How to Defy SCOTUS' Obergefell Ruling, Twelve Tips? Part 2 of 2

This is the conclusion of a two-part article on how to practically resist and deal with the rogue, unjust and unconstitutional Obergefell Supreme Court ruling.

Part One included the action of becoming educated on why same-sex "marriage" is grossly harmful and educating others as to why it is. Supporting those organizations that are defending traditional marriage, religious liberty and freedom of conscience. Another action involves supporting in every way possible including voting for candidates who strongly support traditional marriage and other social issues such as the sanctity of life. For some, it may even mean running for elective office themselves in order to fight for what is right.

Today we will continue to address another way we can approach our politicians in office. It is important to find out where they stand on the issue of Supreme Court tyranny or activism.

Dave Zanotti of the American Policy Roundtable suggested that we email or write a letter to our two U.S. Senators and our U.S. House Representative. In your email or letter ask him or her the following:

"Where do you stand on the United State Supreme Courts seizure of power from Congress and over the States in the June 26, 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision inventing the right to same-sex "marriage"? Are you willing to work to restrict the power of SCOTUS? I would appreciate a reply..." 

Zanotti in a radio broadcast in July of last year (click here) contends that in Article 1 of the Constitution, Congress has been given the legal authority to create the Federal Courts. Therefore, he says that Congress can control the court's jurisdictions and has on many occasions passed laws that basically said this is the law of the land and the Supreme Court cannot review it. It's that simple, yet this Congress, up to now, has not had the backbone to stand up to the Supreme Court. Perhaps they fear that they would be violating the fictitious and loathsome notion of Political Correctness or do not want to deal with the radical venomous pro-homosexual forces.

I will be following through with his suggestion and will be emailing and writing my three members of Congress.

(6) Write, email, and/or visit state and federal legislators requesting that they to do all they can to minimize the damage done by the outlandish Obegefell ruling. One such bill is the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA). This act protects the religious liberty of those who reject the normality of same-sex "marriage" on moral and conscience grounds.

Vote with your dollar

(7) Reward those organizations that support or at least stay neutral on the issue

of same-sex "marriage" and the homosexual agenda. Likewise, boycott those organization like McDonalds and Walmart who receive 100% ratings from the pro-homosexual Human Rights Campaign for their compliance to the wishes of the pro-homosexual agenda. HRC intimidates, threatens or otherwise subverts major corporations into donating to the Homosexual Agenda. They have been greatly successful.

There is an app that I am now using on my laptop and my smartphone called SECOND VOTE, which rates large companies on where the stand on social issues such as Sanctity of Life (Pro-Life or Pro-Abortion) and Marriage (traditional versus same-sex). Vote with your dollars and tell the companies why you no longer do business with them. If enough people do this then we can counteract the subversive gains made by the leftist pro-homosexual advocates and activists. There are many more of us than there are of them. We need to get active!

I had done a lot of shopping at Walmart and Sam's Club. However, last summer  I found out that Walmart is a big time supporter of same-sex "marriage." Walmart has a rating of 1.6 out of 5.0 and Sam's Club is 1.4 out of 5.0. A rating of 1 means an entity is liberal and a 5 means an organization is conservative. Both Walmart and Sam's Club support highly suspect liberal organization such as the Human Rights Campaign mentioned previously.  

Defy individually

(8) If your church approves of same-sex "marriage" or allows homosexuals or lesbians to serve as ministers or pastors, leave that church. Seek a church who strongly supports and reinforces traditional, biblical marriage.  Refuse to participate in any way in any same-sex "marriage" events or celebrations.

(9) Join or organization and rallies protesting same-sex "marriages."

Thwart attempts to indoctrinate the children

(10) Government schools are the breeding grounds for some of the most vile ideas. Schools now are more indoctrination or brainwashing centers than they are centers of learning the basics needed for successful living in the real world. If you have a child in a government schools, remove that child if you possibly can and homeschool or send them to a private school and/or use an online curriculum or program.

If you can afford it, send your child or grandchild to go to a good church-related school. This will deter or limit exposure to the propaganda and indoctrination the acceptance of such perversity as the homosexual lifestyle, transgender as an acceptable, moral lifestyles, Planned Parenthood directed Sex Ed, etc. Some resources for parents contemplating home schooling can be found at Exodus Mandate website.   

The John Birch Society offers an online curriculum called Freedom Project Education, which you can enroll in August 2016 for the 2016-2017 school year. This particular program is Common-Core free and teaches traditional American values.

Scouting has gotten lost in the woods

(11) Extracurricular activities are also important and should be carefully scrutinized and monitored. If you have a child in scouting, remove them. The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts have compromised their belief in traditional values and have accepted openly homosexual young boys/girls and men/women and some have even allowed homosexual/lesbian leaders. Again protect your children from the influence of homosexual and lesbian advocates. Trail Life USA and American Heritage Girls are wholesome alternatives to the tainted scouts.

Choosing entertainment wisely

(12) The entertainment industry, movies, TV, music, video games, have contributed immensely to the desensitizing Americans, especially youth, to morality, virtue and traditional values. This has been done incrementally and surreptitiously. Children are not only taught in government schools, but also by the entertainment media that homo-sexuality, lesbianism, transgenderism, pornography, adultery and all such immorality and perversion is acceptable and normal. That is why it is important to train up a child in the way they should go, so that when they are older in high school or college they will not drift away to an unprincipled godless life. So monitor what your children watch on TV, movies, games, etc. Movieguide is a good resource for learning which movies may be acceptable and which are objectionable. PluggedIn is another useful resource for discerning wholesome versus hurtful entertainment media like movies, games, TV, and music.

The miniscule 1% minority of same-sex activists have made great strides in advance their culture-corrupting agenda while the silent majority of Americans remained silent. It is time for the 99% to wake up and smell the havoc caused by the renegade Supreme Court, a feckless Congress and an increasingly tyrannical government. It is time to take a stand. Doing one or more of the actions noted above may help to reverse the dangerous course that our nation has chosen to take as we've sat idly by, oblivious to what is happening around us.

Here are two podcasts that are an excellent resources for further information on the topic of this blog article, "Who Do We Think We Are? Part II" as well as "Who Do We Think We Are?"

How to Defy SCOTUS' Obergefell Ruling, Twelve Tips? Part 1 of 2

The State of the Union? Pitiful!

Tonight, Tuesday, January 12, 2016 President Barack Obama will (thankfully) be giving his final State of the Union (SOTU) address. It is interesting that for this event both sides of the political aisle will highlight certain guests who symbolize some cause or milestone that occurred during the past year. For his part Barack Obama will note the presence of one invitee, Jim Obergefell, whose same-sex "marriage" case was decided by the treasonous and decadent Supreme Court majority of activist justices. In that case, SCOTUS once again invented or discovered, between the lines of the U.S. Constitution, a previously unknown right. Shamefully Mr. Obama will point out Mr. Obergefell as some sort of leftist superstar and/or hero for his part in the cause of corrupting American culture.

Another guest of some anonymous Congressional member is Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk, who stood on her real religious right of conscience and defied the order to issue same-sex "marriage" licenses. The person or persons who invited Mrs. Davis didn't want to face the abuse which surely would come from the crazed and vindictive same-sex anarchists and the politically correct crowd.  Mrs. Davis was jailed for her Christian beliefs and ridiculed and ostracized by the media and others as one of the first repercussions of the atrocious Supreme Court ruling "legalizing" "marriage" between two sodomites or two lesbians.

So who's right?

Social Media Showdown

SiriusXM Progress @SXMProgress

Will #Obergefell be the new litmus test for Republicans moving forward? 866-997-4748

3:24 PM - 14 Dec 2015 

GregJaye @GregJaye

The Unjust disgraceful unconstitutional #Obergefell ruling should be a defining issue. @SXMProgress It should be rejected and defied by all!

2:44 PM - 15 Dec 2015

vorpal22 @vorpal22

@GregJaye @SXMProgress How will you defy Obergefell, exactly? By not marrying someone of the same sex? No, you'll just impotently whine.

5:35 AM - 7 Jan 2016

Weeks passed and out of the blue a response appears in my twitter account. A thoughtful question was raised in response my tweets by vorpal22. It is my strong belief that the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS)'s decision permitting same-sex "marriage" was a debauched breach of the U.S. Constitution. The Obergefell ruling has scarred the nation and the institution of marriage, family and traditional American values. The five justice majority imposed their perverse personal political ideology on all Americans. It is a disgrace, a scourge on all that is good about our country.

The question was asked on Twitter, "Will Obergefell be the new litmus test for Republicans moving forward?" It definitely should be, in my humble opinion, and I said so in my responding tweet above. I called the Obergefell v. Hodges decision unjust, disgraceful and unconstitutional. It is judicial activism and tyranny at its "finest."

Like the equally unconscionable unconstitutional and immoral Roe v Wade decision, Obergefell is far from "settled law." Actually these activist judicial edicts are very unsettling and should be to all Americans. Our glorious constitution is being trampled upon by a bare majority of unelected unaccountable oligarchs on the court, who seek to force their personal political or philosophical agenda or view on all Americans.

So I now take the opportunity to do more than "whine" about this scandalous decision and propose something what we can do about the worrisome Obergefell declaration. Here are some practical ways we can and will defy Obergefell as well as the whole insidious Homosexual Agenda:

Become Educated, Educate Others


(1) After the Obergefell ruling came out, a group of legal scholars warns that accepting Obergefell as settled law is dangerous and has harmful consequences for the country as a whole. They urge all officeholders, like Kim Davis did, to refuse to accept same-sex "marriage" as binding precedent.
 
(2) So-called same-sex "marriage" has hurtful effects on children. The optimal social environment in which encourages normal, healthy human development is an intact family, a mother, a father and children. All other configurations are generally less conducive to child development. At every opportunity this fact, the deleterious affect on children, should be pointed out to the American people.

(3) Actively, prayerfully and financially support those organization fighting on behalf of traditional, natural marriage. Chief among organizations deserving support are such defenders of traditional, natural, biblical, civilized marriage are the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, Family Research Council (FRC), American Family Association (AFA). These organization via various forms of communication try to inform the public of the truth about homosexuality and the sordid effects of same-sex "marriage." These groups and others try to counteract the work of pro-homosexual organizations such as Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Freedom to Marry, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Other groups worthy of support are those who are active in defense of true marriage in the courts. Serious opponents to the entire Homosexual Agenda and that are active on behalf of traditional marriage in the courts are Alliance Defending Freedom, American Center for Law and Justice, Liberty Counsel, and Liberty Institute. There are others as well.


Ironically, a more comprehensive list of supporters of legitimate, natural or biblical marriage are listed by the very radical leftist Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) in one of their reports: 18 Anti-(Homosexual) Groups and Their Propaganda.

(4) Write editorials in support of pro-marriage, pro-family, pro-freedom causes and point out the dangers of acceptance of same-sex "marriage."

Vote for and Encourage Pro-Marriage Politicians

(5) Support financially, volunteer in campaigns and vote only for political candidates who take a strong position on fighting for natural, traditional marriage. This should be a strong criteria, along with sanctity of life and religious liberty, as key social issues. Every candidate should be judged as to where they stand on these critical issues.

Run for office if you can and if you have strong conviction as to preserving the sanctity of marriage and want to do all you can to minimize the damage done by the Obergefell decision.



to be continued

2015, A Step Forward in the Wrong Direction

2015 was a very bad year for the moms, marriage, and the American way.

SUPREME SCANDAL

The United States Supreme Court in one major decision managed to put another nail in coffin of the nation called America. Chief Justice and alleged conservative John Roberts' foolish ruling confirming the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) as just, was insignificant in terms of the destruction and havoc caused by another decision that overshadowed the ACA decision or anything else this radical court has recently done (or undone).

Some call the Obergefell v. Hodges decision the 'social justice story of the year.' Homosexual advocates danced in the street. Same-sex "marriages" exploded across the country in defiance of all that is right and good. Out-of-the-closet homosexual advocate Barack Obama lit up the people's house in a rainbow of colors, a stolen symbol, ironically, of God's salvation of Noah and his family (and mankind) from the pronounced decadence of the then world.

The People's House Perverse Celebration

Marring Marriage

The thoroughly contrived unconstitutional unconscionable inconceivable unjust "right" of same-sex couples to partake in the sacred institution and privilege of marriage has indelibly scared this nation. The unintended or intended consequences of loss of religious liberty, the first of all freedoms outlined in the Bill of Rights, was the first casualty.  

Kids Corrupted

Children of so-called same-sex household are equally negatively impacted. Why? Because nature and nature's law and a civilized society is build on the family unit, a man, a woman and children. Any deviation from this building block of society is suboptimal at best.

Kim Davis

You can see the affects of this godless ruling in the imprisonment of Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk, for sticking to her conscience and scriptural belief about the true nature of marriage. We will see more and more discrimination and persecution of Christians in 2016 as a result of this worthless and wicked court decision.

Bruce transJenner

Despicable Me

As depraved as the Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decision was, the epitome of moral depravity in 2015 has to be Bruce Jenner "transformation" from a man to "something else?". All the hoopla and adulation given to one-time Olympian turned pervert, Bruce Jenner media hype and hysteria testifies as to how far our culture has fallen.  

Apparently desperate for attention he now has transformed himself (at least in his mind) into the impossible, a “woman.” You would have thought the man won another gold medal the way he burst on the scene and was the focus of the entertainment, sports and media for his 15 minutes of shame.  This leap forward into the wrong end zone merely complements the perversity of the Obergefell ruling and the trend of our society under President Obama. 

Once a role model for those seeking athletic achievement, Bruce now, I guess, wants to be a fashion model. This is a gross example of shameless self-promotion at all cost of respectability and couth.

ISLAM-INSPIRED TERRORISM & ILLEGAL ALIEN INFILTRATION

Islam-Inspired Acts of Terror Foreign & Domestic

On another front in the assault on American tradition, virtues and values is our government's reaction to Islam-inspired terrorism at home and abroad. Paris, France and San Bernardino, California were just the recent acts of Islam-in-action. Our "leader" Barack Obama refuses to name our enemy, Islamic terrorism. Christians and conservatives draw more ire from the President than do the murderous Jihadists. Why? Could it be that he is closet Muslim? After all he was for tradition marriage until after he could not be voted out of office.

There has been no real attempt to curtail illegal alien entry into this country. The wall that was supposed to have been built years ago remains on the drawing board. Islamic terrorists mingle with illegal aliens coming across our borders. Valerie Jarrett ties the hands of Border Agents here and our military aboard. Like Vietnam we can't finish the job of defeating the enemy by requiring the tying the one hand behind each soldier behind their backs...

Kathryn Steinle

Illegal Alien Killer & Katie Steinle  

2016 will bring much more terrorism in this country and world-wide. It may get so bad here that Mr. Obama may declare Marshall law to justify remaining in office to "fight" the terrorism he helped enable. The president has demonstrated that he has more concern for the feelings and future of Muslims and illegal aliens than he does for legal American citizens. Why else would he continue to allow the existence of Sanctuary Cities, open borders and the insufficiently placement of Iraqi and Syrian refugees in this country?

CLIMATE CHANGE

While Paris burned Mr. Obama was hell-bent on spreading the yarn about man-caused Global Warming or the now more PC-term global warming. Regardless of the fact that manufacturers here in the U.S. have controlled all pollution to a great degree, our super-hero (in his own eyes) President continues to penalize Americans and American businesses with the notion that we can do something about climate change. That man could have significantly affect the weather is foolhardy. So committed to this radical idea, the President will jeopardize our economy ignoring the real pollution spewing from Red China and India. He will not leave office until he brings more ruination to this nation in his attempt to bring fundamentally ruin and chaos.

EXPOSING PLANNED PARENTHOOD

I will end my article with one powerful push back against the Obama Agenda and the Progressive Movement to fundamentally destroy America that did occur in 2015. The Center for Medical Progress (CMP), in a series of video exposés, has been bravely graphically documenting some of the atrocities beyond abortion in which Planned Parenthood routinely participates. Many Americans now knows that Planned Parenthood not only kills babies via abortion, but they also profit from selling aborted baby body parts. Despite their claim that abortions are just a small part of their business of providing "women's health," abortion is their prime business and all their other services are ancillary to it.

This monumental undercover work by CMP, which the main stream media refuses to do itself (because it doesn't fit their pro-abortion agenda), has garnered a lot of attention despite the attempt by the media, for the most part, to discredit, to ignore and to marginalize this very significant story of 2015. The Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), and other defenders of this most inhumane enterprise, are doing all they can, too, to keep hidden the real nature of the abortion industry, which is profiting by killing baby boys and girls.

Unfortunately the Republican leaders have not taken the hand off from the CMP and have fumbled the ball and refused to act in any meaningful way to stop baby-killing machine, PPFA. Empty feckless words of 'shock and awe' is the best we get from status-quo Senator Mitch McConnell or physically fit pretty-boy Speaker Paul Ryan and many other deadbeat do-nothing RINOs who only occupy space in Congress or serve for their own self-aggrandizement. We know the Democrats are unashamedly Pro-Death proponents, however by their inaction so is the Republican Party, tragically despite the massive evidence that CMP has clearly documented. 

2016, EXPECT MORE OF THE SAME?

One thing you can say about the Obama Administration, they have succeeded in fundamentally changing America. They had help from the Republican leadership, though. The GOP utterly caved to the demands of the Democrats and the White House. So greatly intimidated by the Main Stream Media, apparently, that they gave up without a fight as evidenced by the passage of the Omnibus by Democrats and Republican-leadership-led RINOs congressional members.

Speaker Paul Ryan vows to advance a strong "conservative" agenda. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell sits on the sideline counting the days until he retires on his lucrative taxpayer funded pension and the perks of being a lifetime in office ... Seeing the GOP leadership's track record since gaining majorities in the House and Senate, we honestly can't expect much from them. I hope that I am proven wrong.

updated 1/2/2016 5:30 pm
updated 1/3/2016 3:00 pm

Obeying Governing Authorities

I have been listening to some “Principles and Policies” radio broadcasts about Kim Davis.  Chuck Michaelis and Barry Sheets have been talking about how Romans 13:1-7 has been used by sodomites and their sympathizers against Kim Davis on the basis that she has failed to obey the governing authorities.  Barry has said that he hasn’t found any Christian blogs that have made a response to this false argument.  So I have decided to make a response.  Before hearing their podcast, I hadn’t actually heard this argument being applied to Kim Davis.  First I quote for you the Scripture in question:

1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Romans 13:1-7 (KJV)

I will go over the arguments that Chuck and Barry have already given.  Kim Davis, being a duly elected County Clerk of Courts is a “ruler” and a “minister of God” according to the way the terms are used in the above Scripture.  So according the argument of the sodomites, everybody should do what Kim Davis says.  The Supreme Court has no legal authority over the issue in question and furthermore Kim Davis cannot be in contempt because she was not one of the litigants in Obergefell v. Hodges.  Furthermore God’s word condemns both sodomites and those who approve of such practices in Romans 1.  The key issue is that governing authorities are no longer recognized by God if they fail to operate within their appointed purpose which according to the above passage is to punish evildoers.  I would add that in Acts 5:29, when told to stop spreading the gospel by the council of the elders of Israel, the apostles said, “We ought to obey God rather than men”.  The sodomites’ argument tells us that if we were living in Nazi Germany, we ought not to help Jews and others escape the concentration camps because we would be disobeying "the law of the land".

Chuck and Barry also talked the Supreme Court's misuse of power by misinterpreting the 14th Amendment as well as the misinterpretation Article III judicial power.  I don't believe that the 14th Amendment was limited to protection from racial injustices, but I would add that the original meaning of "equal protection" is just what it sounds like.  No law (at any level of government) can give someone more protection from a criminal than someone else.  The "immunities and privileges" clause of the 14th Amendment does not change the definition of marriage or require that equal benefits be given to same sex couples as are given to couple who are really married. But the 14th Amendment does unwisely extend the powers of the judiciary as they get to decide whether a state has given someone "equal protection" in a particular case.  The 14th Amendment shouldn't even be in the Constitution because it was not properly ratified.    And judicial power extends only to litigants involved in a particular case.  The principal of stare decisis is valid, but not absolute.  Judges are not the ultimate arbiters of the Constitution.

Chuck also mentioned that Davis had been married four times.  I had heard this before, but I hadn’t heard that she was not a Christian until after she was married a fourth time.  I also heard that one of her marriages was to a former husband after having since married some other man which is a violation of Deuteronomy 24.  (But more importantly she violated Matthew 5:30, Mark 10:12, Luke 16:18, Romans 7:2-3, I Corinthians 7:10-11, 39 just by remarrying any man after having been divorced.)  I did hear a portion of an interview where she was asked if her decision was not hypocrisy in light of her past.  Her reply was, “I’m forgiven.”  This is an excellent point.  When people get married, divorce and then remarry and the church accepts this as an acceptable lifestyle, the institution of marriage is effectively destroyed.  Marriage was not ruined by the sodomites, but by the mainstream church.  However, no matter what sin someone has committed, if they simply repent and make Yahshua Messiah (Jesus Christ) the absolute Lord of their life, then they are forgiven.  At that point there is no hypocrisy in refusing to participate in sinful behavior including the granting of marriage licenses to sodomites.  To issue those licenses would be in itself a sin which one would need repentance in order to be saved.

The "Three Goats and Cow", Romans 13 and all other arguments that the sodomites have come up with have all been so obviously false that any critical thinking person should easily see through it.

Three Falsehoods and an Absurdity

A billboard put up in Kim Davis’ hometown reads:

“THE FACT YOU CAN’T SELL YOUR DAUGHTER FOR THREE GOATS AND A COW MEANS WE’VE ALREADY REDEFINED MARRIAGE.”

I have one question for the authors of this billboard.  Who is this “we”?

I did a quick search for cattle and goat prices and found that each costs about $200 a head.  But I also looked up the price of marriage licenses in my home state of Ohio and the cost was $50.  A little cheaper, maybe, but the concept is the same.  Instead of exchanging the animals with the parents for their daughter, now the state is the one who owns the women and the groom must pay their price in order to have her as his wife.  So much for “progressivism”.

Actually, to my knowledge, there has never been a definition of marriage which has required payment of goods, services or money by the groom to the parents.  There is nothing about it in the most reputable law dictionaries of early American history.  For example, Bouvier’s Law Dictionary makes it clear that both the man and the woman must be consenting to the marriage in order for it to be legally binding.  This goes all the way back to King Cnut (1016-35 A.D.) whose laws included this :

And let no one compel either woman or maiden to him whom she herself mislikes nor for money sell her unless he is willing to give any thing voluntarily.

And King Henry I :

Liberty of marriage recognized by Cn Sec 74 is here abridged but it is forbidden to demand money for the licence required as by the law of Cnut.

There is nothing that I have found in British Common Law that requires payments to be made to the parents of the bride by the groom.  Actually they had the concept of a dowry, which is almost the opposite.  Wikipedia defines it as “...wealth transferred from the bride's family to the groom or his family, ostensibly for the bride.”

Yes, there are provisions in these laws for buying of a wife like what is supposed to happen when a man buys a wife and the marriage doesn’t actually take place. But it doesn’t say anything about buying a girl from her parents. What if today a man from the U.S. went to some country where slavery is legal, found a slave girl that he wanted to marry and agreed to buy her if she would marry him and come back to the U.S. with him (of her own free will)? Would this not qualify as a real marriage under the laws of any state in the U.S.? The fact that he bought the girl has nothing to do with the definition of marriage. The fact that they were both willing is the important thing.  The problem was with the slavery, not marriage or its definition.

There is nothing in the Bible that says that a man must pay a price to the parents of a woman for her to be his wife.  There are only two things that are even close to this :

Deuteronomy 22:19 says that a man must pay 100 shekels of silver (not animals!) for lying about the bride’s virginity after they are married.

Exodus 22:16-17 and Deuteronomy 22:29 say that a man must pay 50 shekels of silver for committing promiscuity with an unmarried woman.  (Again no animals were being exchanged for that purpose despite the fact that animals were required to be given for a variety of other purposes at that time.)  The man was supposed to marry the woman, unless the father of the woman refused to allow it.  But either way, the man had to pay the 50 shekels.

Some people think that the latter provision implies that this payment was required for any groom.  But this is speculation.  This could have been the tradition of the Patriarchs, the Israelites or the Canaanites living in the land at that time (c.f. Genesis 29:15-18, 34:12), but there is no evidence of a commandment of God to do this anywhere in the Bible. 

It is even a more of a stretch to say that such a provision was ever considered to be part of the definition of marriage according to the one true God, the God of the Bible.  Take for example the tradition of exchanging rings.  If you don’t exchange rings, does this mean that you aren’t really married?  Of course not!  Just because a marriage tradition exists (good or bad), that doesn’t make it part of the definition of marriage.

The commandments concerning the payment of money mentioned above are properly regarded as being for the nation of Israel only.  In particular, Christians are not bound by the Law of Moses.  So even if a “bride price” were included in the definition of marriage in the Law Moses (which is isn’t), the New Testament clearly releases Christians from such requirements because it indicates the Old Covenant has passed away, the people of the Old Covenant are no longer his people, and that God has established a new covenant with a new people, the believers in Jesus (Romans 9:25-6, Galatians 3, Hebrews, etc.).  And even if a “bride price” used to be a part of the definition of marriage, the change was done by God, not the “we” referred to in the billboard.

In early American history, in various states, interracial marriages were illegal.  But these were man made rules, not Biblical precepts.  Moses, an Israelite, married a Cushite (Ethiopian) woman (Numbers 12:1) and Solomon, also a Jew, married a black woman (Song of Songs 1:5-6).

The only time that the real definition of marriage has been significantly changed was when God forbad sexual relations between close relatives (Leviticus 18).  Previously, Abraham had married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12).  But again, it is God who changed the definition, not “we”.  Since God created the institution of marriage in first place, He and only He has the right to change it. 

There is obviously no danger that the tradition of exchanging animals for wives will return (if it ever existed).  But if we continue down the road that these sodomites would have us go, animals won’t be used as a bride price, but they will be the brides!  If “we” can change the definition of marriage in such a radical way as to allow a sodomite relationship to be considered the equivalent of marriage, then “we” could again change it to include bestiality, pedophilia, polyandry and any number of other unnameable sexual perversions.  If we continue in the same direction that we are headed, everyone will be forced to have a same-sex sexual relationship.  Anyone who fails to comply will be considered bigoted or guilty of sexual orientation discrimination.

In summary, the three falsehoods conveyed by the billboard are :

1. In the Bible or in Western Civilization, there is or was some widespread, generally accepted definition of marriage which required a man to purchase a woman from her parents with animals before he could marry her.

2. Some “progressive” activists freed us from this oppressive provision.

3. The same forward thinking leads us to logically conclude that sodomite relationships should be included in the definition of marriage.

And the most absurd proposition of all is that men can change the definition of an institution which was created and defined by God in the first place.