Kirsten Andersen

,

Rhode Island to become 10th state to allow same-sex 'marriage'

Kirsten Andersen
Kirsten Andersen
Image
Image

PROVIDENCE, RI, April 26, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Rhode Island is poised to become the 10th state to approve same-sex “marriage.” The Rhode Island State Senate Wednesday voted 26-12 in favor of a bill redefining marriage to include homosexual couples.

The vote came after the House overwhelmingly approved the measure in January, and after Senate President Teresa Paiva-Weed, a Democrat who opposes same-sex “marriage,” nonetheless allowed the bill to come to the floor for a vote.

The bill will now go back to the House for a perfunctory vote before being forwarded to Gov. Lincoln Chafee for his signature. The governor has previously expressed his support for the bill.

Once signed, the bill will take effect August 1.

After that date, civil unions will no longer be available to same-sex couples in Rhode Island, only marriage. However, the state will continue to recognize existing civil partnerships that have been formed since the state approved civil unions two years ago.

Additionally, the bill contains a provision allowing those who entered civil unions to convert those legal partnerships to “marriages.”

Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin of the Diocese of Providence urged legislators Monday “to stand strong” and “to defend marriage and family as traditionally defined.”

“We should be very clear about this,” Tobin added. “It is only with grave risk to our spiritual well-being and the common good of our society that we dare to redefine what God himself has created.”

“It was horrific to see many Rhode Island senators who call themselves Catholics publicly betray their Catholic faith by voting for this same-sex ‘marriage’ bill,” said Kara Young, a Catholic pro-family activist who spoke against the bill during the Senate hearings.

Young, a former candidate for Lieutenant Governor, told LifeSiteNews.com, “Some of them even gave televised speeches on the Senate floor before the vote occurred, during which they proudly proclaimed themselves as Catholics and promoted their reasons for why they were voting for the bill.”

But on Tuesday, after weeks of pressure, two key “pro-family” Rhode Island State Senators caved in to the homosexual lobby and switched their votes, causing the Senate Judiciary Committee to pass the gay “marriage” bill by a 7-4 vote, and send it to the full Senate.

Sens. William Conley and Leonidas Reptakis are both religious Democrats who until this week had maintained strong opposition to same-sex “marriage.” Conley is Catholic.

Reptakis is a member of the Greek Orthodox Church. The priests at both men’s churches have spoken out against gay “marriage” throughout the debate.

As recently as January, Reptakis told a local newspaper, “I believe in a traditional marriage between a man and a woman.” But over the last several weeks, homosexual activists turned up the heat on both men. Last month, Reptakis told the press that he'd been getting 30 to 40 phone calls every day on the issue of same-sex “marriage.”

In the end, both men voted for the bill. So did Sen. Maryellen Goodwin, another Catholic Democrat who told the Associated Press that after many personal pleas from homosexual constituents and several sleepless nights, she decided to turn her back on the teaching of her Church and vote “on the side of love.”

“I’m a practicing Catholic. I’m proud to be a Catholic,” she told the AP. “I struggled with this for days, for weeks. It's certainly not an easy vote.”

“These Catholic senators are causing grave scandal to the faithful,” Young told LifeSiteNews. “Unless they repent beforehand, [they] should be denied Communion.”

Young said she is concerned that the vote will lead to persecution of those whose faiths teach against homosexuality.

“For the ‘crime’ of not toeing the line of the radical same sex agenda…citizens, parents, business owners, and organizations can expect to be fined, fired, or even arrested for their non-compliance,” Young wrote. “Rhode Island public schools will be breeding grounds for indoctrination into the same sex agenda.”

Young said that has already happened in Massachussetts, where same-sex ‘marriage’ has been legal since 2004.

“In 2005 in Massachusetts, a mother and father named David and Tonia Parker were horrified after their five-year-old kindergartner son was given a book by his school promoting same sex partnerships,” Young wrote in an e-mail to LifeSiteNews. “David Parker went to the school, asking them to notify him whenever the school would be discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, so that he could opt his son out of this indoctrination. The school not only refused this concerned father's request, but ended up having him arrested and jailed overnight.”

Rhode Island’s bill redefines marriage by removing all gender-specific language from the state’s marriage laws. It also adds new language that permits a person to marry any other eligible person, regardless of sex.

While the bill contains a clause allowing churches to refuse to conduct same-sex “marriages” on religious grounds, that protection does not extend to businesses owned by people of faith. Photographers, bakeries, inns, and other for-profit ventures that cater to the wedding industry may not refuse their services to gay “wedding” ceremonies, regardless of religious objection to homosexuality.

The bill’s sponsor, Democrat Donna Nesselbush, hailed the “historic vote” in a statement, saying legislators wisely chose to “join the force for marriage equality that is sweeping our nation.”

Marc Solomon, spokesmen for “Freedom to Marry,” a pro-gay-‘marriage’ group, also celebrated the vote. “This finishes off New England—we now have a region of the country that is 100 percent for the freedom to marry,” Solomon told the Wall Street Journal Wednesday.

Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Vermont all allow same-sex “marriage” now, along with Iowa, New York, Maryland, Washington, and the District of Columbia. Of those, only Maine, Maryland and Washington voted in favor of gay nuptials. The others were the result of court orders.

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:

Donate to LifeSiteNews

Give the gift of Truth.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

,

Pressure mounts as Catholic Relief Services fails to act on VP in gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne
Image
Rick Estridge, Catholic Relief Services' Vice President of Overseas Finance, is in a same-sex "marriage," public records show. Twitter

BALTIMORE, MD, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Nearly a week after news broke that a Catholic Relief Services vice president had contracted a homosexual “marriage” while also publicly promoting homosexuality on social media in conflict with Church teaching, the US Bishops international relief agency has taken no apparent steps to address the matter and is also not talking.

CRS Vice President of Overseas Finance Rick Estridge entered into a homosexual “marriage” in Maryland the same month in 2013 that he was promoted by CRS to vice president, public records show.

Despite repeated efforts at a response, CRS has not acknowledged LifeSiteNews’ inquiries during the week. And the agency told ChurchMilitant.com Thursday that no action had been taken beyond discussion of the situation and CRS would have no further comment.

"Nothing has changed,” CRS Senior Manager for Communications Tom said. “No further statement will be made."

LifeSiteNews first contacted CRS for a response prior to the April 20 release of the report and did not receive a reply, however Estridge’s Facebook and LinkeIn profiles were then removed just prior to the report’s release.

CRS also did not acknowledge LifeSiteNews’ follow-up inquiry later in the week.

“Having an executive who publicly celebrates a moral abomination shows the ineffectiveness of CRS' Catholic identity training,” Lepanto Institute President Michael Hichborn told LifeSiteNews. “How many others who hate Catholic moral teaching work at CRS?”

CRS did admit it was aware Estridge was in a “same-sex civil marriage” to Catholic News Agency (CNA) Monday afternoon, and confirmed he was VP of Overseas Finance and had been with CRS for 16 years.

“At this point we are in deliberations on this matter,” Price told CNA that day.

ChurchMilitant.com also reported that according to its sources, it was a well-known fact at CRS headquarters in Baltimore that Estridge was in a homosexual “marriage.” 

“There is no way CRS didn't know one of its executives entered into a mock-marriage until we broke the story,” Hichborn said. “The implication is clear; CRS top brass had no problem with having an executive so deliberately flouting Catholic moral teaching.”

“The big question is,” Hichborn continued, “what other morally repugnant matters is CRS comfortable with?”

While the wait continues for the Bishops’ relief organization to address the matter, those behind the report and other critics of prior instances of CRS involvement in programs and groups that violate Church principles continue to call for a thorough and independent review of the agency programs and personnel.

“How long should it take to call an employee into your office, tell him that his behavior is incompatible with the mission of the organization, and ask for his resignation?” asked Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher. “About thirty minutes, I would say.”

“The Catholic identity of CRS is at stake,” Hichborn stated. “If CRS does nothing, then there is no way faithful Catholics can trust the integrity of CRS's programs or desire to make its Catholicity preeminent.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Thousands of marriage activists gathered in D.C. June 19, 2014 for the 2nd March for Marriage. Dustin Siggins / LifeSiteNews.com
The Editors

, ,

Watch the March for Marriage online—only at LifeSiteNews

The Editors
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- At noon on Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and dozens of cosponsors, coalition partners, and speakers will launch the third annual March for Marriage. Thousands of people are expected to take place in this important event to show the support real marriage has among the American people.

As the sole media sponsor of the March, LifeSiteNews is proud to exclusively livestream the March. Click here to see the rally at noon Eastern Time near the U.S. Capitol, and the March to the Supreme Court at 1:00 Eastern Time.

And don't forget to pray that God's Will is done on Tuesday, when the Supreme Court hears arguments about marriage!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious beliefs’ against abortion ‘have to be changed’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

NEW YORK CITY, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Speaking to an influential gathering in New York City on Thursday, Hillary Clinton declared that “religious beliefs” that condemn "reproductive rights," “have to be changed.”

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” Hillary told the Women in the World Summit yesterday.

Liberal politicians use “reproductive health” as a blanket term that includes abortion. However, Hillary's reference echoes National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill's op-ed from last May that called abortion “an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality.”

The Democratic presidential hopeful added that governments should throw the power of state coercion behind the effort to redefine traditional religious dogmas.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will,” she said. “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

The line received rousing applause at the feminist conference, hosted in Manhattan's Lincoln Center by Tina Brown.

She also cited religious-based objections to the HHS mandate, funding Planned Parenthood, and the homosexual and transgender agenda as obstacles that the government must defeat.

“America moves ahead when all women are guaranteed the right to make their own health care choices, not when those choices are taken away by an employer like Hobby Lobby,” she said. The Supreme Court ruled last year that closely held corporations had the right to opt out of the provision of ObamaCare requiring them to provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization to employees with no co-pay – a mandate that violates the teachings of the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies.

Clinton lamented that “there are those who offer themselves as leaders...who would defund the country's leading provider of family planning,” Planned Parenthood, “and want to let health insurance companies once again charge women just because of our gender.”

“We move forward when gay and transgender women are embraced...not fired from good jobs because of who they love or who they are,” she added.

It is not the first time the former first lady had said that liberal social policies should displace religious views. In a December 2011 speech in Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said perhaps the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” These objections, she said, are “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation.”

While opinions on homosexuality are “still evolving,” in time “we came to learn that no [religious] practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us.”

Her views, if outside the American political mainstream, have been supported by the United Nations. The UN Population Fund stated in its 2012 annual report that religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs had to be overcome. According to the UNFPA report, “‘duty-bearers’ (governments and others)” have a responsibility to assure that all forms of contraception – including sterilization and abortion-inducing ‘emergency contraception’ – are viewed as acceptable – “But if they are not acceptable for cultural, religious or other reasons, they will not be used.”

Two years later, the United Nations' Committee on the Rights of the Child instructed the Vatican last February that the Catholic Church should amend canon law “relating to abortion with a view to identifying circumstances under which access to abortion services may be permitted.”

At Thursday's speech, Hillary called the legal, state-enforced implementation of feminist politics “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” which must be accomplished “not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

“These are not just women's fights. These have to be America's fights and the world's fights,” she said. “There's still much to be done in our own country, much more to be done around the world, but I'm confident and optimistic that if we get to work, we will get it done together.”

American critics called Clinton's suggestion that a nation founded upon freedom of religion begin using state force to change religious practices unprecedented.

“Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion,” said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

“In one sense, this shows just how extreme the pro-abortion caucus actually is,” Ed Morrissey writes at HotAir.com. “Running for president on the basis of promising to use the power of government to change 'deep seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs' might be the most honest progressive slogan in history.”

He hoped that, now that she had called for governments to change religious doctrines, “voters will now see the real Hillary Clinton, the one who dismisses their faith just the same as Obama did, and this time publicly rather than in a private fundraiser.”

Donohue asked Hillary “to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.”

You may watch Hillary's speech below.

Her comments on religion begin at approximately 9:00. 

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook