Protect against Title IX and submit a comment by September 12, 2022.

The US Department of Education released their proposed changes to Title IX regulations that would dramatically change the future for women and girls in federally funded activities and programs. There are many negative impacts that will harm girls, women, and families.

A government portal has been set up for you to make a comment submission.  It is very straight-forward and easy to do.  In addition, this governmental body is required to read every submission, large and small – before they can finalize the new “Rule.”  So rest assured, your input will be read and considered.


supreme-court-justicesDiane Robertson

Behind closed doors, the justices on the Supreme Court are considering taking gay marriage cases from five states: Utah, Oklahoma, Virginia, Indiana, and Wisconsin. The Justices put these cases at the top of their schedule. All five states had either their marriage amendment or laws over turned by the lower federal circuit courts.

The justices could decide to hear all 5 cases, put them all into a single case, wait for more cases or reject them altogether and allow the lower court rulings to stand. Most legal analysts on both sides of the issue believe the Supreme Court will hear one or more of the cases and make a decision that will affect each and every state.

The people in favor of gay marriage preach that June will be the end of the issue and that the court will make a ruling similar to Roe vs Wade and enforce legalized gay marriage in every state in the nation. The LGBT lobby insists this is inevitable and that everyone should just give up the fight and join the right side of history.

The LGBT lobby has reasons to declare their victory so confidently. The US 7th court of appeals ruled that Indiana and Wisconsin had no “reasonable basis” for defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman. In essence the 7th circuit court declared that the only reason millions of Americans in more than 30 states voted for man/woman marriage was because they are bigoted.

The pro-marriage side declares that there is no reason to believe that legalized gay marriage is inevitable and that the Supreme Court has already settled this. Ryan Anderson explains:

“While generating less fanfare, the day before Posner’s opinion was released, U.S. District Judge Martin L.C. Feldman upheld Louisiana’s marriage law — a constitutional amendment passed by 78 percent of the voters. Two federal appellate judges — Paul V. Niemeyer of the 4th Circuit and Paul J. Kelly Jr. of the 10th Circuit — issued strong dissenting opinions this summer on why state laws defining marriage as a male-female union are constitutional. As these marriage cases make their way to the Supreme Court, very likely during the term about to begin, the justices should heed the reasoning of these judges.”

These judges have affirmed the idea that marriage solidifies the relationship children need with their mother and father and that marriage laws should reflect that and be left to elected officials, not judges.

The June 2013 Supreme Court ruling left marriage laws open to the states. It may have been the inertia activist judges were looking for to declare conjugal marriage unconstitutional, but it would still be surprising if the high court undoes a ruling from only two years previous. Most people predict that the Supreme Court will once again hear arguments over gay marriage and that a ruling will be handed down by the end of June 2015.