Monday, April 20, 2009

Mr. Perez Is a Creator-o-phobe

According to CitizenLink, "The U.S. House Judiciary Committee is expected to take up the legislation — H.R. 1913 — this week."
Democrats in Congress are pushing to create a new class of crimes based on the victim's "actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity."

Under such "hate-crime" laws, pastors could be prosecuted for preaching the biblical view of homosexuality. Similar laws have been used to prosecute religious speech in the U.S. and abroad.

We know for a fact that secret tribunals exist in Canada that specifically go after Pastors that are faithful in the preaching of both Law and Gospel. Since the Secret Tribunals of Canada are coming this way, it should not shock us that Miss California should lose simply because she said that states have the right to choose (contrary to what Perez said in his video) and that she personally believes marriage is defined as a man and a woman (Yes, she was in the lead and lost solely due to Perez's purposeful controversial question).

In this clip, you can watch the normal comment that could have come from almost any American about Gay marriage.

Yet this judge (imagine him as a judge on your secret tribunal panel?) thinks he is so intelligent while acting like the very wickedness he think this lady is. How did this guy get to be a judge? Is he not a clear picture of Romans 1?

He tells us in this video how Miss California should have answered. Yet everyone knows homosexual activists don't believe in the Constitution as the law of the land. He most likely wants the Courts to rule when states don't go towards his view. So his pomp is just that...pomp. Her answer should have been:
What does it matter to you what Vermont or any other state does? You would just take it to the Courts and make the law go your way anyway.

Here is a good commentary by Dr. White that says what we ought to be saying.

No comments: