The general rule of law, according to natural, Divine, and even most man-made law in the several states of the United States, is that the traditional family is the best place to raise children and provide them with the necessary nurturing and guidance. Broken families, either through death or divorce therefore would come short of the ideal. Regarding the issue of divorce and the impact that this has on families, at least one researcher notes that it “harms children” and is an “infectious social plague that hurts the commonweal.” (43)
I agree in general. In fact, I would agree with a position that the Catholic Church teaches in its “Catechism of the Catholic Church” that in general divorce:
is a grave offense against the natural law. Divorce is immoral . . . because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect, which makes it truly a plague on society. (44)
Statistics seem to bear this position out. Since no-fault divorce laws were enacted in the early 70’s divorce accelerated 17 percent between 1968 and 1988.(45) and children of divorced parents were 50% more likely to divorce their spouse. (46)
Further, divorce has a detrimental effect on children. Children in general, lose the following benefits from broken families:
- The benefit from economic resources that both parents bring to the household
- Parental modeling of appropriate male-female relations and character building traits, such as fidelity and self sacrifice
- With both parents in the home they are able to “spell” one another and to monitor each other’s parenting, thus reducing stress and helping to ensure that there is a moderation between the two extremes of being either too strict or too permissive in their parenting, as well as reducing the likelihood of abuse
- With fathers in the home they can act as guides to their children inintroducing them to the outside world
- Natural parents have the family history and culture, the authority, and the trust of children (47)
Children from broken homes also, on average, are more likely to drop out of high school, bear children out of wedlock, end up in prison, and to increase the chances of impoverishment. (48) For these reasons, in conclusion, the law should make every effort to support couples and the sacred institution of marriage–not make it ever easier to get out of.
For the reasons before cited, in regards to children doing better physically, emotionally, financially, and otherwise, in the traditional family, and in seeking the rule of what is in the best interest of the child, there should be a high legal preference to traditional married couples. I agree with the model legislation proposed by the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy that,
“it is in the child’s best interest (where possible) to provide that child with the closest possible restoration of that child’s natural right to the care and protection of both a mother and a father,” and that “family structure is highly relevant to child well-being,”
and charging the legislature as part of the act, to seek the best interest of an adoptive child by
“placing the child with a married mother and father.”(49)
However, many states ban discrimination based on marital status, with five states specifically making it “illegal to prefer married couples in placement decisions,” and only the state of Utah codifying a “clear preference for married couples in adoption.” (50) In 2006 the Arizona House passed legislation giving preference to married couples in adoptions. (51)
Historically however, adoption has only been very recently (mid 1800’s) a “legal structure,” and the first adoption laws, significantly enough, were “designed to imitate nature [the traditional marriage between a man and a woman].”(52) American society, as well as the political and legal professions, needs to return to their roots regarding adoption and return the traditional married couple to their rightful “preferred” position regarding adoption and adoption proceedings.
CUSTODY AND VISITATION
Historically, Custody in the United States, is the right of a parent to make decisions for the child and to take care of the child, and visitation is the right (some jurisdictions deeming it a privilege) of a non-custodial parent to visit with their children. It used to be the case that most jurisdictions preferred custody going to the biological mother (as the one most qualified) and most jurisdictions would limit visitation rights to only those with a biological relationship.
Today, however great inroads have been made. For example, in a recent Pennsylvania case, non-relatives sought to obtain visitation rights, (53) and in a Utah case, a former lesbian lover sought the same. (54) While most jurisdictions acknowledge that it is the most biological mother who is usually the one most qualified to care for the child other jurisdictions have been more liberal in their approach.
Judges today, in seeking to determine visitation rights, attempt to determine what is public policy and what is in the best interests of the child when seeking that determination. The problem being that “public policy” and what is actually the “best interest of the child” might be two entirely separate things. And leads to, in the words of one family expert, an “expansion of state power and fragmentation of the family.”(55) But, do judges really know what is in the best interest of the child when all they are going on is the interview, of a couple hours length (if their lucky) of a family in crisis by a social worker, who basically tells the judge what to do?
Is seeking the best interests of a child even justified? What about seeking the best interests of the family? While I know that there are plenty of instances where children need to be protected from abusive parents or other adults, children are resilient and perhaps more effort needs to expended by society to keep families together rather than seeking to tear them apart.
In conclusion, let me quote these words from the Heritage Foundation:
Marriage is a fundamental institution, deeply rooted in all societies, which has been tested and reaffirmed over thousands of years. It is the permanent union of one man and one woman. Marriage is not, in the words of a Massachusetts court, an “evolving paradigm,” but instead a time-tested pillar of civilization. (56)
Perhaps, to put it more succinctly, we ought to recall these words, from a value-laden era, and from a man–Benjamin Franklin–who firmly believed in the law of chastity, contrary to what certain historical revisionists make him out to be, who penned a letter to a young man attempting to persuade his friend from adopting a mistress and rejecting the institution of marriage:
Marriage is the proper remedy. It is the most natural state of man, and therefore the state in which you are most likely to find solid happiness. Your reasons against entering into it at present appear to me not well founded. The circumstantial advantages you have in view by postponing it are not only uncertain, but they are small in comparison with that of the thing itself, the being married and settled.
It is the man and woman united that make the complete human being. Separate, she wants his force of body and strength of reason; he, her softness, sensibility, and acute discernment. Together they are more likely to succeed in the world. A single man has not nearly the value he would have in that state of union. He is an incomplete animal. He resembles the odd half of a pair of scissors. If you get a prudent, healthy wife, your industry in your profession, with her good economy, will be a fortune sufficient.(57)
And finally, to quote former Newsmax pundit, Steve Farrell, we ought to keep in mind that there are wicked, haughty, and destructive eyes peering:
down on Marriage and the Family–and yet marriage between a man and a woman, and children raised by mother and father, are still Divine institutions. The nation that makes war on them will rue the day as surely as the sun rises tomorrow. The nation that rises up and defends them will save itself.(58)
In order to stem these destructive forces assaulting the family and our Judeo-Christian culture and heritage–and isn’t that what George Washington and his gallant soldiers fought for when boiled down to its essentials? — Shall we not attempt to do everything in our power to become involved in civic affairs and strive to make our influence felt by our vote, our letters, and our advice? (59)
To do any less would be to give up the fight to moral and ideological reprobates who, are striving with all their might, to turn our society, culture, values, and indeed the whole world upside down.
- Wilcox, W. Bradford. “Touchstone Archives: The Facts of Life & Marriage.” 2004. Touchstone Magazine. 22 Apr. 2006 http://touchstonemag.com/archives/print.php?id=18-01-038-f.
- “Catechism of the Catholic Church – PART 3 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE 6.” Saint Charles Borromeo Catholic Church. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm.
- Wilcox, Op Cite.
- Institute For Marriage And Public Policy. “Marriage Preferences in Adoption Law: Model Legislation.” Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. 2005. http://www.marriagedebate.com/pdf/LEGISmarr&adopt.pdf.
- Baker, Joshua K. and Duncan, William C. “Marital Preferences In Adoption Law: A Fifty State Review” Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. 2005. http://www.marriagedebate.com/pdf/iMAPPmarriage.adoption.pdf.
- Family Research Council. “Adoption: It’s For Children” Family Research Council. 2006. http://www.frc.org.
See also this interesting law review article: Wardle, Lynn D. “A Critical Analysis of Interstate Recognition of Lesbigay Adoptions.” Ave Maria School of Law. 2005. Ave Maria Law Review. 22 Apr. 2006 .
Wardle’s Law Review article contains the following supporting quote:
Until recently, adoption by same-sex couples was not allowed in the United States. Adoption was not known at common law, and adoption in Roman-influenced civil law was for the purpose of adults–either or both the adult adopter or an adult adoptee. The era of modern adoption began with the enactment of child-welfare focused adoption laws in Massachusetts in 1851. The primary, dominant, motivating purpose of American-style adoption was to provide parents for parentless children, and only secondarily, but simultaneously, to fulfill the reciprocal aspirations of adults to raise children. Thus, the heart of this child-centered model of adoption was the creation of family relationships that imitated and were intended to replicate the relationship that exists between parents and child(ren) in a birth (natural) family.
- Scolforo, Mark. “Pa. court lets nonrelatives seek ‘grandparent’ visitation (phillyBurbs.com) | Pennsylvania News.” 4 Jan. 2006. Calkins Media, Inc. http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-01032006-592311.html.
- Fattah, Geoffrey. “Ex-partners in court.” 2006. Deseret News Publishing Company. 22 Apr. 2006 http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600159937,00.html.
- Gallagher, Maggie. “iMAPP.org | Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.” 4 Jan. 2006. Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.marriagedebate.com/2006/01/penn.htm.
- “A Defining Moment: Marriage, the Courts, and the Constitution.” The Heritage Foundation: Policy Research and Analysis. 2006. http://new.heritage.org/research/family/nature-of-marriage.cfm.
- Franklin, Benjamin, as quoted by Farrell, Steve. “Red Eye on Marriage.” Constitutional Broadside. 2003. 20 Apr. 2006 http://www.geocities.com/graymada/CB/marriage.html.
- Benson, Ezra T. “The Constitution: A Heavenly Banner.” The Perfect Law of Liberty. Steven Montgomery. 27 Apr. 2006 http://www.geocities.com/graymada/tcahb.html.
Ala. Const. Art. I Â§ 35. The Alabama State Constitution contain one of the best short, succinct, and accurate statements regarding the proper role of government that I have ever seen, “the sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression.”
Barruel. Memoirs Illustrating The History Of Jacobinism. City: Real-View-Books, 1995. Abbe Barruel was a Catholic Jesuit priest who saw the influence of the secret combination known as the Jacobin’s on the French Revolution. Barruel and Robison (who wrote Proofs of a Conspiracy) were contemporaries who each wrote books detailing the rise of a secret combination which sought, and is still seeking today, to overthrow all the governments and religions of the world and supplanting them with a world government of their own making. Although Barruel and Robison were different in their methodology and viewpoint, both works support and buttress each other and both should be read, along with the more modern work, Fire in the Minds of Men, to grasp an understanding of a vast world-wide conspiracy which exists today that seeks to undermine our Judeo-Christian heritage, including the vital institutions of marriage and the family, and to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations and countries.
Benson, Ezra Taft. Conference Report, April 1966, 130. Great article by then Elder, Ezra Taft Benson, on the family and the importance of preserving traditional family values. The Conference Report itself contains the talks by the Prophet, Apostles, and other leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and contains much invaluable instruction and doctrine.
Benson, Taft, Ezra. The Constitution: A Heavenly Banner. City: Deseret Book Company, 1989. This booklet contains the last major political speech by President Ezra Taft Benson of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints before his death. It contains, in a nutshell, basic Constitutional and freedom related principles vital to preserving a free Republic.
Bentley, Christopher S. “The Assault on Marriage.” The New American Magazine. 2005. American Opinion Publishing Incorporated. 21 Apr. 2006 http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_203.shtml. Excellent article on traditional marriage and it’s opposition. The New American Magazine in general, is one of the best magazines for obtaining current information on Americanism and its enemies. Although written in a populist style (I prefer something a bit more scholarly and referenced) it should be required reading for everyone. President Ezra Taft Benson of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints thought so highly of this magazine that for years he gave subscriptions of this magazine to his Counselors, associates and friends as Christmas gifts.
Billington, H., James. Fire In The Minds Of Men. City: Basic Books, 1983. Originally written in 1980, Billington has impeccable credentials and is the current historian for the Library of Congress. What makes his work even more important is that Billington verifies the works of Robison and Barruel, and all of this from an admitted liberal. Billington notes in extensive detail the ideological and conspiratorial roots of modern day Marxists and revolutionary movements. This is an important work to understand in order to comprehend what is behind our current social, political, and sexual activists seeking to undermine western cultural heritage.
The Holy Bible. King James Version, Editor. Salt Lake City: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1983. The Bible continues to form the basis for western law and legal application.
The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. Salt Lake City: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1981. The Keystone Scripture for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. President Ezra Taft Benson said of this scripture that one of the books purposes was to expose:
the enemies of Christ. It confounds false doctrines and lays down contention. (See 2 Nephi 3:12.) It fortifies the humble followers of Christ against the evil designs, strategies, and doctrines of the devil in our day. The type of apostates in the Book of Mormon are similar to the type we have today. God, with his infinite foreknowledge, so molded the Book of Mormon that we might see the error and know how to combat false educational, political, religious, and philosophical concepts of our time. (Benson, Ezra Taft. “The Book of Mormon is the Word of God” CR, April 5, 1975. When Ezra Taft Benson became the Prophet of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints he repeated this talk at least 37 different times, at every Regional Conference he attended, The Regional Representatives Seminar, reprinted as the 1st Presidency message in the Ensign, and at several talks he gave at various Wards or Stakes)
President Benson also said that this book:
states that the downfall of two great American civilizations came as a result of secret conspiracies whose desire was to overthrow the freedom of the people. ‘And they have caused the destruction of this people of whom I am now speaking’, says Moroni, ‘and also the destructions of the people of Nephi (Ether 8:21).’ Now undoubtedly Moroni could have pointed out many factors that led to the destruction of the people, but notice how he singled out the secret combinations, just as the Church today could point out many threats to peace, prosperity, and the spread of God’s work, but it has singled out the greatest threat as the godless conspiracy. There is no conspiracy theory in the Book of Mormon–it is a conspiracy fact. Then Moroni speaks to us in this day and says, ‘wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this secret combination which shall be among you (Benson, Ezra Taft. “The Book of Mormon is the Word of God” CR, April 5, 1975.)
Regarding the connection which the Book of Mormon has to Marxism, or Communism, and the influence these ideologies have upon modern society, President Benson had the following to say:
Concerning the United States, the Lord revealed to his prophets that its greatest threat would be a vast, world-wide ‘secret combination’ which would not only threaten United States but also seek to ‘overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries’ (Ether 8:25). In connection with attack on the United States, the Lord told the Prophet Joseph Smith there would be an attempt to overthrow the country by destroying the Constitution. Joseph Smith predicted that the time would come when the Constitution would hang, as it were, by a thread, and at that time ‘this people will step forth and save it from threatened destruction’ (Journal History, Brigham Young’s Speech, July 4, 1854). . . . The Prophet Moroni seemed greatly exercised lest in our day we might not be able to recognize the startling fact that the same secret societies which destroyed the Jaredites and decimated numerous kingdoms of both Nephites and Lamanites would be precisely the same form of criminal conspiracy which would rise up among the gentile nations in this day. The stratagems of the leaders of these societies are amazingly familiar to anyone who has studied the tactics of modern communist leaders. The Lord has declared that before the second coming of Christ it will be necessary to ‘destroy the secret works of darkness . . ‘ in order to preserve the land of Zion–the Americas (2 Nephi 10: 11-16). The world-wide secret conspiracy which has risen up in our day to fulfill these prophecies is easily identified. President Mckay has left no room for doubt as to what attitude Latter-day Saints should take toward the modern ‘secret combination’ of conspiratorial communism . . .” (Ezra Taft Benson, CR, Oct 1961, p. 69-75)
“BoycottFord.com – Sponsored by American Family Association.” BoycottFord.com. 2005. American Family Association |. 21 Apr. 2006 http://www.boycottford.com. This is a site advocating a boycott of Ford products because of their pro-homosexual leanings and activism promoting the gay lifestyle. Contains much useful information on how much of corporate America is participating in our moral degeneracy.
Carlson, Allen. ” What Has Government Done to Our Families? – Mises Institute.” Mises Institute. 2003. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.mises.org/story/1406. Interesting article by Carlson on the influence of the welfare state on the breakdown of the family and family friendly institutions. The Ludwig Von Mises site in general is one of the best sites for gaining a greater understanding of economics in the Austrian school of thought, or tradition.
Carson, Clarence B. (1970). The American Tradition. Irvington on Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education. 40. A short, and very useful, and in my opinion, indispensable book for understanding freedom, American Political thought, and basic constitutional principles and understanding.
“Catechism of the Catholic Church – PART 3 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE 6.” Saint Charles Borromeo Catholic Church. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm. This particular article of the Catholic Catechism contains much useful information on the moral dangers of divorce and other issues for those interested in family law.
The Christian Institute. “Gay Marriage in all but name: How Civil Partnerships equate Holy Matrimony with Homosexual Liaisons” The Christian Institute. 2004. http://www.christian.org.uk/civilpartnerships/booklet_may04.pdf. This article details the dangers of allowing civil partnerships to attain a status equal to that of the traditional marriage. The Christian Institute is a United Kingdom family friendly site which contains much useful information from a British perspective.
Marx, Karl, Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. New York, NY: Signic Classic, 1998.
This is the classic work on Communist thought and theory by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.
Fagan, Patrick F. “The Child Abuse Crisis: The Disintegration of Marriage, Family, and the American Community.” The Heritage Foundation. 1997. Issue in Brief: Family and Marriage. 27 Apr. 2006 http://new.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1115.cfm.
The Heritage Foundation which hosts Mr. Fagan’s article is a family friendly site with much useful information.
Family Research Council. “Adoption: It’s For Children” Family Research Council. 2006. . Interesting article outlining the reasons to maintain traditional values when considering who’s going to adopt.
Farrell, Steve. “Red Eye on Marriage.” Constitutional Broadside. 2003. 20 Apr. 2006 http://www.geocities.com/graymada/CB/marriage.html. In this short article Steve explains, from our founding father’s perspective the benefits of marriage and the Marxist origins of the recent attacks on marriage. The Constitutional Broadside website itself is an excellent resource for researching and understanding the Constitution in the tradition of the founding fathers.
Fattah, Geoffrey. “Ex-partners in court.” 2006. Deseret News Publishing Company. 22 Apr. 2006 http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600159937,00.html. This article briefly explains the issues behind visitation rights and the competition between those seeking to maintain traditional values and families and those seeking to liberalize such.
First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “Same Gender Marriage.” Official Internet Site of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2006. Intellectual Reserve, Inc. 21 Apr. 2006 http://www.lds.org/newsroom/issues/answer/0,19491,6056-1-202-4-202,00.html. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is on the forefront of organizations combating moral evil. Their “Proclamation on the Family” is one of the finest succinct doctrinal treatises on the role of husband and father, wife and mother, the traditional family, and mankind’s role in seeking to preserve these institutions.
Gibbon, Edward. The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, .
Gibbon’s multi-volume work continues to be the historical pinnacle and standard upon which other more modern historians aspire. Should be must reading for any student interested in obtaining a greater understanding of the causes for the decline of nations.
Gallagher, Maggie. “iMAPP.org | Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.” 4 Jan. 2006. Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.marriagedebate.com/2006/01/penn.htm. Commentary by Gallagher on the Pennsylvania adoption case.
Gallagher, Maggie. Institute for Marriage and Public Policy http://www.imapp.org Family friendly site with plenty of statistics, research articles, model legislation and other useful information. This site also hosts the related site, www.marriagedebate.com, another very useful site.
Griggs, William N. “The New American – Toward the Total State – July 5, 1999.” The New American Magazine. 5 July 1999. American Opinion Publishing Incorporated. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1999/07-05-99/vo15no14_total.htm. Instructive article by Griggs on the influence of Marxism over America Society and culture.
Hall, Verna M. (1975). Christian History of the United States Constitution. Bicentennial ed. United States: Foundation for American Christian Education. Excellent sourcebook of primary historical documents pertaining to the United States Constitution and its Christian historical background.
Hall, Verna M. (1975). The Christian History of the United States Revolution. Bicentennial ed. United States: Foundation for American Christian Education. Excellent sourcebook of primary historical documents pertaining to the American Revolution and the drive for Independence and of the primary moving force for revolution and independence being Christianity and the colonialist understanding of biblical principles.
The Heritage Foundation. “Map of the Family Charts.” 2006. 22 Apr. 2006 http://new.heritage.org/Research/Family/Mapofthefamilycharts.cfm. This is an interesting chart which shows the harmful effects of poverty on children. The Heritage Foundation is a family friendly site which contains much useful information.
Institute For Marriage And Public Policy. “Marriage Preferences in Adoption Law: Model Legislation.” Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. 2005. http://www.marriagedebate.com/pdf/LEGISmarr&adopt.pdf. This article contains model legislation for those states seeking to preserve the preference for traditional married couples when adopting children.
Kimball, Spencer W. Conference Report, October 4, 1980. Good article by President Spencer W. Kimball, of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, containing instructions to Church members on preserving the institution of marriage and the family.
Lively, Scott, Kevin Abrams. The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party. City: Veritas Aeterna, 2002. This work documents the influence that homosexuality had on the origins and rise of the Nazi Party. And, contrary to popular understanding, as Kevin Abrams states in his preface, “the Nazis were not Right Wing Conservative Creationists; they were Left Wing Darwinian Evolutionary Socialists.” Abrams is right. The Nazi’s were National Socialists and are every bit of much Marxian, although a different brand, as Stalin’s Communism. Many of the tactics used by modern-day Marxist homosexual and political activists derive their origin from the tactics used by Hitler and his homosexual activists.
Lively, Scott. Homosexuality and the Nazi Party. 13 July 2003. Leadership U. 22 Apr. 2006. Most people are simply unaware of the influence that Homosexual activists had on the rise of Hitler and Nazism. Along with The Pink Swastika, this is a must read article to those seeking to understand the roots of modern-day homosexual activism.
Madison, James. Madison Debates. The Avalon Project. 29 Dec. 1998. Yale Law School. 21 Apr. 2006 http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/debates/822.htm. Notes kept by James Madison of the Federal Convention held in Philadelphia from May to September 1787. Reading Madison’s Debates is vital to understanding the Constitution in the tradition of our Founding Fathers.
Montgomery, Steven R. “Glasnost-Perestroika: Marxist-Leninist Holy War.” Perfect Law of Liberty: Glasnost-Perestroika Index . 1999. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/4516/gp/mlhw.html. In this article I explain, in a brief overview, the ideology of the Marxist dialectical advance and how that is applied to undermining western society, culture and religion.
O’Leary, Dale. “Feminism.” EWTN, Global Catholic Network. 1994. Trinity Communications. 10 Apr. 2006 http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/FEMINISM.TXT. Good article for understanding the Marxist roots of modern day Feminism.
People v. Ruggles (8 Johns. R. 290 N.Y. 1811) Early New York Supreme Court decision affirming the Christian basis of the American Republic and that “the morality of the country is deeply ingrafted upon Christianity.”
Roberts, Carey. “Feminist utopia, social nightmare.” Renew America. 18 Jan. 2005. Carey Roberts. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/roberts/050118. Great article by Roberts in understanding the Marxist roots of modern day Feminism and the assaults made on women by the ideology of Marxism.
Robison, John. Proofs Of A Conspiracy Against All The Religions And Governments Of Europe Carried On In The Secret Meetings Of Freemasons, Illuminati And Reading Societies. City: Kessinger Publishing, 2003. Written in 1798, Robison details the origin, rise, and influence of the secret society known as the Illuminati (and its eventual successor Communism) and its effect on the French Revolution. Proofs of a Conspiracy is an important work to get to know and understand for anyone seeking to understand modern day Communism. This book was also influential on George Washington and the President of Yale University, Timothy Dwight, in helping them understand the rise of Secret Combinations seeking to overthrow the newly born Republic. This understanding of the conspiracy that George Washington gained by reading this book led to the so-called Citizen Genet affair and the Alien and Sedition Acts. This influence of the Jacobins on the early United States is probably one of the most neglected areas in all of U.S. history.
Scolforo, Mark. “Pa. court lets nonrelatives seek ‘grandparent’ visitation (phillyBurbs.com) | Pennsylvania News.” 4 Jan. 2006. Calkins Media, Inc. 20 Apr. 2006 http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-01032006-592311.html. Brief news article which briefly explains the issues behind visitation rights and the competition between those seeking to maintain traditional values and families and those seeking to liberalize such.
Sprigg, Peter. “Questions and Answers: What’s Wrong With Letting Same-Sex Couples “Marry?”.” 2006. Family Research Council. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IF03H01. This article details legal, historical, and social science reasons why marriage should not be redefined, allowing same-sex couples to “marry.” Family Research Council is a family friendly site which contains much useful information.
These Last Days Ministries. “Marxist roots of radical feminism.” These Last Days Ministries. 19 Mar. 2005. These Last Days Ministries, Inc. 10 Apr. 2006 http://www.tldm.org/news5/radical.htm. These Last Days Ministries is a traditional Catholic and family friendly site. While I don’t necessarily agree with all of their conclusions and arguments, their information on Feminism and Communism is superb.
Traditional Values Coalition. “Homosexuality 101: A Primer.” Traditional Values Coalition. 2005. Traditional Values Coalition. 10 Apr. 2006 http://traditionalvalues.org/. The Traditional Values Coalition is a fundamentalist Christian site, which I don’t necessarily agree with in all their particulars, but they do have some excellent material and sources for the family friendly researcher, author, or writer.
The Traditional Values Coalition. “Special Report: Homosexual Civil Unions.” Traditional Values Coalition. 2005. 10 April 2006. http://www.traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/CivilUnions.pdf.
Details the dangers of allowing homosexual civil unions.
Updegraph v. Commonwealth, 11 Serg. & Rawle, 394 (Penn. 1824) Early Pennsylvania case which illustrated the role that Christianity played in the common law of Pennsylvania, at least in the early years.
Vidal v. Executors of Girard, 43 U.S. 127 (1844).Early U.S. Supreme Court decision affirming the Christian basis of the founding and early history of the American Republic.
Wardle, Lynn D. “A Critical Analysis of Interstate Recognition of Lesbigay Adoptions.” Ave Maria School of Law. 2005. Ave Maria Law Review. 22 Apr. 2006 . An extensive analysis by Wardle of the dangers of allowing lesbian adoptions in interstate law. Wardle is a professor of law at the J. Reuben Clark law school of Brigham Young University and the article itself appears on the Ave Maria School of Law’s website. So its interesting to see this interaction and cooperation between Mormons and Catholics.
Wardle, Lynn D., as quoted by Church News. “LDS Media: Failure in Home Fosters Trends to Alternatives.” 1997. Infobase Media. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.ldsmedia.com/2286519. Wardle shows how the failure of familes in general has helped to promote alternative lifestyles and lifestyle choices. He also briefly states his opinion that certain activists are working to destroy the traditional family in the law and bring about more favorable (to these activists) change.
Weston, John-Henry. “French Government Report Says No to Homosexual Marriage.” 2006. 22 Apr. 2006 http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/printerfriendly.html. Lifesite, which hosts this article is a Canadian, family friendly site which claims to be a “life, family, and culture outpost featuring daily news and information not widely available in the mainstream media.
Wilcox, W. Bradford. “Touchstone Archives: The Facts of Life & Marriage.” 2005. Touchstone Magazine. 22 Apr. 2006 http://touchstonemag.com/archives/print.php?id=18-01-038-f.
This article demonstrates the compatibility of Catholic Christian Moral Teachings and social science.
The Witherspoon Institute. “Top Ten Social Scientific Arguments Against Same Sex Marriage” The Witherspoon Institute. 2006. http://www.winst.org/top%20ten%20lists.html. This article details the scientific arguments against same-sex marriage from the social scientist perspective. The Witherspoon Institute is a family friendly site with much useful information.
Wood, Bill. “Hearing Archives :Committee on Ways & Means :: U.S. House of Representatives :.” Committee on Ways & Means. 22 Apr. 2006 http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.asp?formmode=view&id=954. This testimony of Bill Wood’s outlines how Marxists, using the techniques developed by Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci, to undermine and eventually overthrow targeted nations (in this case the U.S.).
Wood, S., Gordon. The Creation Of The American Republic, 1776-1787. Chapel Hill: Published for the Institute of Early American History and Culture at Williamsburg, Va. Written by a preeminent historian, this work is vital and indispensable for a greater understanding of American political thought and its genesis. It should be on everyone’s shelf if they desire a greater understanding of the thoughts, ideas, speeches and writings of those who were instrumental in shaping ideas, and in the founding of the American Republic.