States need to start rising up and telling the federal government that when it comes to the definition of marriage, keep out of their business. That's the view of pro-family spokesman and activist Peter LaBarbera.
On Tuesday, federal judge Terrence Kern, a Bill Clinton appointee, ruled Oklahoma's ban on same-gender "marriage" unconstitutional, labeling it as "arbitrary" and "irrational" and in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
LaBarbera, who heads up Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, tells OneNewsNow Kern's ruling comes in spite of the fact that three out of every four Oklahoma voters approved the state constitutional amendment in 2004.
"And now a single judge would purport to override that vote of the people – it's just shocking," he observes. "I think what's happened is the liberals think that they have the right to dictate to the American people that traditional marriage is no longer going to survive in the United States of America, even in a deep 'Red' state like Oklahoma."
When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act last year, the majority opinion stated that states have the right to define marriage.
"The people's will in Oklahoma couldn't be more clear," notes LaBarbera. "They voted 76 percent in favor of marriage between one man and one woman – and I hope and pray that no matter what happens in the courts in this decision, or any decision down the road, that Oklahomans will not stand to have their vote overturned by judges."
But LaBarbera believes that even if the Supreme Court should rule homosexual marriage legal, states should refuse to comply.
Judge Kern stayed his decision pending outcome of appeals.
A Judeo-Christian law firm doubts a federal judge will rule in its favor in a lawsuit it brought against a Seattle-area transit authority