That’s Right Nate

In 2005, with the liberal and homosexual agendas making huge inroads in Texas, the state found itself in increasing danger of a referendum making gay marriage legal and ending life as they know it in the lone star state forever.   Now Texans, don’t cotton to those kind of changes and they sure don’t take them lying down.   A referendum was overwhelmingly passed that not only banned gay marriage, but also declared, “This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”

The state of Texas had spoken.  In order to prevent homosexuals from getting married, the state would no longer recognize marriage of any kind.  This was the ultimate act of self-sacrifice for many longtime married couples in the state.  It must have been quite a shock for a lot of children in the state to learn that not only were their parents not married, but neither were their grandparents.  When asked for comment,  Jerry Strickland, a representative for the Texas Attorney General said, “The Texas Constitution and the marriage statute are entirely constitutional. We will continue to defend both in court.”

Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Legal Institute in Plano explained the language was designed to be broad enough to prevent the creation of domestic partnerships, civil unions or other arrangements that would give same-sex couples many of the benefits of marriage.  In fact, it prevents two lesbians and two gay men from engaging in heterosexual marriages and then simply swapping partners to get around legal restrictions.

As a non-Texan I can only admire this kind of bravery.  It reminds me of the scorched Earth techniques used to frustrate Napoleon and later Hitler.   By sacrificing their own marriages Texas has struck a blow to defend the sanctity of those very marriages that they can no longer have.   I believe there is a lesson here for the rest of us.

John Ensign, David Vitter, and myself relaxing after a long day of work

[I was very lucky to receive an email today from Congressman Jack Kimble (R-CA) who wished to write a guest column in my blog about the situation with Nevada Senator John Ensign.   I was happy to oblige.  If you haven't been paying attention, today Ensign admitted to an affair with one of his staff.   Her husband also worked for Ensign and when he tried to blackmail him, Ensign went public with the affair.]

John Ensign has been a giant of the Senate.   He has always stood for family values and conservative principles.  When Clinton put this country through the shame of Monica-gate, Ensign was one of the loudest voices for impeachment calling it “an embarrassing moment for the country” and stating the Clinton had no credibility left.  In more recent years he came out forcefully against gay marriage saying, “I believe that marriage should be defined as that between one man and one woman. You want to do what is ideal for children and all of the studies show that the ideal for children is to be in a household with a father and a mother.”

In short, John is exactly the kind of guy that we want in the Senate.  He’s a family man and he obviously has a strong sense of morals.  Unfortunately, the pressures that a congressman faces are huge.  It begins when we’re freshmen, you see all these attractive young women who want jobs as staffers and they’re on you the moment you step off the plane–tossing you their keys or underwear and asking you if you have a place to stay or giving you a ride to the capitol.   Let’s face it, in Washington DC we are the rock stars.

Then there are the parties.   I remember after drinking hard all night at Dennis Hastert’s,  they locked myself and Judy Biggert in a closet for 10 minutes.   Judy and I managed to keep our clothes on, but we still made sure to give them a good show when they finally opened the door.  That kind of stuff was happening all the time.  I still remember when Paul Ryan showed John and I the Double Kissinger–Wow!  My wife Margaret wouldn’t even let me do that in our bedroom.

Anyway, if we’re the rock stars in Washington DC, as a representative I’m like one of the Temptations.  As a senator John Ensign is like Huey Lewis.   If you stay in Washington long enough its going to make it tough to avoid temptation.    I hope the American people realize that the way to judge a congressman’s morals is through his speeches and the positions he takes on the issues and not what he does in his private life.   John you’re a good buddy and I know you’ll pull through this OK.

With the looney left having threatened the very institution of marriage by allowing gays in California to marry, we finally have some men of decency stepping forward to say, “Not in my country.”  S.J. Res 43 is a joint resolution to propose a Constitutional amendment to  limit marriage to a relationship between one man and one woman and I say its about time.

Co-sponsors David Vitter and Larry Craig openned themselves up to personal criticism after revelations last year that Vitter was a client of the now deceased DC Madam and Craig was mistakenly arrested for lewd behavior in the Minneapolis airport.  Still, these men of concious and their 7 other co-sponsors know that when marriage is threatened they have a responsibility to take a stand regardless of how hypocritical it may appear.

We applaud Vitter, Craig, and the 7 other sponsors for seeing a threat to the American family and rising up to do something about it.  I urge all readers of my blog to write to their congressmen and let them know that you want them to join with Vitter and Craig to protect wholesome family values.