First Freedoms Forum – Marriage and Non-Discrimination

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Although American Leadership Fund does not endorse the language of the “First Freedoms Compact,”* ALF is pleased to support and share this First Freedoms Forum video from Thursday, January 23, 2014. It has valuable information that we encourage you to pass along to your friends.

Speakers Senator Stuart Reid and Sutherland President Paul Mero presented a professional and factual representation of the importance of society to support marriage between a man and a woman and the fallacies of fairness under a non-discrimination law. It is worth the watch and sharing with your family and friends.

*ALF views the policy of marriage to be non-negotiable, and non-compromising. It is not a win-win proposition. There is no question that there will be a winner and a loser in this debate.

ALF also supports the enduring concept that not all religious ideas have equal value, standing or protection in a “live and let live” environment (e.g Islamic Sharia law, which violates U.S. Constitutional law on at least fourteen points).

ALF believes that free speech allows for public discussion and deliberation of differences in an environment that allows all sides to be heard.

However, the U.S. Constitution guarantees a republican form of government. That standard was based on common law, founded on the law of Nature and of Nature’s God – which is a Judeo-Christian religious ethic.

Religions that violate these principles must either modify the doctrines in conflict with that law, and agree to live peaceably under the U.S. republican form of government, or a conflict will be inevitable.

This disparity has led to the current religious liberty debate we face with marriage policy today. Secularists and religions that depart from the Judeo-Christian code found in the Ten Commandments are attempting to alter the original intent of the U.S. Constitution. They have naturally found themselves at odds with believers. That is the source of the contentious marriage debate today.

ALF also believes there are some exceptions to establishing a “special class” of citizen. That would include protecting the right to Life for the vulnerable unborn children as well as the elderly. It also includes the need to focus on the rights of children to live in a society that protects the two-parent, mother-father relationship, and that restores and protects the once-special classification of of mothers who desire to stay at home to raise their children in an increasingly hostile, government-imposed, two-income economy.

This special classification for women/mothers was abandoned by the feminist movement throughout the 1970s and 1980s, encouraging equal pay for equal work and more women entering the work force. It has not been the panacea promised for women, but instead it has created havoc in family courts through no-fault divorce laws, harming women and children and more often than not, and creating a new class of poverty for them.

Likewise, non-discrimination laws have resulted in reverse discrimination and affirmative action that has actually harmed stay-at-home mothers, children and their marriages, forcing them out of their homes and actually diminishing the role of the father as provider.