There has been a controversy in our country, on
whether or not
human beings evolved from
lower life forms, or were uniquely created by
God. The atheists and evolutionists have been
successful in establishing the
teaching of Atheism in our
public schools for the last 50+ years", which is
the very reason "same-sex
marriage" arguments are now being presented
before the United States
Supreme Court. It is not the intention
amicus curiae to argue
against the teaching of evolution, but to point out that
when only one side is being
taught to generations of children, they grow up
with biased and distorted views
on life, and the raising of these types of
ungodly issues are the
result. If the truth of Genesis (and not
of Creationism) had been additionally
taught to us and our children in public
schools, this case matter would
be a stink in the nostrils of mankind, and not
only in that of God.
the rise of Atheism, the attempt to redefine marriage would
have been universally declared
to be foul perversion. The Court must
realize who the entities
contenting in this case really
are. The proponents of
immorality are rebelling
against decency, morality, and the commandments
Amicus Herman Cummings, is not a
member of any group or
but is the world's leading expert on the book of Genesis. "So
bible scholars and the world of theology have never understood the
of the first two chapters of Genesis.
Theology has erroneously taught
that Genesis is describing "the Seven Days of
the book of Genesis is actually conveying a previously unknown
given to the ancient nation of Israel in 1598 BC, which modern
would not discover for another 3,000 years.
It was the concept of
time. Therefore, each vision (day) seen
by Moses was taken from
different weeks, and each week was taken from seven different time
in the history of Earth. In layman's
terms, the seven days were not
linear, nor revealed in chronological order.
This amicus wants to prove to the
court that the "same-sex" marriage
is not a civil rights issue. The
proponents of same-sex marriage
to use recent civil rights legislations as a smoke screen to impose
upon the rest of society. Therefore,
this is a moral issue, and not
civil rights issue. This is a case of
those that have embraced immorality,
want to force acceptance of their ungodly life style upon the rest of
and unlawfully gain the benefits which the institution of traditional
marriage has in our civilization.
I. THE INFLUENCE OF ATHEISM IN OUR SOCIETY
America has been known to be "the land of the free,
and the home of
the brave". But because of the influence of evil upon
must always be protected,
else it is lost. History tells us, over
again, that there are those
that try to destroy freedom, and put the masses
under their rule. Cases in point, the Nazis, the Communists,
Each of these has a RED ideology, which will later be defined in this brief.
But as with all freedoms, there can be abuse. There are those that
have abused their freedom to
advocate rebellion against God, under the
pretext of "tolerance". But such tolerance has been an effective attack
against the moral structure
of our country. Two of the three most
enemies facing America today,
which are being addressed in this case, are
Atheism, and homosexuality.
the course of time, the religion of Atheism has crept into our
society, and has
unconstitutional control of our education system. How
influence does the idealism of Atheism have in our school
systems? How much has it had in our courts? How much of Atheism (and
has infiltrated into legislative and executive branches at all levels of
government? Fifty years of indoctrinating our students
with Atheism has
people in positions of authority that question and/or deny the
existence of God. Fifty years ago, who
would have thought that an
judge would try to remove "under God" from the Pledge of
Allegiance? Are we now becoming an atheistic
society? In the absence of
there is only darkness. In the absence
of godliness, there is
and perversion. This is why the
redefinition of marriage is
before the United States Supreme Court.
Citing Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488
(1961), "We repeat and again
that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally
a person [to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.] Neither can
pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as
non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in
existence of God as against those religions
founded on different
The U.S. Supreme Court has identified Atheism to be a religion, at
the same level as any (theistic) belief system. Atheism is a religion that has
its own doctrines, publications, and websites which are used to convert
others to their belief system. If a person wants to accept such a belief
system, that is their choice.
Our county was founded for the very purpose of freedom of religion
(within reason). But when any religion tries to force its life style and views
upon the rest of society, impedes the quest for knowledge, and interferes
with the development of our children, an evil imbalance has been created.
II. THE AUTHORITY OF THE HOLY
There is no escaping the issue of the authority and
influence of the
Holy Bible upon mankind, and
our system of law. If the Holy Bible
significance, why must a
witness first take an oath upon the Holy Bible to
tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth? The
Holy Bible is
the only "sacred" book that defines sin and immorality.
The United States of America declared its independence on
1776, beginning with these words:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
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.
Our current society has grown up like lost children, that
have not had
"home training", and has lost
the ideals and morals of our fathers that
founded our nation. The United States was once proud to be called
"Christian nation". But unlike other nations that had adopted a
religion, allegiance to any
(moral) religion was not required. In
first came to this land in order to find freedom of religion.
The civil laws we abide by
have a rich history in the Bible. The laws
found in the Holy Bible are the basis of our entire
modern day civil justice
Biblical laws emphasize justice, morality, the rights of the
poor, and even environmental protection.
Since there is no valid denial of the influence that the
Holy Bible has
had upon mankind, it is
hypocritical to deny the historical information that it
has given us. The following three paragraphs must be read
in order to
understand the incorporeal
history of mankind, and how it pertains to
has come and gone on Earth, over the course of 4+ billion
years, several times before
the advent of modern man. The origin of modern
man begins with Adam, in
Genesis chapter two, in about the year 7200 BC.
God gave Adam the command to
not eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good
and Evil, else Adam would
begin to die. About 200 years later, God made
Eve, and Adam conveyed to Eve what God had told him.
world of Theology does not understand the book of Genesis,
especially the first two
chapters. After Creation Week (not found in
Genesis), God appointed the
arc-angel Lucifer to be overseer of our
universe, but Lucifer later
rebelled, and lost the "civil war" in Heaven, in
245 Million BC, causing what
is called "the Great Extinction" on Earth.
Five eras (of mankind) later,
the Evil Tree was put in the Garden of Eden by
God, but not as a "test of
obedience" for Adam. It was actually a
Lucifer (Satan), so that God
could rightfully rescind control of our universe
from Satan, and rid the Earth
of Satan's reign. It has been Satan's
exclude, and deny the truth of the
commandments of God. I
identify this as the RED agenda.
In order to entice Eve to eat of the evil
tree, Satan used denial, and
redefinition of the
commandment that God had given to Adam, in order to
obtain ownership of modern
mankind's birthright (which Satan was unable
to obtain with previous
advents of mankind). Once Satan gained
of mankind's soul, by extorting sovereignty from
Adam (the executor of
modern mankind), God could
then rightfully rescind Satan's appointment,
and set a plan for mankind's redemption.
back on history, such evil religions (or cults) are
recognizable as being RED.
They Redefine that which has
they Exclude evidence or teaching of the contrary, and they Deny the truth.
The arguments for same-sex
marriage are the direct result of the adversary
trying to have the
institution of marriage redefined,
and to establish the
denial of a commandment of God.
III. THE CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION OF THE COURT
The United States Supreme Court has (rightly) put itself
strategic position. Our branches of
government must not entangle
in matters of religious doctrine, unless it is somehow necessary.
example, Congress may not find reason to block an appointment,
the appointee is a theist or an atheist.
But if that appointee practices
form of Satanism that requires human sacrifice, Congress rightfully should
deny confirmation, solely on those religious grounds.
Like it or not, the United States
Supreme Court has been drawn into
morality issue. By using common sense
and righteousness, this issue
have been resolved long before ever having to be tried at any state
level. But with the teaching of Atheism in our public schools, over the last
years, morality and righteousness have fallen.
The sub-culture of
which was previously limited to hidden rendezvous and in
prisons, is now boldly trying to assert itself openly within our society,
which promises to bring moral decay and the fall of our nation.
Fortunately, the principle of precedent has already been
set by the
States Supreme Court, on morality in America.
Case in point,
Reynolds v. United States , U.S.
Supreme Court 98 (8 Otto.) 145, in 1878, in
which the high court correctly
upheld that bigamy was unlawful, regardless
if it was a religious
practice. It was argued by the defense that under the
the U.S. Congress cannot pass a law that prohibits the free
exercise of religion.
However, the Court ruled that the law prohibiting bigamy did
standard, and that the established standard that a person could
married to one person at a time had existed since
the times of King
James I of
England in English law, upon which the laws of society in the
United States are based. If a sub-culture is successful in redefining
in our society, or in their
own circles, that would negate the standards of
marriage, and open the doors
for the practice of bigamy, which a redefinition
of marriage would lead to.
Citing Davis v.
Beason , U.S. Supreme Court 133 U.S. 333 , reaffirmed
Reynolds v. United States (1878).
Justice Stephen Field, writing for the
Court, stated that "Few
crimes are more pernicious to the best interests of
society, and receive more
general or more deserved punishment.".
by way of comparison that if
a religious sect advocated fornication or human
sacrifice, "swift punishment would follow the carrying into effect of its
doctrines, and no heed would be given to the pretense that, as religious
beliefs, their supporters could be protected in their exercise by the
constitution of the United States."
The United States Supreme Court has historically been in position to
maintain a righteous standard of morality, and must continue to do so. The
United States Supreme Court was established to have no one to answer to,
except to God, to whom everyone will have to give an account at the end of
this era of modern mankind.
IV. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FORNICATION AND SODOMY
The social definition of fornication has changed, as the morality
standards of any society have descended. The standards of mankind are
constantly being eroded by the influence of Atheism. However, the
standards of God do not change.
Biblically, physical (as opposed to spiritual) fornication is defined as
sexual intercourse (or intimacy) between a human male and a human female
outside of marriage. This includes sex before marriage, adultery, an
unmarried person having intercourse with a married person, more than two
participants, and the act of incest. Fornication is not being addressed in this
Be advised that oral sex within marriage is biblically allowed, if both
parties consent to it. We interpret that from the following verse:
Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
Sodomy is defined as sexual intercourse (or intimacy) between a
human and an animal, anal sex outside of marriage, oral sex outside of
marriage, and any same-sex intimacy. The term comes from the Hebrew,
s'dom, meaning "city of sin," which was the biblical city of Sodom, which
was destroyed by two angels in the year 2219 BC.
The complete story can be found in Genesis chapter 19. The city of
Sodom, along with four other cities of the plain, was widely known for its
abundance of sin and immorality. God sent two angels, which looked like
ordinary men, to Sodom to confirm its evil report. A God fearing man
named Abraham asked God to spare the city, if ten righteous people could
be found in the city. Abraham had a special interest in the city, because his
nephew, named Lot, lived there.
The angels were visiting Lot when a large group of male homosexuals
came to the house that evening. They wanted "to know" (have intercourse)
with the new visitors in town. Lot refused to hand them over to the deviates,
which actually was the norm in that city. Lot offered instead to give his two
virgin daughters to the group, in order to protect the two men which he had
recognized as being angels. But the group did not want the virgins", they
wanted to force themselves upon the two men. With Lot's refusal to hand
over, the group threatened to do worse upon Lot.
Lot lived in the city, but did not participate in their evil. He first
came to the region to live and feed his herds outside of the city. But when
there was an attack upon the city by another king (Genesis ch. 14), Lot and
his family, plus many of the city dwellers, were captured and were being
Abraham heard that Lot was taken captive, went, fought, and
recaptured Lot and restored the people of Sodom. Lot was invited to live in
the city, as an honored hero, because of their appreciation to Abraham. But
when Lot refused to let the homosexuals "have their way", Lot became "fair
The angels caused the group to be blind, and told Lot to get his family
out of Sodom. Remember the ten people that Abraham asked the Lord
about? There were only eight people that were righteous in the whole city.
Lot had four daughters. Two were married, and two were at home and yet
unmarried. The eight righteous people were Lot, his wife, his two married
daughters and their husbands, and his two unmarried daughters. Only Lot,
his wife, and his two daughters who lived with him escaped the city.
The reason that the city was destroyed was because homosexuality
had taken over the city. The following are notable biblical references to the
city of Sodom:
2 Peter 2:6
And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
V. THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE
The institution of marriage was established long before the advent of
modern mankind. In the Bible, in the book of Mark, chapter 10, verses six
and seven, it says "But from the beginning of the creation God made them
male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and
cleave to his wife;". That passage can only be interpreted as saying that
even before modern mankind was made on the Earth, that marriage was
established by God to be between a male and female.
VI. THE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE
Marriage is the state of being united, emotionally and intimately, to
a person of the opposite sex, as husband and wife, in a consensual and
contractual relationship recognized by law. It is t he social institution under
by legal commitments, and/or religious ceremonies. It's a social union or
and obligations between the spouses, between the spouses and their children,
and between the spouses and their in-laws.
VII. THE PURPOSE OF MARRIAGE
Marriage is the God ordained agency that was established to convey
lasting love between a man and a woman, and to produce offspring from that
union. Our society has long recognized the need to have couples to raise
families, and has fashioned laws and benefits to encourage the production of
families. Nations, and mankind himself, cannot survive without provisions
for the growth of families.
VIII. THE ATTEMPT TO REDEFINE MARRIAGE
Due to the attack of Atheism and homosexuality upon our society, an
attempt is made to redefine marriage, that which is ungodly, and having the
elements of sodomy. Same-sex unions cannot produce a family (by natural
means). So why would two male homosexuals, or two female homosexuals
(lesbians) want to defile the institution of marriage? It is for at least two
reasons; 1) to gain the economic/social benefits of a traditional married
couple, and 2) attempt to redefine their ungodly practice as being socially
What is perversion? First, what is a pervert? The dictionary says:
One who performs an act of perverting. A person that
is in state of
being perverted. A perverted form of something. To cause to turn
away from what is right, proper, or good; corrupt.
Now, what is perversion?
To bring to a bad or worse condition; debase. To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. To interpret incorrectly; misconstrue or distort. Any of various means of obtaining sexual gratification that are generally regarded as being abnormal.
In Pathology, it is:
A change to what is unnatural or abnormal: a perversion of function or structure.
The attempt to redefine marriage is an act of perversion, which again,
is an attempt to redefine that which is establish, and to deny the truth of
IX. THE EFFECT OF SUCH PERVERSION IN OUR SOCIETY
Before conveying what the effect of such perversion would have on
our society, we must first define the word "reprobate". So what is a
reprobate? The dictionary says:
A depraved, unprincipled, or wicked person: a drunken reprobate. A person rejected by God and beyond hope of salvation, such as "being given over to a reprobate mind".
Because of the perversion of Sodom, Gomorrah, and the other three
Cities of the Plain, they were destroyed. In modern times, instead of
rebuking such behavior, reprobate mentality has harbored this class of the
calling it "equal rights".
It is the agenda of said class of people to redefine such a life style, and
to have it accepted as normal. What does a clergyman or marriage official
say at a same-sex ceremony? " We are gathered here today, in the sight of
God, to unite these two in unholy matrimony"?
God invented sex, and His "never ending patent" declares that the
practice of intimacy is between husband and wife, male and female. But
over the years, the entity of evil has first "changed the norm" that sex be
not confined within marriage. Remember the "free love" and "shacking up"
movements? Then, after years of destroying the family unit, comes the
attack against (with the redefinition of) marriage. This is all in rebellion
against God. Any such human union that cannot be consummated using one
male organ and one female organ is unnatural, perverted, ungodly, and
When you elect the ungodly to public office, you get ungodly results.
It is the ungodly that are striving to legalize same sex marriage. Those law
makers do not have wisdom, and are short sighted. What would happen to
the "straight" community? Would the godly among us be subjected to
seeing two men or two women walking in public holding hands, kissing, and
showing affection? Children are impressionable. Is this what we want our
children to see? What sane, and righteous person, wants their child to grow
up to be a homosexual?
As in the states that have legalized same-sex marriage, is the sight of
reprobate behavior going to be forced upon the rest of the population, and
their children? This is how it started in Sodom. This is worse than tobacco
smoke being forced upon non-smokers. Why would any parent take their
family to a public place to eat, or enjoy entertainment, if there will be public
displays of perverted relationships? They would stay at home, if places of
business allowed such behavior. What was before kept in the dark closet is
now trying to boldly walk in the light of day.
If there is "same sex marriage", then those unions would want to raise
children, giving rise to an unwanted sub-culture of homosexuals, such as
now is in most prisons. Who, with any sanity, would allow a child to be
raised in that environment? What happens when such perversion becomes
the norm, as was in the city of Sodom? Suppose a male student goes to
school, and demands a romantic relationship from another male student? If
the second male refuses, suppose the first male finds a way to force himself
upon the other. That is what would come next. So why would we pave the
way for the advent of a "sickening society"?
The Court must make every effort not to be fooled by the agenda of
those that would erode the very moral fabric of our nation. In Romer v.
Evans , 517 U.S. 620 (1996), Justice Antonin Scalia asks this question:
It remains to be explained how -501 of the Idaho Revised Statutes was not an "impermissible targeting" of polygamists, but (the much more mild) Amendment 2 is an "impermissible targeting" of homosexuals. Has the Court concluded that the perceived social harm of polygamy is a "legitimate concern of government," and the perceived social harm of homosexuality is not?"
Where is the wisdom of our courts? If we are wise enough to
understand the social harm of polygamy, how much more should we
recognize the social harm of homosexuality? Imagine the harm to society if
all criminals were let loose from prison, to practice their ungodliness upon
the rest of our citizens? If any person wants to practice the perversion of
homosexuality let them do so out of the sight of society, and our courts
must not give any hint of legality to such practice. Discrimination must be
upheld against such, throughout our nation, to keep them from having access
to children, the eventual victims of such behavior. For this very reason, the
moral majority voted to protect their children from such immorality.
However, no other discrimination should be levied, because all people
have rights as human beings", but not "gay rights". The "don't ask, and
don't tell" was a good policy for our military. What has become of it now?
For the above stated reasons, this amicus respectfully entreats the U.S.
Supreme Court to uphold the standard of morality, and grant the petition for
a writ of certiorari (reversal).