuality.

If Wood is correct, Jesus’ entire salvation message was based upon this well-defined group of commands that didn’t include the prohibition on homosexuality. In other words, Jesus specifically taught that homosexuality was irrelevant to salvation and judgment.

“Christianity originally began as a sect within Judaism, at a time when their law was divided into Justices and Jobs,” explained Wood. “The second-century writings of Justin Martyr show that when the Gentiles dominated the Faith in the second century, they brought with them the false assumption that the law was divided into morality and ritual. And the rest, as they say, is history.”

The Justices covered philanthropy and ethics while the Jobs addressed ritual observances and sexual taboos. The division was based on the precept, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” For example, the command not to rape was a Justice and the prohibition on homosexuality was a Job.

Wood pointed out that Jesus, Paul and James all used the precept, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” “Now we know that they used this precept to reference a well-established group of commandments — the Justices,” he said. “Each, in his own particular way, used the precept to explain that the Justices alone are the Christian law.”

Wood previously uncovered and wrote about new findings regarding the Bible’s book of Romans and the Dead Sea Scrolls. “Jesus on Homosexuality” (Tubi Publishing, LLC, April 2012) is the result of 10 years of research, and Wood includes numerous footnotes citing historical writings and other scholarly material to document the 1,900-year-old error.

One of the Biblical examples that Wood uses to support his claim that Jesus repeatedly presented the Justices as the entirety of the Law is Jesus’ response to the rich young ruler in Matthew 19:16-19. “In Jesus’ response he cited only ethical commandments and then quoted, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’– the precept designating the Justices,” Wood said.

“In other words, Jesus stated that only the Justices matter. Every Job — every religious requirement — was excluded. That deliberate exclusion was a clear statement of Jesus’ position on ritual (such as the prohibition on eating shellfish and wearing garments made of two cloths) and sexual taboos (such as the prohibition on homosexuality and having sex with your wife during her menstrual cycle). The discovery of the Justices and Jobs finally reveals Jesus’ original message.”

The 56-page ebook can be downloaded free of charge at http://www.JesusOnHomosexuality.com. Wood encourages readers to copy and distribute the book, provided it is copied in full without any editing or modification. “I wrote the book to kick-start a much-needed conversation. It’s time for the conversation to begin,” Wood said.

About the Author

Michael Wood designed REDOC-II – one of the only unbreakable codes in existence today. Wood then turned his cryptanalytic attention to finding a way to solving the problem of managing the physical infrastructure of the Internet. He designed an artificial intelligent system which instructed a computer how to decode the information flowing through its network wires. The computer then used artificial intelligence to assemble the deciphered information into a real-time map of the worldwide physical infrastructure.

Wood also applied his cryptanalytic skills to monitor the real-time level of human parasympathetic activity by decoding subtle changes in heart rate measurements.

Wood then turned his cryptanalytic skills to finding patterns in first-century Jewish language, culture, and law. After ten years of dedicated effort, this eventually led to the discovery of the Justices and Jobs in the writings of the Apostle Paul.

The article ‘Jesus on Homosexuality’ by Michael Wood appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In Africa, homosexuality is frequently treated as a taboo subject, and outspoken opposition to it is a political vote winner. However, according to Richard Dowden, director at the Royal African Society, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that homosexuality was accepted in many societies throughout Africa in pre-colonial times. In his article, ‘Getting Gay Rights Wrong in Africa,’ Dowden wonders if the missionaries in Africa were to blame.

“So, is it the fault of the missionaries? But, the missionaries also preached against theft and corruption, against sex before marriage, against marrying several wives, or covetousness. Why do so many Africans get outraged and censorious about homosexuality, something that isn’t even one of the Ten Commandments, while tolerating so many sins that are?” ponders Dowden in his article.

Homosexuality on the African continent is frowned upon, and those suspected of being gay face dire consequences. Thirty-eight African countries criminalize same-sex conduct, and LGBT people run the risk of lengthy prison sentences for expressing their sexuality. Sudan, Mauritania, and northern Nigeria even impose the death penalty. Despite variations in enforcement, what many African countries have in common is the criminalization of private acts between consenting adults whose sexuality and gender identity are considered “abnormal.”

Like many other nations, new legislation in Liberia calls for punishing homosexuality with longer jail time. Anti-LGBT rhetoric is escalating outside of the Liberian government with a group calling itself the Movement Against Gays in Liberia, or MOGAL, distributing a hit list of people who support gay rights, stating that these people “should not be given space to get a gulp of air.”

Gay rights debate in Liberia began getting this sort of unprecedented attention in the newspapers and radio stations after the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, announced in December 2011 that America’s foreign aid budget would promote the protection of gay rights. This, according to Tamasin Ford—a freelance reporter for the BBC and Britain’s newspaper, The Guardian, based in Monrovia —prompted speculation that funds would be tied to countries’ rights records and prompting two new laws.

In the two new bills, one would amend the penal code to make a person guilty of second degree felony if he or she “seduces, encourages, promotes another person of the same gender to engage in sexual activities, or purposefully engages in acts that arouse or tend to arouse another person of the same gender to have sexual intercourse.” The second bill put forward by Jewel Howard Taylor, a senator in Liberia, would make gay marriage a first degree crime punishable by up to 10 years in jail.

Over the years, gay people have been attacked and activists for gay rights killed. In 2010, at least four gay men were attacked in Uganda after a newspaper ran a front-page story listing 100 ‘top’ homosexuals with a heading that read ‘Hang Them’, and a gay activist was killed in 2011.

Image Courtesy of    jerekeys

The article Why The Moral Abhorrence Towards Gays in Africa? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, announced on March 16 that he will step down at the end of the year in order to take up the position of Master of Magdalene College at the University of Cambridge.

Originally from Wales, Williams had a distinguished career as a professor of theology before being elected Bishop of Monmouth in the Church of Wales in 1991. In 1999, he was elected Archbishop of Wales. Three years later, he was chosen to be the 104th Archbishop of Canterbury, the most senior bishop in the Church of England and the titular head of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

Williams’ appointment was controversial from the start. Liberals in the church rejoiced. As a professor, he wrote an essay entitled “The Body’s Grace” that revealed his opposition to the church’s traditional teaching on homosexuality, and a series of letters written during his tenure as Archbishop of Wales revealed his belief that same-sex unions could be just as holy as heterosexual ones.

But the conservative wing of the church greeted him with suspicion, and he was snubbed by the National Evangelical Anglican Congress in 2003. They let him lead prayers, but he could not speak or preach a sermon.

But it soon became clear that, whatever his personal views on the subject of homosexuality, Williams was determined to maintain church unity at all costs. In 2003, a gay priest named Jeffrey John was chosen to be an assistant bishop in the Diocese of Oxford. Other Anglican leaders objected to John’s appointment because of his longstanding relationship with another priest, even though it was a celibate one.

Fearing the dissolution of the Anglican Communion, Williams pressured John to withdraw his candidacy, and John ultimately acquiesced. Several years later, when John was being considered for the Bishopric of Southwark, Williams is widely believed to have vetoed his candidacy.

As the nominal leader of the Anglican Communion, Williams spoke out against the election of the openly-gay Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, and he was equally opposed to the Canadian Diocese of New Westminster’s decision to start blessing same-sex unions. But Williams was powerless to intervene, and he was equally unable to prevent conservative Anglican churches in Africa from trying to offer ‘alternative episcopal oversight’ to disaffected American parishes.

In a bid to keep the increasingly-fractious Anglican Communion together, Williams asked each autonomous province of the Communion to sign up to an ‘Anglican Covenant’ that would oblige them to consider the views of other provinces before doing anything that “may provoke controversy.”

Furthermore, churches that breached the rules could face disciplinary action, such as suspension from inter-Anglican bodies. But it now looks as if the Church of England itself may reject the Covenant. In order to proceed to a vote in the General Synod (the church’s lawmaking body), the Covenant would need to be approved by a majority of the 44 dioceses. So far, 17 have voted against it, and only 10 have voted in favor.

When announcing his resignation, Williams attempted to downplay the effect of the row over homosexuality. “It has certainly been a major nuisance,” he said. “But in every job that you are in there are controversies and conflicts and this one isn’t going to go away in a hurry. I can’t say that it is a great sense of ‘free at last.’”

Williams may yet see one last triumph before he leaves office. In July, the General Synod could approve legislation to allow the consecration of women bishops. But many Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals oppose the plan, and they could still make life difficult for Williams as he prepares to leave office.

Williams’ successor will be found through a complex process involving both church and state. A church body known as the Crown Nominations Commission will come up with a list of two names to send to the Prime Minister. By convention, the Prime Minister then forwards the first name on to the Queen, who formally approves the appointment.

Image Courtesy of    http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottgunn/

The article Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams To Step Down appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The fathers, who were married in California and joined in a civil union in New Jersey, had long desired to be parents and created embryos using the eggs of an anonymous donor.  The sister of the non-biological father agreed to carry the pregnancy.  After giving birth, she challenged the fathers’ right to primary custody of the children.

In a fifteen-page decision issued on December 13, the court granted the biological father sole legal and physical custody of the couple’s daughters, now five years old, emphasizing the importance of their commitment to their children’s well-being and their values of tolerance and inclusion.

Following a trial that spanned more than a year and included more than 30 days in court, the Honorable Francis B. Schultz of the New Jersey Superior Court concluded that the girls’ best interests would be served by placing them with parents who would celebrate their unique histories, noting, “The common thread of [the biological father's] testimony was to … explain to the girls (when age appropriate) everything necessary for the girls to understand their origin, their heritage, as well as religion, and the [fathers'] same sex [relationship].

Nothing negative about these sensitive issues will be brought to bear upon the children by their father.” In contrast, the court found that the mother and grandmother have “strong feelings about surrogacy and homosexuality” that “will be understood by the girls and will have a very damaging effect on them. It will make them feel ashamed of themselves, and this they do not need.”

“This decision is a victory for parents, particularly those in non-traditional families, who value diversity and inclusion and pass those values along to their children,” said Karim G. Kaspar, senior counsel in Lowenstein Sandler’s Litigation Department.

“This important case exemplifies Lowenstein’s longstanding commitment to addressing significant social issues through public service,” said Kenneth H. Zimmerman, Member of the Firm and Chair of the Lowenstein Center for the Public Interest.

The article Same Sex Couple Wins Custody Case in New Jersey appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.