To: Ronda Menlove, David Lifferth, Jack Draxler, Edward Redd, Curt Webb, Jacob Anderegg, Ryan Wilcox, Gage Froerer, Jeremy Peterson, Dixon Pitcher, Brad Dee, Richard Greenwood, Paul Ray, Curtis Oda, Brad Wilson, Steve Handy, Stewart Barlow, Roger Barrus, Jim Nielson, Becky Edwards, Doug Sagers, Susan Duckworth, Jennifer M. Seelig, Rebecca Houck, Joel Briscoe, Angela Romero, Mike Kennedy, Brian King, Lee Perry, Janice Fisher, Larry Wiley, LaVar Christensen, Craig Hall, Johnny Anderson, Mark A. Wheatley, Patrice Arent, Carol Moss, Eric Hutchings, Jim Dunnigan, Lynn Hemingway, Daniel McCay, Jim Bird, Earl Tanner, Tim Cosgrove, Steve Eliason, Marie Poulson, Ken Ivory, Keven John Stratton, Derek Brown, Richard Cunningham, Greg Hughes, John Knotwell, Melvin Brown, Kraig Powell, John G. Mathis, Kay Christofferson, Brian Greene, Jon Cox, Val Peterson, layton, Keith Grover, Jon Stanard, Dean Sanpei, Rebecca Lockhart, Francis Gibson, Michael Mckell, Marc Roberts, Merrill Nelson, Jerry Anderson, Kay Mciff, Brad Last, John Westwood, mnoel, Lowry Snow, Don Ipson,
Subject: Gay Marriage in Utah: A call to defend our freedoms and family, vouchsafed by God and the US Constitution
Date: Tue Dec 31 03:20:57 MST 2013
Stuart Wallace, South Jordan Utah,  801-792-5296 . Pleas call me as I would love to discuss this with you. Thanks

"If you do're going to lose everything, and I don't mean just here and now." Stuart Wallace

We must stand for our freedoms  and for the family as defined in... The Family. A Proclamation to the World.

What we must do now:

1. Call the Governor. We must fight unconstitutional rulings from the federal courts by urging Governor Gary Herbert to use his executive powers to forbid any County in Utah from issuing any more same sex marriage licenses. The Governor needs to issue a statement that Utah will ignore the unconstitutional ruling of Judge Robert J. Shelby that supposedly overturned Utah's amendment 3, on States Rights grounds. He needs to stand up for the citizens of the state that made their voices heard as they voted 66% in the affirmative and passed amendment 3, which says marriage is between one man and one woman. He must fight same sex marriage and support States' Rights and family friendly policy now, and not wait for the courts to decide on appeal. It is not up to them. We must stop their usurpation of our rights. (Read below for clarification of this usurpation of our State's Rights and contact information for the Governor.)

2. Call the Office of the Attorney General of Utah and urge Sean D. Reyes to back the Governor in standing up to federal usurpation of our rights. We have the right to self determination as a State. States' Rights are being ignored and crushed. (Contact information below.)

3. Call our state legislators and ask them to pass a resolution in the 2014 legislative session in support of Governor Herbert in his actions in standing for States' Rights and against unconstitutional rulings from federal courts and for family values. If the Governor will not take a stand for states rights and do the right thing, then we need the Legislative Branch to do the right thing and pass a resolution refusing to obey an unconstitutional edict from a federal court. (Read below for contact information for the state legislators. Call them all, not just your own.)

4. Stand up and fight. We must, as President Thomas S. Monson has stated, "Dare to stand alone" and as President Gordon B. Hinckley has stated in the title of his New York Times bestseller, "Stand for Something". I does not matter what anyone else thinks about our stand on gay marriage, we need to stand against it even if we are the only ones. We need to as President Ezra Taft Benson has said, "make our influence felt by vote, our letters, our teaching, and our advice."

5. Help an organization. If you would like to help the only, or one of the only organizations that is bold enough to actively fight this gay marriage issue, plus fight to uphold all our constitutional rights, look no further than Utah Eagle Forum.

James 1:
22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

Utah Governor's Office, Gary Herbert, PHONE: 801-538-1000, TOLL FREE: 800-705-2464
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Sean D. Reyes, (801) 366-0260, (801) 538-9600, (801) 366-0300

Utah State Legislative District search

Utah House of Representatives

Utah Senate


A) Judicial Activism

Judicial activism is what continues to happened to regular enactments of Congress, State Legislatures, voter approved initiatives, and state constitutional amendments that are unjustly overturned on a regular basis.

Judicial activism is when courts do not confine themselves to reasonable interpretations of laws, but instead create law. Judicial activism is when courts do not limit their ruling to the dispute before them, but instead establish a new rule to apply broadly to issues not presented in the specific action. Judicial activism is when judges substitute their own political opinions for the applicable law, or when judges act like a legislature (legislating from the bench) rather than like a traditional court. In so doing, the court takes for itself the powers of Congress, State Legislatures, or the power of the people themselves via citizen initiatives or constitutional amendments, rather than limiting itself to the powers traditionally given to the judiciary.

In this regard, judicial activism is a way for liberals to avoid the regular legislative means of enacting laws in order to ignore public opinion and dodge public debate, or to overturn laws that they disagree with.

Courts in California — both state and federal ones — frequently engage in judicial activism. Two major examples of this is the relatively recent California Supreme Court decision In re Marriage Cases, wherein four California Supreme Court justices (who are appointed, not elected) unilaterally overruled the will of the people of the state of California, and legalized gay "marriage." Proposition 22. Also Proposition 8 was erroneously declared unconstitutional by U.S district judge Vaughn Walker based on a misapplication of the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. And now we have Utah's amendment 3 supposedly overturned.

See this link for some cases where the federal courts have used judicial activism:
B) States' Rights Trampled upon

Federal Courts using the US Constitution to overrule State law, where the US Constitution is silent on the matter, is totally unacceptable and a complete trampling of our God given rights of self rule. We the people as citizens of our respective States, formed the United States of America. We voted to enshrine the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the land, and we as citizens must be the ultimate arbitrator of what is and is not meant by its words. If we do nothing, then what liberal Judge Robert J. Shelby say it means, is what it means. If we stand up and refuse to allow an activist Judge to legislate from the bench, his words will have no effect. A federal court cannot enforce its decisions. It relies on the executive branch to enforce its rulings. The executive branch in this matter is the state of Utah's Governor Gary Herbert. He as the head of our state's Executive branch, with the help and support of good people like you and me, can stand up to this activist judge and courts and issue an executive ruling forbidding Utah's Counties from issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples.

Courts have limited power to implement the decisions that they make. For example, if the president or another member of the executive branch chooses to ignore a ruling, there is very little that the federal courts can do about it. For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.

Utah Citizens voted 66% to amend the Utah Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. No where in the US Constitution does it allow the federal government to determine who can marry, nor does it prohibit the states from defining in law what marriage means. It is silent on the matter. Except for the District of Colombia and US territories, the federal government, nor its courts, have any jurisdiction in this matter. It is a States' Rights issue vouchsafed by the Tenth Amendment to the US Contitution:

United States Constitution: Amendment 10

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

James Madison wrote in The Federalist No. 45:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace negotiation, and foreign commerce;...The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the state."

The right to issue marriage licenses has traditionally been within the preview of the States. The Federal courts have no jurisdiction in this matter. This case should have been thrown out of court on that basis alone.

Judges like to use judicial precedent or case law to help guide them in their decision making process. Precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. Case law is the set of existing rulings which have made new interpretations of law and, therefore, can be cited as precedent. 

Liberals love the way our legal system has evolved. Activists lawyers and judges have moved the interpretation of laws in a liberal direction, over time. This is a huge problem, with judicial precedent or case law changing the original intent and meaning of laws all over the USA, and the US Constitution itself. This is not how the Founding Fathers envisioned our country. They set up the Constitution as the unchanging supreme law of the land with a process to change it, if necessary, by constitutional amendment. But the liberals hate that process because they can't ever win that way. So they've done an end run around the constitution and corrupted our laws of the land by fraud. Its changed meaning has corrupted all of society, not just in America, but all over the world. 

Alma 10:27 And now behold, I say unto you, that the foundation of the destruction of this people is beginning to be laid by the unrighteousness of your lawyers and your judges.

C) American history has shown us that the States have pushed back against the federal government in the past. 

The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions (or Resolves) were political statements drafted in 1798 and 1799, in which the Kentucky and Virginia legislatures took the position that the federal Alien and Sedition Acts were unconstitutional. The resolutions argued that the states had the right and the duty to declare unconstitutional any acts of Congress that were not authorized by the Constitution. In doing so, they argued for states' rights and strict constructionism of the Constitution. The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 were written secretly by Vice President Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, respectively.

Jefferson said: "where powers are assumed [by the federal government] which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits." 

The Report of 1800 written by Madison reviewed and affirmed each part of the Virginia Resolution, affirming that the states have the right to declare that a federal action is unconstitutional. The Report went on to assert that a declaration of unconstitutionality by a state would be an expression of opinion, without legal effect. The purpose of such a declaration, said Madison, was to mobilize public opinion and to elicit cooperation from other states. Madison indicated that the power to make binding constitutional determinations remained in the federal courts.

Madison then argued that a state, after declaring a federal law unconstitutional, could take action by communicating with other states, attempting to enlist their support, petitioning Congress to repeal the law in question, introducing amendments to the Constitution in Congress, or calling a constitutional convention. However, in the same document Madison explicitly argued that the states retain the ultimate power to decide about the constitutionality of the federal laws, in "extreme cases" such as the Alien and Sedition Act. The Supreme Court can decide in the last resort only in those cases which pertain to the acts of other branches of the federal government, but cannot takeover the ultimate decision making power from the states which are the "sovereign parties" in the Constitutional compact. According to Madison states could override not only the Congressional acts, but also the decisions of the Supreme Court. 

Madison was called the father of the constitution. He along with John Jay and Alexander Hamilton wrote the federalist papers that helped people understand what the constitution meant as they were deliberating its ratification. 

The state governments of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island threatened to ignore the Embargo Act of 1807 based on the authority of states to stand up to laws deemed by those states to be unconstitutional. Rhode Island justified its position on the embargo act based on the explicit language of interposition. However, none of these states actually passed a resolution nullifying the Embargo Act. Instead, they challenged it in court, appealed to Congress for its repeal, and proposed several constitutional amendments.

South Carolina passed an Ordinance of Nullification purporting to nullify two federal tariff laws. South Carolina asserted that the Tariff of 1828 and the Tariff of 1832 were beyond the authority of the Constitution, and therefore were"null, void, and no law, nor binding upon this State, its officers or citizens".

D) The gay rights movement wants to destroy Christianity

We need to stand up to this corruption as a people. If we don't, we only have ourselves to blame. Conservatives are by far the majority in Utah, and I believe we still hold the majority in the nation. As Christians we are going to lose our religious freedoms if we let same sex marriage overflow the nation. This fight is not just about live and let live. The homosexual lobby is not in this just to secure the right to marry. The below article lays this out in no uncertain terms. They want to destroy all those who stand up for traditional family values. They want to destroy Christianity. 

See the article and the below exerts from it.

"First, on June 28, 1969 the goal of the American homosexual movement shifted from tolerance (the right to be left alone) to control (the complete restructuring of society in its own image, with “gays“ or their surrogates in all seats of power). Its tactics shifted from civil dialogue to implacable militancy. That was the date of the Stonewall Riot in New York City, today celebrated annually as “Gay Pride Day.” Logically, this movement cannot achieve its goal without replacing the Biblical social ethic of marriage-based heterosexual monogamy and the natural family with its own philosophy of unlimited “sexual freedom” (which is in reality moral anarchy). In short, the true and necessary goal of the “gay” movement is the defeat of Christianity.

Second, in the space of just forty years homosexual militants have defeated every secular institution in their path in the United States. The first to fall was the American Psychiatric Association in 1973, when “gay” activists, using Brownshirt tactics of disruption and intimidation, forced the APA to remove homosexuality from its list of mental disorders in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV. The most recent and final secular institution to fall was the Boy Scouts of America in 2013 when the BSA leadership voted to allow openly self-declared homosexual boys into the organization. The next-to-last entity to fall was the U. S. military. In both cases, the first news following the capitulation was of uniformed members of each organization marching triumphantly in “Gay Pride” parades.

Third, the “gays” have always intended to attack the church in the final stage of their conquest of our culture. As early as 1987 they openly admitted this plan in an article called The Overhauling of Straight America, which later became the basis for the book After the Ball, which has ever since been their primary strategic blueprint. They wrote:

When conservative churches condemn gays…we can use talk to muddy the moral waters. This means publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches, raising theological objections of our own about conservative interpretations of biblical teachings, and exposing hatred and inconsistency. Second, we can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology. Against the mighty pull of institutional Religion one must set the mightier draw of Science & Public Opinion (the shield and sword of that accursed “secular humanism”). Such an unholy alliance has worked well against churches before, on such topics as divorce and abortion. …. At a later stage…it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified. (Guide Magazine, November 1987)

Frankly, even at this late stage of the game, much of the church seems to be still asleep or in denial about the state of our culture. Even many conservative Christian leaders who are awake to the seriousness of the crisis are only dimly aware that the culture war at its foundation is and has always been a winner-take-all contest between Christians and homosexual activists. Now that the last secular barriers to the “gay” agenda have been crushed, all of their weapons and all of their warriors will be focused on the last remaining obstacle to their power, the Christian church."

Here is another article that warns about gays suing churches to force them to perform gay marriages.

Here is a quote from Wilford Woodruff's Salt Lake Temple dedicatory prayer in 1893. In it he alludes to a future time when the Saints cannot use the temple. Could that horrible consequence follow the decline in those who support religious liberty? Could the temples close because churches are being forced to perform gay marriages?

"Heavenly Father, when Thy people shall not have the opportunity of entering this holy house to offer their supplications unto Thee, and they are oppressed and in trouble, surrounded by difficulties or assailed by temptation and shall turn their faces towards this Thy holy house and ask Thee for deliverance, for help, for Thy power to be extended in their behalf, we beseech Thee, to look down from Thy holy habitation in mercy and tender compassion upon them, and listen to their cries. Or when the children of Thy people, in years to come, shall be separated, through any cause, from this place, and their hearts shall turn in remembrance of Thy promises to this holy Temple, and they shall cry unto Thee from the depths of their affliction and sorrow to extend relief and deliverance to them, we humbly entreat Thee to Turn Thine ear in mercy to them; hearken to their cries, and grant unto them the blessings for which they ask."

E) Gay rights will spill over into the public schools, confusing your children, and teaching them immoral behavior is normal.

If forced gay marriage and the potential closing of LDS Temples doesn't scare you, then read below about how much damage the opening of the same sex marriage flood gates did in 2003, almost overnight, to the children of Massachusetts in the public schools.


Exerts from the article:

At my own children's high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex "marriage" in earlyDecember 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be "marrying" their same-sex partners and starting families, either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage - how it is now a normal part of society - was handed out to the students.

Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, Mass., told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the door for teaching homosexuality. "In my mind, I know that, 'OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, 'Give me a break. It's legal now,'" she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.

By the following year it was in elementary school curricula - with hostility toward parents who disagreed. Kindergartners in Lexington, Mass. were given copies of a picture book, Who's in a Family?, telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, just like their own parents. When David Parker - parent of a kindergartner - calmly refused to leave a school meeting unless officials agreed to notify him when discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and jailed overnight.

The next year, second graders at the same school were read a book, King & King, about two men who fall in love and marry each other, ending with a picture of them kissing. When parents Robb and Robin Wirthlin complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify them or allow them to opt their child out.

In 2007 a federal judge ruled that because of "gay marriage" in Massachusetts, parents have no rights regarding the teaching of homosexual relationships in schools. The previous year the Parkers and Wirthlins had filed a federal civil rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judge dismissed the case. The appeals judges later upheld the first judge's ruling that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children; and schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt out their children. Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship! 

F) The LDS Church, Founding Fathers, The Bible, The Book of Mormon, and The Prophets of God teach us to fight for our right to a moral society where freedom, faith, and family can thrive. 

The LDS Church has put up a new web sight about religious freedom. In it they encourage us to fight for religious freedom. The gay marriage issue is a religious freedom issue. If you don't believe that, wait and see. You will be sorely mistaken.

“All laws that are proper and correct, and all obligations entered into which are not violative of the constitution should be kept inviolate. But if they are violative of the constitution, then the compact between the rulers and the ruled is broken and the obligation ceases to be binding.”-- President John Taylor, 1884 JD-26:350.

“If our Constitution, our laws, and the fundamental principles of our Government are to be trampled underfoot, it would seem to be high time that all honorable men should stand up in defense of liberty and the rights of man.” (John Taylor, Ecclesiastical Control in Utah, JT Papers, Volume 2, Page 300.)

Doctrine and Covenants 98:
6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.

“The different states, and even Congress itself, have passed many laws diametrically contrary to the Constitution of the United States … Shall we be such fools as to be governed by its laws, which are unconstitutional? No!” --- Joseph Smith, Documentary History of the Church p. 289-290

“Unless we member of the Church do all we can to preserve the freedoms we have, within the bounds of the laws of God, we will be held accountable.”---Joseph Smith, Principles of the Gospel, p. 135-136, 146-147

“I do not lift my voice against the great and glorious Government guaranteed to every citizen by the Constitution, but against those corrupt administrators who trample the Constitution and just laws under their feet.”--- Brigham Young Journal of Discourses 5:232-233

“Next to being one in worshiping God, there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States.---David O McKay, Gen Conference 10/8/1939

“No true Latter-day Saint and no true American can be a socialist or a communist or support programs leading in that direction. These evil philosophies are incompatible with Mormonism, the true gospel of Jesus Christ.”---Ezra Taft Benson

“...”Wait until it becomes popular to do,” says the devil, “or, at least, until everybody in the Church agrees on what should be done.” This fight for freedom might never become popular in our day. And if you wait until everybody agrees in this Church, you will be waiting through the second coming of the Lord.”--Ezra Taft Benson, Teaching of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 659-660

"On what basis can we morally resist tyranny? I say to you with all the fervor of my soul that God intended men to be free. Rebellion against tyranny is a righteous cause." - Ezra Taft Benson, International Freedoms Conference, Philadelphia, 1979

“I'd rather be dead than lose my liberty. I have no fear we'll ever lose it because of invasion from the outside, but I do have fear that it may slip away from us because of our own indifference as citizens of this land. And so I plead with you this morning, that you take an active interest in matters pertaining to the future of this country.”---Ezra Taft Benson

“When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty.” ---Thomas Jefferson

“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.” --- Benjamin Franklin

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds." ---Samuel Adams

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness--- The Declaration of Independence

"WE WARN that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets." ---The Family. A Proclamation to the World

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. ---Mathew 24:24 The context of that scripture is a warning about false prophets. But as then Elder Harold B. Lee reminded us, “False prophets and Christs, as foretold by the Savior, may come to deceive us not alone in the name of religion, but if we can believe the history of Italy and Germany and Russia, they may come under the label of politicians or of social planners or so-called economists, deceitful in their offerings of a kind of salvation which may come under such guise.” (And I might add the homosexual agenda is also designed to deceive.)

Therefore, my beloved brother, Moroni, let us resist evil, and whatsoever evil we cannot resist with our words, yea, such as rebellions and dissensions, let us resist them with our swords, that we may retain our freedom, that we may rejoice in the great privilege of our church, and in the cause of our Redeemer and our God. ---Alma 61:14

And now, my beloved son, notwithstanding their hardness, let us labor diligently; for if we should cease to labor, we should be brought under condemnation; for we have a labor to perform whilst in this tabernacle of clay, that we may conquer the enemy of all righteousness, and rest our souls in the kingdom of God. ---Moroni 9:6

Mathew 10:
32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is notworthy of me.
39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

Those who have family, friends, neighbors, and coworkers who are homosexual, will have to decide for themselves where they stand. Do they love those who are homosexual above God and his commandments, or do they stand with God and defend the family even when its not popular.

Please forward this all across America. We need to fight for what is right. Thanks