Well boys and girls (or girls and girls as the case may be ;), this nasty
little bit of trash found its way upon my doorstep this week. 

Lifted (without permission of course) from Vol. 1, No. 2 of _Family
Times_, a
local christian publication that is finding its way stuffed into
advertiser
bundles thrown onto the doorsteps of just about everybody in town (whether

we requested it or not).  Subtitle:  Dedicated to promoting traditional 
family values. "Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in
vain.
Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchmen stand guard in vain." 
- Psalm 127:1
Yeah, whatever.  There is also an article titled _Homosexual Chooses
Life_.  It's about some guy who "converted."  Now he's a "happy"
heterosexual.  I'll 
post that one at a later time.  There are also a couple of articles that 
single out a few video stores in town that rent out adult videos.  Awe
geez, 
here's goes that censorship thang again...

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Citizens Seek Repeal of Ordinance
By Kurt Brenneman

	On August 12th, a group of concerned citizens filed a 
petition for the repeal of ordinance 92-41 with the city clerk's 
office, giving four Lafayette city council members who opposed the 
local "gay rights" ordinance an opportunity to prevail. Each 
council member was served a copy by mail. The petition gives the 
council until September 15th to repeal the ordinance, allowing 
more than thirty days for the council to address the issue. The 
regular city council meeting is scheduled for September 7th, and, 
according to petitioner Roger Gray,president of Christian 
Coalition, a record crowd is expected.  Richard Ford, businessman 
and signer of the supporting affidavit, referred to the petition 
and memorandum as a "legal document."Although 243 signatures were 
collected on August 8th at a few area churches, the petition does 
not rely on signatures for its justification. The forty-eight page 
"Memorandum of Law and Facts" contains quotes from court cases, 
recognized law books, historical records, and twenty pages of 
statistical data to support the document.
	According to Dr. Paul Cameron of the Family Research 
Institute, information on the medical consequences of 
homosexuality has been used to defeat similar pro-homosexual 
legislation in two different cities.  Copies of the 50 page 
document are available at The Carpenter's Son, Logos Bookstore, 
and WCFY for a suggested contribution of $8.  Mr. Jim Sattier, one 
of the petitioners, said the document attempts to establish that 
those who voted for 92-41 made a mistake. "By appealing to them 
with the documented truth, we hope to avoid taking it before the 
judiciary.  It will save us all a lot of grief if they will just 
accept that the community stands against this and is willing to 
work with them to make things right again," Sattler said.  
Councilman Norb Fisher stated the survey results, which were 
consistent with what he and other councilmembers had found, 
obligated him to oppose 92-41.  Eight months were spent trying to 
convince the public that this ordinance was right for Lafayette.  
After failing to do so, the ordinance was passed anyway by only 
one vote.  Councilmember Jerry Ledbetter, who sponsored 92-41 and 
whose son is an avowed homosexual responded to the media without 
having read the content of the petition. Ledbetter told the 
Journal and Courier, "Obviously, it won't change mv mind, and it 
won't change the mind of any council members either. I would be 
surprised if it even gets discussed." Two days after the petition 
had been filed, Mr. Fisher was asked if he or other council 
members had been contacted by the local newspaper. "No, the only 
one I know of is Ledbetter himself; he's the spokesman." Ordinance 
opponents wonder how other councilmembers felt about being 
unofficially represented by Ledbetter.
	Ledbetter made comments about Christians imposing their 
morals on others. Petition supporters reacted by stating  that  
repercussions of Ledbetter's immorality is forced on them, 
resulting in discrimination which denies people the right to 
protect themselves, their employees,  tenants, or family members, 
etc., from this kind of dangerous immorality.  Fisher did express 
concern over the time deadline and a provision in the petition 
making the four council members who opposed 92-41 potentially 
liable if they fail to sponsor a repeal ordinance. However, the 
petition does imply that if a repeal ordinance was sponsored, 
those in favor of it would be exempted. Ford also assured us that 
if more time was necessary, it would be granted upon request. "Our 
objective is not to make things difficult for the council. Because 
of the known consequences of homosexuality, we simply have a duty 
and an obligation to address the problem with a sense of urgency," 
he said.
	The memorandum implies that legal action will be taken if 
the ordinance is not repealed. Case law and both state and federal 
codes are cited as providing a plausible bias for litigation. 
Several references are made concerning the common law and its 
application. Ford said, "the document is replete with 
authoritative quotes that are simple to understand and 
irrebutable."
	One attorney warned of the legal ramifications that would 
surely follow if 92-41 were to be passed and now the council has 
before it the legal information and facts, although litigation can 
be avoided by repealing the ordinance.  Petitioners are optimistic 
and have expressed confidence in the merit of the petition.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
[Relevant Petition follows]
A Petition To:

the City Council for the Repeal of City Ordinance No.92-41 in the 
City of Lafayette, Indiana.

	Whereas, the legal basis and authority for our Declaration 
of Independence, our Constitution for the United States of 
America, and our Constitution for the State of Indiana depends 
solely upon the laws of nature and of nature's God; and
	Whereas, no legislative assembly under mere pretense or 
color of law can legally pass and enforce an ordinance contrary to 
the supreme organic law; neither can they protect themselves, or 
the people they represent, from the inevitable consequences of 
such a usurpation, social acceptance or toleration not 
withstanding; and
	Whereas, preeminent law commentators of the past and the 
Founding Fathers of this nation believed the laws of nature and of 
nature's God to be expressed in the Holy Scriptures and that any 
legislative act contrary to these eternal and immutable principles 
is null and void ab initio- from the beginning; and
	Whereas, in addition to a vast amount of other historical 
evidence, the Holy Scriptures were affirmed and declared to be the 
Word of God by U.S. Congress in 1982; and
	Whereas, since times of antiquity, the judicial application 
of the laws of nature and of nature's God has been known as common 
law and access to the common law, as opposed to the legalistic 
character of legislative statutes and ordinances, is a right 
protected by the Constitution; and
	Whereas, under common law a devious act may be unlawful even 
if not expressly stated so by statute and may be effectively 
prosecuted by the damaged party in accordance with the fundemental 
legal maxim, to wit: for every wrong there is a remedy; and
	Whereas, "Male or female homosexuality... and 
bisexuality...between consenting adults." as quoted from ordinance 
No. 92-41 [hereafter referred to as 92-41], is legally defined as 
sodomy and has for centuries past, in both English and American 
jurisprudence, always been considered a loathsome crime against 
nature and an act so repulsive that it was not to be described or 
even mentioned publicly; and
	Whereas, the Holy Scriptures explicitly and unequivocally 
denounce and condemn homosexual acts and until 1961 the 
"abominable and detestable crime against nature" was prokibited by 
statute in all fifty States; and
	Whereas, the Mayor and each member of the Lafayette City 
Council invoked this same God of Holy Scripture by taking an oath 
to discharge their duties according to law and to the best of 
their ability with His help; and
	Whereas, 92-41 represents an outrageous departure from the 
long proven moral certainty that homosexual behavior is 
dangerously wrong and this divergence is an indisputable trespass 
against the great legal doctrine of  stare decisis- to abide by 
well settled decisions in matters of law; and
	Whereas, the passage of 92-41 by the Lafayette City Council 
indicates either extreme ignorance or blatant disregard for the 
law on the part of its Members who voted in the affirmative and on 
the part of the Mayor who approved and signed the ordinance; and
	Whereas, there are severe social repercussions for 
protecting, condoning, or failing te prevent the proliferation of 
homosexual conduct and any serious evaluation of the available 
statistics undeniably supports this fact; and
	Whereas, flagrant indifference was displayed by the Mayor 
and Council Members who supported 92-41 in the face of an obvious 
and overwhelming majority that were vehemently against it; and 
Whereas, tremendous resistance to 92-41 was clearly evidenced by 
meeting attendance, petition signatures, and by survey, and many 
voiced grave concern for the health and safety of this community, 
especially for the children and sanctity of family life; and
	Whereas, the undersigned petitioners are grateful to those 
Members of the Council who voted in opposition to 92-41 and 
respectfully remind them of their duty and obligation to take the 
initiative in seeking its repeal; and
	Whereas, the passage of 92-41, as a matter of law, is a 
breach of trust and a violation of oath of office by the Mayor and 
each Member of the Council who voted for it; and
opposed 92-41 could be culpably negligent in their duty to guard 
and defend the public good if.they do not actively pursue its 
repeal; and
	Whereas, the Mayor and Members of the Council, as a matter 
of law, may also be guilty as accomplices or accessories to the 
crime of sodomy if 92-41 is not repealed; and
	Whereas, under the auspices of law, any attempt to confer a 
right of protection upon the avowed homosexual is a deprivation 
and negation of the basic natural right to protect oneself and 
others from health hazards, dangerous and immoral influence, and 
the threat of physical or sexual abuse, all of which are 
characteristic of the homosexual lifestyle;
	Now, therefore, be it known that the Mayor and City Council 
of Lafayette, Indiana have officially been put on notice of the 
above stated facts supported by the corresponding memorandum of 
law and facts, and that the undersigned, on behalf of themselves 
and the families in our community, do hereby insist that ordinance 
No. 92-41 be repealed on or before the Fifteenth day of September 
in the Year of our Lord, Nineteen hundred ninety three [9/15/93];
	Whereupon, failure to do so would establish that the Mayor 
and City Council stand in willful and open defiance to the Living 
God, His law, and His creation of the family, and in order to find 
relief, His people would have no choice but to pursue a more 
drastic course of action.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+