Total thought control: California Democrats introduce bill to ban 'husband' and 'wife' as 'outdated and biased'

(NaturalNews) The progressive Left has been unleashed on the American public over the course of Barack Obama's tenure. Obama is unquestionably the most left-wing activist president the country has ever seen, and the Left is on a mission to redefine as much of American traditional and cultural norms and mores as possible. They see the Obama era as the best chance they've had in decades, perhaps ever, to advance an agenda they've long dreamt about.

The most recent example in this war on American traditions took place in California, a state that the left-wing extremist Democrats have controlled for decades. Gov. Jerry Brown has just signed legislation removing the words "husband" and "wife" from state law.

As reported by Fox News:

The terms will be replaced with "spouse" to accommodate same-sex marriage, which became legal in the state last year after the Supreme Court struck down a voter-approved ban on it.

SB1306, the bill signed Monday by Brown, takes effect Jan. 1 and reflects the legality of gay marriage after a decade of litigation. The law also removes limits on recognizing same-sex marriages performed out of state.

This change comes after 61 percent of Californians in 2000 favored a statewide amendment to define marriage as that between a man and a woman, though that was struck down in 2008 as unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court.

What religious liberty?

Residents tried again to keep marriage defined traditionally with a new proposition, but that, too was eventually struck down, this time by a federal court.

Now, there is a national effort to replicate the California law in every state. Rep. Lois Capps, a California Democrat, has introduced legislation with the goal of replacing "gender terms" with "gender neutral" language – suggesting that the difference between men and women is neutral and requires no distinction.

"The Amend the Code for Marriage Equality Act recognizes that the words in our laws have meaning and can continue to reflect prejudice and discrimination even when rendered null by our highest courts," Capps said. "Our values as a country are reflected in our laws. I authored this bill because it is imperative that our federal code reflect the equality of all marriages."

But her measure continues – into the absurd (and the media simply reports it as though what she's saying and doing are the most normal things ever). As noted by the Associated Press:

She said her bill would also have other benefits if it became law. In one example, she noted that U.S. law says it's illegal to threaten the president's wife, but says nothing about the president's husband.

"Capps' bill would update the code to make it illegal to threaten the president's spouse," her office said.

The change means "the country has descended into farce," writes Todd Warner Huston.

Besides seeking to dismantle American cultural and societal norms and traditions, such efforts are also a naked attempt at speech and thought control, which of course are historically tools of left-wing revolutionaries used to control behavior.

Click here to search GoodGopher.com for news on thought control.

Competing constitutional protections

Some are refusing to go along with this nonsense. In Ohio, a Toledo judge who refused to marry a same-sex couple on religious liberty grounds almost two weeks after the Supreme Court's ruling legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states, said his refusal was not about animosity or hate.

"The declination was based upon my personal and Christian beliefs established over many years. I apologize to the couple for the delay they experienced and wish them the best. The court has implemented a process whereby same-sex marriages will be accommodated," said Judge C. Allen McConnell.

Immediately his decision was attacked, and some used legal justification for their criticism.

Equality Toledo Board Member and attorney Rob Salem says the statement doesn't comply with the laws of the court.

"I don't think this is a very complicated issue. This court, the Toledo Municipal Court, requires the Judge on duty to perform marriages," he said.

Yes, but the First Amendment protects religious liberties. So which amendment will win out here – equal protection (14th) or religious liberty (1st)?

Sources:

http://www.foxnews.com

http://www.latimes.com

http://rightwingnews.com

http://www.toledonewsnow.com

http://goodgopher.com