Louisiana Voters Overwhelm Homosexual Activists To Amend State Constitution

For Publication On Or After September 21, 2004
by Rev. Louis P. Sheldon
Chairman, Traditional Values Coalition

Washington, DC – On Saturday, September 11, voters in Louisiana went to the polls to express their support for traditional marriage. An overwhelming number of them (78%) voted to amend their state constitution to define marriage as a one-man, one-woman union. The amendment also included provisions that ban homosexual civil unions and domestic partnerships.This vote is a significant defeat for homosexual activists who are working to overturn the centuries-old definition of marriage as a union of one man and one woman. But, of course, the anti-democratic homosexual activist organizations are never satisfied with the concept of majority rule. They have already threatened to file a lawsuit to overturn a vote of 78% of the electorate on this issue. These anti-democratic activists wish to impose their minority views upon the rest of the populace by appealing to liberal judges. These judges are only too eager to issue extra-legal edicts to impose their social agenda upon the majority.

The voters in Louisiana have shown—once again—that well-informed Americans do not want marriage redefined to include homosexual relationships. When the voters—not judges—are given the power to decide if they want marriage protected, they overwhelmingly vote on the side of traditional marriage.

In Hawaii in 1998, 69% of the voters approved a constitutional amendment to protect marriage; in 1998, Alaskans voted 68% to protect marriage; in Nebraska in 2000, 70% of the voters chose to amend the state constitution; Californians voted 61% to 39% to approve a state-wide proposition declaring that marriage is a one-man, one-woman institution; and in 2002, Nevada voters approved a constitutional amendment by 67% to 33%.

The Louisiana vote sends a clear message to homosexual activists: The American people do not want marriage redefined by a mere 2% to 3% of the population. This is especially true when voters realize that homosexual activists have openly admitted that their goal is to overthrow the institution of marriage altogether and to usher in an era of polyamory (multiple sex partners) and serial relationships. Homosexual activist Andrew Sullivan, for example, writing in Virtually Normal has stated that once same-sex marriage is legalized, heterosexuals will have to understand that homosexual males have a greater “need for extramarital outlets” than heterosexual males and females. Sullivan is admitting that homosexuals will pursue multiple sex partnerships—even if married—and that we must just learn to live with this reality. Well, no we won’t.

Every state in the union needs a constitutional amendment like the one just passed by the voters in Louisiana. The amendment should not only specifically ban same-sex marriage but civil unions and domestic partnerships, which are simply euphemisms for same-sex marriage. We also need a constitutional amendment at the federal level that will accomplish the same goal of protecting the institution of marriage from being overthrown by anti-democratic homosexual activists.

We cannot afford to lose this battle for the family and traditional values.

Printer Friendly Page -

Email To A Friend - Support TVC - Get Our Newsletter!

More Inside TVC...