"THE TRUTH"

BY:DR. FOREST LEWIS

    CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST

FRIENTS OF "THE TRUTH"

WWW.CAPITOLHILLCOFFEEHOUSE.COM

WWW.TALKSTREAMLIVE.COM

In 2004, the homosexual community skirted public disapproval of gays marrying, by winning a major victory in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

The court by a 4-3 margin said there was nothing in the constitution that precluded gays from marrying those of the same gender. In other words, the activitist judges told the good people of the state of Massachusetts that they would "Make Law, And Not Define It".

The gay community has a history of running to the courts--when the people vote in referendum denouncing their plans to re-define marriage. They have won some small skirmishes. However, they have yet to score a nationwide victory.

During the last mid-term election, a number of states placed on the ballot a referendum defining marriage as that between a man and a woman. The outcome was no contest. The gay community was trounced by voters. We didn't hear a peep from the "Hit And Run Media" on this political flogging handed to the gay community.

Word comes now that a Rhode Island couple has filed for divorce in that state. The couple was married in Massachusetts in 2004. However, they are filing for divorce in Rhode Island. Seems innocent enough--until you look in to the shenanigans of this "Married Couple".

The state of Rhode Island is "Silent" on the issue of gay marriage. Margaret Chambers and Cassandra Ormiston of Providence, say irreconcilable differences has caused them to file for divorce. Their lawyer, Louis Pulner refused to elaborate any further.

I am not a lawyer--however--like most people--I have common sense. My question to this couple is simple, why not go back to Massachusetts and file for divorce? I think I know the reason to my own question.

I believe that this couple is "Testing The Waters" in Rhode Island. In other words, if the Rhode Island courts get involved in their "Irreconcilable differences" divorce; and happen to grant them their wish to be done with one another: then what is to stop the gay community from petitioning the courts in Rhode Island to legalize gay marriage?

The argument would go something like this. Since you have granted Margaret Chambers and Cassandra Ormiston a divorce, why can't gays now get married in your state?

If the courts in Rhode Island foolishly get involved in this charade--they will thus have their backs against the wall.

Although I am against gay marriages, I would have to side with the gay community on this issue, should the Rhode Island courts get involved in divorce proceedings involving homosexuals.

It simply isn't logical--that you would grant a divorce to a gay couple--but deny them the right to marry in your state. Think about that for just a moment.

Should the Rhode Island courts meddle in the affairs of Massachusetts, the courts would  be lending tacit approval to gay marriage in my opinion.

Rhode Island Family Court Chief judge, Jeremiah Jeremiah is mulling over whether his state should get involved in this controversial issue. I say it is controversial because Rhode Island is sitting on a powder keg. This New England State does not have to light the fuse to this controversy.

Jeremiah noted this is the first case of same sex divorce in his state. He has scheduled a preliminary hearing for December 5th, 2006.

The will of the people continue to be thwarted by activist judges. It is high time for the public to become more proactive in dealing with these people who are dead set at making laws--and not interpreting them.

MY NEW BOOK, "THE DIARY OF A BLACK MAN WHO ESCAPED FROM THE DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL PLANTATION" IS NOW AVAILABLE IN TIME FOR CHRISTMAS. YOU CAN PURCHASE YOUR COPY AT WWW.AMAZON.COM.