Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Protect DOMA Website

The rabidly vile and angry protests being waged throughout California by the homosexual activists who are mad that Proposition 8 passed with over 52% of the vote, are not about to give up the fight. In fact, I can still see some of the "no on 8" political signs in my area. They were placed high up on telephone poles so that only someone with a ladder could reach them and tear them down.

The stampedes into churches; the shoving of an 80-yr.-old Christian woman while the huge cross she was carrying was trampled on; the hate-spewing protests in front of Mormon churches - are just a few of the terrible actions being done by rabid homosexual activists.

These people are more than just "sore losers." They are adamant about getting their way and will stop at NOTHING to do so.

I am grateful for organizations like Alliance for Marriage that is already preparing for the next battle. The ProtectDOMA.org website has been launched.

Here is a copy of an email that I received today from Alliance for Marriage:

Gay Activist Press Cites AFM Campaign
as Stumbling Block to Pending Attack
on DOMA in Congress


“Predominantly White” Activists Lament Failure to "Feature People of Color" as AFM’s Diverse Coalition launches ProtectDOMA.org campaign

Last week, the Alliance for Marriage launched one of the most important campaigns in our organization’s history to protect the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in the upcoming 111th Congress.

By launching ProtectDOMA.org -- and immediately commencing our campaign efforts on Capitol Hill -- the Alliance for Marriage Foundation has drawn a line in the sand against radical activists who are determined to export Massachusetts-style “gay marriage” to the entire nation.

AFM’s ProtectDOMA campaign was cited this past week in the gay press:
“The Alliance for Marriage just announced that preserving DOMA - especially by lobbying newly elected members of Congress from people of color communities - is one of their top priorities right now”
– Gay City News, (11/26/08).

But what was most eye-opening about this news story -- which reported on a panel discussion including the Human Rights Commission about same-sex marriage in New York State and the repeal of DOMA nationally -- was a rare window into the activist community and just how absurd their deceptive analogies to America’s civil rights movement have become.

“At a time when the community has been rubbed raw by a debate over the percentage of people of color who voted for Prop 8 and the failure of the No on 8 campaign to feature people of color as spokespeople or to do sufficient outreach to those populations, the New York panel consisted of five white men and one white woman.... The audience was predominately white and male as well….”


For years, AFM has reached out to communities of color - including leaders of the African-American community - to make their voices heard in the historic debate over the future of marriage. Our strategic leadership in building an authentically diverse coalition to protect marriage has been widely recognized in the national media.
“As the community that endured both slavery and segregation, African-Americans will always reject the lie that radical activists have a "civil right" to redefine marriage,” said Niger Innis, an AFM Advisory Board Member and National Spokesperson for the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), one of the "Big Four" historic civil rights groups. “That's because my community - perhaps more than any other - understands in very real terms the consequences of family breakdown. When marriage declines, children and society both suffer.”

Too often, Americans of goodwill are intimidated by the threat of being labeled as bigots for believing what the vast majority of people - of every creed and color - regard as common sense. But the African-American leaders in the AFM coalition have always proclaimed the widespread view in their community that there is no “civil right" to redefine marriage for all of society.

Thank you for helping us to make their voices heard across the nation. Thank you also for your friendship and partnership in our efforts to ensure that more children in America are raised in a home with a mother and a father.

www.afmusa.org

*******
Technorati Profile

Friday, November 21, 2008

CA Justices Recall Threat

Obviously, an LA Times blog would word such a post differently than I would. My choice of a title would have been, "Traditional marriage supporters threaten to recall California Supreme Court justices." Anyway, here's the post:

Gay marriage foes threaten to recall California Supreme Court justices
11:45 PM, November 19, 2008
Last week, the aggressive tactics of Prop. 8 opponents -- street protests, boycotts of business -- made headlines. This week, it appears that backers of the ban on gay marriage are the ones making threats. Yes on 8 forces are talking about a recall against members of the California Supreme Court if they throw out the measure.

To some, the recall talk marks another increase in the post-election battle and a response to the No on 8 protests:

"This push-back in the last two weeks has actually mobilized the Yes on 8 people," said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. If the California Supreme Court were to overturn Proposition 8, "you will see a mobilized group like you have never seen in the state of California." Rodriguez said in an interview Tuesday that some religious leaders are discussing a potential recall of Supreme Court justices. He expects the Supreme Court to overturn Proposition 8, and if that happens, "there are grounds for a recall. We saw that with Gray Davis," he said. "We have an oligarchy, an oligarchy in judges' role in the state of California."

Remember the Gray Davis recall? Well, one of the figures behind it thinks a Prop. 8 recall effort if the justices toss the measure out is a real possibility. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune:

If that happens, watch out for a "barn-burner of an election -- the biggest thing this state has ever seen," says recall election guru Ted Costa. Costa says he's already been contacted by some of the folks who would seek to recall Ronald George, Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno if Prop. 8 is scrapped. He thinks it's premature and risky because talk of a recall "would just (bleep) off the judges." Costa also doesn't sound like he's too thrilled about such a recall, saying it wouldn't be "healthy." Citing all the financial turmoil in California, he said, "If someone's going to do some recalling, that should be the focus."

When it comes to judicial recalls, one woman's name says it all. And Jon Fleischman utters it: "No government official is immune from the voters’ will, whether they be in the executive, legislative or, yes, even in the judicial branch. Remember Rose Bird?"

-- Shelby Grad

HT: LA Times Blogs

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Battle for Marriage Continues

The Battle for Marriage Has Just Begun

November 4th was a pivotal moment in America's history: Californians held their government accountable by passing Proposition 8. For the second time in eight years, Californians decided that the government may not redefine marriage for its citizens. However, despite our convincing victory, 52% to 48%, radical homosexual activists have reacted with anger and renewed determination. In the last week since the election, several cities have seen protests by opponents of Proposition 8. Churches have been vandalized, church goers have been bullied.


This type of furry-fueled protestation only hurts their cause as average citizens are alarmed at the sight of church vandalism and intimidation of the religious community. In fact, this response proves the point that their political agenda will be imposed against the public's will-using the government as their tool to achieve their goals.

And now government officials are aligning against the very people they were elected to represent and serve.


Although Governor Schwarzenegger publicly opposed Proposition 8 from the beginning, he is now encouraging the California Supreme Court to overturn Proposition 8, just as they overturned Proposition 22.

This position is in direct contradiction to his previous position on this issue. Both times same-sex marriage legislation has come to his desk, he has vetoed it. In 2005, he vetoed the bill "out of respect for the will of the people" expressed through Proposition 22's passage. In fact, his spokesperson explained that "The governor believes the matter should be determined not by legislative action - which would be unconstitutional - but by court decision or another vote of the people of our state." Well, the court overturned Proposition 22 and then the people overrode the court. Californians have clearly decided in favor of preserving traditional marriage.


Now state lawmakers are also trying to overturn the will of the people by submitting amicus briefs in homosexual lawsuits against Proposition 8.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg announced this week that they and 44 other state lawmakers sent a friend-of-the-court brief expressing their support for overturning Proposition 8. Another lawsuit was brought ealrier this year to prevent Proposition 8 from appearing on the ballot, but it was denied by the court. In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger stated his position on legislative meddling with Proposition 22: "We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote." Yet the legislature and the governor are trying to derail the will of the people.


Governor Schwarzenegger owes the people of California an apology for his duplicitous positions on such an important issue as preserving marriage. State lawmakers must be held accountable for their willful attempts to subvert the will of the people.

Citizens should call Governor Schwarzenegger and lawmakers to express their outrage over this blatant assault on the initiative process.

Less than a week after the election, government officials are trying undo it.


Although past court decisions seem to favor our case, we cannot trust the same judicial system that overturned Proposition 22 to protect our Election Day decision.

We must remain active and hold our government officials accountable. This battle is far from over. Join us as we continue to push forward in our defense of marriage!


PS
In addition to calling the governor and lawmakers to remind them that we the people are their bosses-not vice versa-there is another action item. California Musical Theater official Scott Eckern is on the verge of losing this job because he donated money to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign. Homosexual activists are demanding his termination for making a financial contribution to a cause he morally supports. What is truly outrageous is that this man could lose his job for expressing his religious and moral beliefs. To try and counter the negative publicity, Eckern has given an equal donation to the radical homosexual group Human Rights Campaign. Please contact the California Musical Theater about Mr. Eckern's ability to express his political beliefs without being punished.



HT: Email From Karen England of Yes on Proposition 8.com

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Crazed Homosexual Activists Attack Woman & Trample Cross

The anchors of the news show got one thing wrong. They claimed that there was a "lot of hate on both sides."

Nope!

A lot of hate from the rabid, homosexual activists - yes.

If you look closely at one point in the video, the 80-yr.-old woman can be seen mouthing the words to those who were attacking her, "I love you." Of course, it was so noisy because of the rabid hate being spewed by the demonstrators, no one could hear her words.

Crazie Lefties Attack Old Lady At "No on 8" Protest

She is certainly a brave woman to show up there and try to minister the love of Jesus Christ and what He did for ALL sinners at the cross.

We are witnessing Biblical prophecy right before our very eyes!

Jesus told us to watch for the signs of his return. In Scripture, he said that the world would be, "as in the Days of Noah, and, as in the Days of Lot."



HT: SFSU College Republicans

Thursday, November 6, 2008

More Evidence of Gay Tolerance /sarc off

It's sad, ironic and true. There is absolutely NO TOLERANCE from the homosexual activists towards those who wish to preserve the original definition of marriage.

NO RIGHTS were taken away from them! The wrong ruling of four rogue judges who took it upon themselves to overturn 4.1 million votes when Proposition 22 was passed years ago, have now been corrected by voters...AGAIN!

I ask...WHERE'S THE TOLERANCE FROM THE OTHER SIDE??? They are all about tolerance when things are going their way. However, when voters decide an issue - the gays curse at us and threaten to burn down Christian churches!

Awful...

Absolutely despicable!!

I have no respect for them anymore. I'm done.

P.S. BTW, I noticed a hand-made "No on Prop 8" sign posted on a telephone pole a few blocks down from my street. It said, "Don't be like Hitler - vote no on Prop. 8."

Yep...a real tolerant bunch...aren't they? /sarc off - again.

*******
Additional articles:



Headlines - Thursday, November 6, 2008

Cal. AG to defend marriage from redefinition while defending its redefinition
November 6, 2008

Statement by Andrew Pugno, General Counsel of ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8
November 6, 2008

New legislatures expected to take up marriage redefinition bills in 5 states November 6, 2008

Fighting Over Voter-Approved Marriage Amendment Puts “Squeeze on California’s Chief Justice”
November 6, 2008

Margin of Prop. 8 victory requires vigilance and ongoing efforts by churches and pro-family groups
November 6, 2008

Pretense of tolerance is over: Prop. 8 opponents attempt to defy voters
November 5, 2008

“Lawsuit Against Gay Marriage Ban Irks Christians”
November 6, 2008

Back to court … again: Californians voted for traditional marriage Tuesday, but opponents file lawsuits
November 6, 2008

“Contempt for the will of the people”: Same-sex marriage proponents won’t concede election, ask court to nullify Proposition 8
November 6, 2008

Jordan Lorence: Marriage battle is not over, its just heating up
November 6, 2008

Mike Johnson on Don Kroah Show: State Marriage Amendment victories

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Restoring Marriage in California!

Praise God for the victory of restoring marriage in California as being as He intends, and has stated in His Word: the union of one man and one woman!

Fox News has reported that California voters passed Proposition 8, overturning a state Supreme Court decision that granted gay couples the right to wed months ago.

Of course, the war of good against evil continues.

Within moments of the announcement that YES on Proposition 8 passed here in California, The San Francisco City Attorney's office says he plans to challenge the validity of the ballot measure that would change the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

Although the presidential election results lead me to mourn for this nation, I praise God that He is still on the throne of heaven. Through prayer, fasting and work, thousands of the faithful in Jesus Christ had their pleadings and prayers to restore marriage here in California answered!

This decision will stave off what would have been a tsunami of liberal judge rulings across our nation to force same-sex marriage upon an electorate that does not want the definition of marriage changed by judicial fiat!

Praise Jesus!

Christine

P.S. - Just a note to anyone who happens to visit here and is mourning this decision. You will not have your right to have a CIVIL UNION with your same-sex partner as a result of this decision. It will just have to be called something else - not marriage.

Those who tried to call our position "hate" - listen up. This was NOT done to hurt you or your partners. I have attended many church functions that spelled out the necessity of preserving biblical marriage.

Christians who believe and follow God's Word rose up in droves to say, "homosexual activists and your supporters (including radical liberal rogue judges) - you have gone to far."

I am asking each of you for tolerance and respect towards those who have voted to restore the traditional, thousands-of-years-old, definition and meaning of marriage here in California. Tolerance is not a one-way street - although the homosexual lobby wants to make it seem that way.

One last point. Those who voted YES ON PROPOSITION 8 are not "bigots." The Christians who follow God's Word know this. It is time that the public realizes this, too.

To those who refuse to show tolerance and respect for the decision rendered by voters here in California - and wish to continue their vitriole of labeling us "bigots" - here is what BIGOT means for me:

Bible
Is
God's
Only
Truth

Sunday, November 2, 2008

More Evidence For YES ON PROP 8!

Neil over at Eternity Matters has a post up that shows how VERY IMPORTANT it is for California to VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8 on Election Day, Tuesday, November 4, 2008!!

Gay Pledge Cards Given to Kindergartners

Neil writes:

As I mentioned in We told you so, even while the GLBT lobby is on their best behavior pending the vote on Proposition 8, we see more and more examples of their supporters doing the opposite of what they claimed would happen: Aggressive indoctrination of youth as young as kindergarten.

During a celebration of National Ally Week, Tara Miller, a teacher at the Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, Calif., passed out cards produced by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network to her class of kindergartners.

The cards asked signers to be “an ally” and to pledge to “not use anti-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) language or slurs; intervene, when I feel I can, in situations where others are using anti-LGBT language or harassing other students and actively support safer schools efforts.”


More here.


My comment at Neil's blog:

The battle over this issue is getting SO NASTY! Signs stolen from yards, cars damaged because they have a YES ON PROPOSITION 8 sticker on them. I could go on and on.

What bothers me the most, though, is the unashamed LYING from the “No on Prop 8″ people! There is a commercial where a superintendent of schools claims that “marriage” isn’t taught in public schools! THAT is a bold faced LIE! It is written directly in the Education code! If gay “marriage” stays legal in CA, then it WILL be taught in schools! There is no doubt about it!

I have to search for it, but there is an entire curriculum drawn up already which will be used to further indoctrinate children. Plus, they want to change all the textbooks to include gay “history” in EVERY SUBJECT! After church today, I will look for the info and share it here.

Please keep the YES ON PROPOSITION 8 ballot measure in your prayers! We need God to move throughout CA to bring hearts more in line with what He designed for marriage - the union of one man and one woman!


HT's:
Eternity Matters

Fox News

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Commentary: Hate in the Name of Love

Commentary: Hate in the Name of Love
by Dennis Prager, guest columnist

'It is the proponents of same-sex marriage who express nearly all the hate.'

Note: This column first appeared on Townhall.com on Oct. 21, 2008. It is used with permission.

Next to the presidential election, California's Proposition 8 is the most important vote in America.

It will determine the definition of marriage for the largest state in America, and it will determine whether judges or society will decide on social-moral issues.

In 2000, 61 percent of the voters in California, one the most liberal states in America, voted to retain the only definition of marriage civilization has ever had — the union of a man and woman (the number of spouses allowed has changed over time but never the sexes of the spouses). But in May 2008, four out of seven California justices decided that they would use their power to make a new definition: Gender will now be irrelevant to marriage.

As a result of this judicial act, the only way to ensure that we continue to define marriage the way every religious and secular society in recorded history has defined marriage — as between men and women — is to amend the California Constitution. It is the only way to prevent the vote of one judge from redefining marriage, as was also done in Massachusetts and Connecticut.
Which is why Proposition 8 exists.

But even though California voters decided by a large margin to retain the man-woman definition of marriage, passing Proposition 8 will be a challenge.
First, the attorney general of California, Jerry Brown, unilaterally renamed the proposition as it appears on California ballots. It had been listed as "Amends the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Brown, a liberal Democrat, changed the proposition's wording to: "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment."

The reason for this change is obvious — to make the proposition appear as a denial of a basic human and civil right.

Marriage has never been regarded as a universal human or civil right. Loving and living with anyone one wants to live with are basic human rights. But marriage is actually a privilege that society bestows on whom it chooses. And even those who believe that any two unmarried people who want to get married should be given a marriage license should regard as wrong an attorney general changing a ballot proposition's language to favor his own social views. What Brown did was attempt to manipulate people who lean toward preserving the definition of the most important social institution in society — people who have no desire whatsoever to hurt gays — to now think of themselves as bigots.

According to Sacramento Bee columnist Margaret A. Bengs, "a recent Field Poll analysis found" that the new wording by Brown "had a 'striking' impact on those newly familiar with the measure, with a 23-point swing against it."

What we have here is truly manipulative. Four justices create a right, and then a sympathetic attorney general renames a proposition so as to protect a 4-month-old right that no one had ever voted to create.

And the left accuses the right of imposing its values on society.

The second hurdle for Proposition 8 is even greater: the multimillion-dollar campaign to label proponents of Proposition 8 "haters" and to label the man-woman definition of marriage as "hate." Or as they put it: "Prop 8 = Prop Hate."

It is apparently inconceivable to many of those who wish to change the definition of marriage that a decent person can want to retain the man-woman definition. From newspaper editorials to gay and other activist groups, the theme is universal — proponents of traditional marriage are haters, the moral equivalents of those who opposed racial equality. As The New York Times editorial on the subject put it, Proposition 8 is "mean-spirited."

But it is the charge of hate (along with bigotry, homophobia and intolerance) that is the primary charge leveled against supporters of Proposition 8. That's why one major anti-Proposition 8 group is "Californians Against Hate."

Any honest outsider would see that virtually all the hate expressed concerning Proposition 8 comes from opponents of the proposition. While there are a few sick individuals who hate gay people, I have neither seen nor heard any hatred of gays expressed by proponents of Proposition 8. Not in my private life, not in my e-mail, not from callers on my radio show.

It is the proponents of same-sex marriage who express nearly all the hate — because in fact many of them do hate, loudly and continuously. But hate in the name of love has a long pedigree. Why should our generation be different?

These charges of "hate" against proponents of retaining the man-woman definition of marriage do not speak well for those who make them. I, for one, find it easy to believe that most opponents and most proponents of Proposition 8 are decent people. There are millions of decent people who think marriage should be redefined. I think they are wrong, but I do not question their decency.

Why won't those who favor redefining marriage accord the same respect to the millions of us who still want marriage to remain man-woman?

Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of four books



HT: CitizenLink

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

What Same-Sex "Marriage" Has Done To Massachusetts

What same-sex "marriage" has done to Massachusetts
It's far worse than most people realize
October 20, 2008
by Brian Camenker

Anyone who thinks that same-sex “marriage” is a benign eccentricity which won’t affect the average person should consider what it has done in Massachusetts. It’s become a hammer to force the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality on everyone. And this train is moving fast. What has happened so far is only the beginning.

On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court announced its Goodridge opinion, ruling that it was unconstitutional not to allow same-sex “marriage.” Six months later, homosexual marriages began to be performed.

The public schools
The homosexual “marriage” onslaught in public schools across the state started soon after the November 2003, court decision.

At my own children's high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex “marriage” in early December, 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be “marrying” their same-sex partners and starting families either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of society – was handed out to the students.

Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September, 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, MA, told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the floodgates for teaching homosexuality. “In my mind, I know that, `OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, `Give me a break. It's legal now,'” she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.

By the following year it was in elementary school curricula. Kindergartners were given picture books telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, like their own parents. In 2005, when David Parker of Lexington, MA – a parent of a kindergartner – strongly insisted on being notified when teachers were discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and put in jail overnight.

Second graders at the same school were read a book, “King and King”, about two men who have a romance and marry each other, with a picture of them kissing. When parents Rob and Robin Wirthlin complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify them or allow them to opt-out their child.

In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt-out their children! Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship!

Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is “legal”, a federal judge has ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!

In 2006, in the elementary school where my daughter went to Kindergarten, the parents of a third-grader were forced to take their child out of school because a man undergoing a sex-change operation and cross-dressing was being brought into class to teach the children that there are now “different kinds of families.” School officials told the mother that her complaints to the principal were considered “inappropriate behavior.”

Libraries have also radically changed. School libraries across the state, from elementary school to high school, now have shelves of books to normalize homosexual behavior and the lifestyle in the minds of kids, some of them quite explicit and even pornographic. Parents complaints are ignored or met with hostility.

Over the past year, homosexual groups have been using taxpayer money to distribute a large, slick hardcover book celebrating homosexual marriage titled “Courting Equality” into every school library in the state.

It’s become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for teachers to prominently display photos of their same-sex “spouses” and occasionally bring them to school functions. Both high schools in my own town now have principals who are “married” to their same-sex partners, whom they bring to school and introduce to the students.

“Gay days” in schools are considered necessary to fight “intolerance” which may exist against same-sex relationships. Hundreds of high schools and even middle schools across the state now hold “gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender appreciation days”. They “celebrate” homosexual marriage and move forward to other behaviors such as cross-dressing and transsexuality. In my own town, a school committee member recently announced that combating “homophobia” is now a top priority.

Once homosexuality has been normalized, all boundaries will come down. The schools are already moving on to normalizing transgenderism (including cross-dressing and sex changes). The state-funded Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth includes leaders who are transsexuals.

Public health
The Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is “married” to another man. In 2007 he told a crowd of kids at a state-sponsored youth event that it’s “wonderful being gay” and he wants to make sure there’s enough HIV testing available for all of them.

Since homosexual marriage became “legal” the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000.

Citing “the right to marry” as one of the “important challenges” in a place where “it’s a great time to be gay”, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health helped produce The Little Black Book, Queer in the 21st Century, a hideous work of obscene pornography which was given to kids at Brookline High School on April 30, 2005. Among other things, it gives “tips” to boys on how to perform oral sex on other males, masturbate other males, and how to “safely” have someone urinate on you for sexual pleasure. It also included a directory of bars in Boston where young men meet for anonymous sex.

Domestic violence
Given the extreme dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more money every year to deal with skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence. This year $350,000 was budgeted, up $100,000 from last year.

Business
All insurance in Massachusetts must now recognize same-sex “married” couples in their coverage. This includes auto insurance, health insurance, life insurance, etc.

Businesses must recognize same-sex “married” couples in all their benefits, activities, etc., regarding both employees and customers.

The wedding industry is required serve the homosexual community if requested. Wedding photographers, halls, caterers, etc., must do same-sex marriages or be arrested for discrimination.

Businesses are often “tested” for tolerance by homosexual activists. Groups of homosexual activists often go into restaurants or bars and publicly kiss and fondle each other to test whether the establishment demonstrates sufficient “equality” — now that homosexual marriage is “legal”. In fact, more and more overt displays of homosexual affection are seen in public places across the state to reinforce "marriage equality".

Legal profession
The Massachusetts Bar Exam now tests lawyers on their knowledge of same-sex "marriage" issues. In 2007, a Boston man, Stephen Dunne, failed the Massachusetts bar exam because he refused to answer the questions in it about homosexual marriage.

Issues regarding homosexual “families” are now firmly entrenched in the Massachusetts legal system. In many firms, lawyers in Massachusetts practicing family law must now attend seminars on homosexual "marriage". There are also now several homosexual judges overseeing the Massachusetts family courts.

Adoption of children to homosexual “married” couples
Homosexual “married” couples can now demand to be able to adopt children the same as normal couples. Catholic Charities decided to abandon handling adoptions rather submit to regulations requiring them to allow homosexuals to adopt the children in their care.

In 2006 the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) honored two men “married” to each other as their “Parents of the Year”. The men already adopted a baby through DSS (against the wishes of the baby’s birth parents). According to news reports, the day after that adoption was final DSS approached the men about adopting a second child. Homosexuals now appear to be put in line for adopting children ahead of heterosexual parents by state agencies in Massachusetts.

Government mandates
In 2004, Governor Mitt Romney ordered Justices of the Peace to perform homosexual marriages when requested or be fired. At least one Justice of the Peace decided to resign.

Also thanks to Gov. Romney, marriage licenses in Massachusetts now have “Party A and Party B” instead of “husband and wife.” Romney did not have a legal requirement to do this; he did it on his own. (See more on this below.)

Since homosexual relationships are now officially “normal”, the Legislature now gives enormous tax money to homosexual activist groups. In particular, the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth is made up of the most radical and militant homosexual groups which target children in the schools. This year they are getting $700,000 of taxpayer money to go into the public schools.

In 2008 Massachusetts changed the state Medicare laws to include homosexual “married” couples in the coverage.

The public square
Since gay “marriage”, annual gay pride parades have become more prominent. There are more politicians and corporations participating, and even police organizations take part. And the envelope gets pushed further and further. There is now a profane “Dyke March” through downtown Boston, and recently a “transgender” parade in Northampton that included bare-chested women who have had their breasts surgically removed so they could “become” men. Governor Patrick even marched with his “out lesbian” 17-year old daughter in the 2008 Boston Pride event, right behind a “leather” group brandishing a black & blue flag, whips and chains!

The media
Boston media, particularly the Boston Globe newspaper, regularly does feature stories and news stories portraying homosexual “married” couples where regular married couples would normally be used. It’s “equal”, they insist, so there must be no difference in the coverage. Also, the newspaper advice columns now deal with homosexual "marriage" issues, and how to properly accept it.

A growing number of news reporters and TV anchors are openly “married” homosexuals who march in the “gay pride” parades.

Is gay marriage actually legal in Massachusetts?
Like everywhere else in America, the imposition of same-sex marriage on the people of Massachusetts was a combination of radical, arrogant judges and pitifully cowardly politicians.

The Goodridge ruling resulted in a complete cave-in by politicians of both parties on this issue. Same-sex “marriage” is still illegal in Massachusetts. On November 18, 2003 the court merely ruled that it was unconstitutional not to allow it, and gave the Legislature six months to “take such action as it may deem appropriate.” Note that the Massachusetts Constitution strongly denies courts the power to make or change laws, or from ordering the other branches to take any action. The constitution effectively bans “judicial review” – a court changing or nullifying a law. Thus, the court did not order anything to happen; it simply rendered an opinion on that specific case. And the Legislature did nothing. The marriage statutes were never changed. However, against the advice of many, Gov. Romney took it upon himself to alter the state's marriage licenses to say "Party A and Party B" and order officials to perform same-sex "weddings" if asked, though he had no legal obligation to do so. Technically, same-sex marriages are still illegal in Massachusetts.

Nevertheless, we are having to live with it. And furthermore, this abdication of their proper constitutional roles by the Legislature and Governor has caused a domino effect as "copycat" rulings have been issued in California and Connecticut, with other states fearful it will happen there.

In conclusion
Homosexual “marriage” hangs over society like a hammer with the force of law. And it’s only just begun.

It’s pretty clear that the homosexual movement’s obsession with marriage is not because large numbers of them actually want to marry each other. Research shows that homosexual relationships are fundamentally dysfunctional on many levels, and “marriage” as we know it isn’t something they can achieve, or even desire. (In fact, over the last three months, the Sunday Boston Globe’s marriage section hasn’t had any photos of homosexual marriages. In the beginning it was full of them.) This is about putting the legal stamp of approval on homosexuality and imposing it with force throughout the various social and political institutions of a society that would never accept it otherwise. To the rest of America: You've been forewarned.

HT: Mass Resistance

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Welcome News for Biblical Marriage!

AFM Welcomes Viva La Familia of CA as the Newest Voice for Latinos on Marriage

California’s Latino community was empowered to protect marriage today in the nation’s most populous state by a new advocacy group that is launching a statewide media blitz over Spanish-language media. The ads feature a Latino superstar urging Latinos to vote “Yes” on Prop 8. The Latino leadership of Viva La Familia will urge Latino voters to support Proposition 8.




The Alliance for Marriage Foundation – the coalition that blazed the path to bring America’s Latino community to the forefront in support of marriage -- welcomes Viva La Familia to the historic battle to protect the future of marriage for our children and grandchildren.

The formation of Viva La Familia is particularly important in California, because any move to protect marriage and advance the interest of families in California – and across the country -- must include the massive and fast-growing Latino community.

“The white Christian evangelic movement needs to understand that they can’t win this battle alone,” said Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, a board member of Viva La Familia, and President of the Sacramento-based National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. “They simply don’t have the sheer numbers necessary to win.”

The movement to protect marriage is often characterized in the media as a project of the conservative Christian subculture. “The Viva La Familia ad campaign is an effort to build the numbers necessary to win,” added Rodriguez.

Mexican movie star Eduardo Verastegui is featured in the ad campaign launched statewide, which encourages Latinos to vote “Yes” on Proposition 8, a measure on the November ballot that would amend the state constitution to define marriage as one man and one woman. The ads will air on Spanish-language radio and appear in print.

Verastegui, who is prominently featured in the ads, is best known in America as the leading actor and producer of the award-winning movie “Bella.” But he has deep “pop-culture” roots in the Latino community, having starred in several hit “soap operas” on Televisa and even named one of 50 Most Beautiful People by People En EspaƱol. He’s been called by the some “the Brad Pitt of Latin America.”

Viva La Familia, an advocacy organization that includes Latino leaders such as Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, Jr., Dr. Jessie Miranda, and Gilbert Montelongo, was formed to reach out to the Latino community in California on public policy issues of marriage and family.

The Alliance for Marriage Foundation has been at the forefront of the battle to protect marriage all across America. In California, the Alliance sponsors Californians for Marriage, Yes on Proposition 8, an organization that helped to qualify the marriage protection initiative for the California ballot. In Denver, the Alliance for Marriage Foundation recently organized a rally for over 5,000 Latinos working together with the Archdiocese of Denver.

Thank you for your friendship and partnership in our efforts to ensure that more children in America are raised in a home with a mother and a father.



Matt Daniels, J.D., Ph.D.
Founder and President


HT: Matt Daniels - Alliance for Marriage

Friday, October 17, 2008

YES Prop 8 Signs Stolen

So, you don't really think that the homosexual activists who are pushing gay "marriage" upon us here in California aren't out to silence Christians, conservatives, and traditional marriage advocates?

The evidence OF THIS FACT is already clear:

Was your Proposition 8 sign stolen?

There are reports from all across the state of voters' Yes on Proposition 8 signs being stolen or vandalized. If you are the victim of this intolerance and bigotry, please send the following information to LaTanya Wright: Name, Address, Zip and Phone Number.

We will make sure your sign is replaced as soon as possible. Email LaTanya at: ltgwright@gmail.com.

300 signs supporting Proposition 8 stolen from Chino Hills church

There was a sign on a neighbor's lawn on my block which was displayed in support of the VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8 ballot measure. Two days later, it was stolen!

See? The silencing of those who disagree with homosexual activists is happening already!

Don't let what has happened in Massachusetts happen in California!

VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8 ON ELECTION DAY - NOVEMBER 8, 2008!!!

Monday, October 13, 2008

How Ironic Is This?

Same-sex marriage advocates in Florida, Arizona, and California may face their toughest opponents in the wave of new, minority voters set to hit the polls next month.


Initiatives on those states’ Nov. 4 ballots would define marriage as being between one man and one woman, thereby prohibiting same-sex marriage.


Gay-rights supporters worry not only that Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has pledged to oppose such efforts but also that his candidacy will bring out record numbers of blacks and Hispanics to vote for him. Those two groups vote mostly for Democratic candidates but often are cultural and religious conservatives who tend to oppose same-sex unions.


About 6 percent of California voters are black, and 15 percent are Hispanic.


“It’s a Catch-22,” Andrea Shorter, campaign director of California’s gay and civil rights coalition And Marriage for All, told The New York Times.




Continue reading:

Obama Voters May Scuttle Same-Sex Marriage Efforts

HT: NewsMax

Saturday, October 4, 2008

"Fine Line" Event

My blogging friend Carlotta - over at Christocentric - has done a great job of providing some details about the "Fine Line" event which was simulcast to hundreds of churches and seen live on the Internet via iProtectMarriage.com.

Here is a link to her post. Lots of great comments there, too.

The following comment is still awaiting moderation. But I wanted to bring it over here because I think that it brings home the point about true salvation verses following false prophets (which Jesus warned us would happen the closer we get to the last days).

The book of Jude contains similar warnings. It's placement - just before the book of Revelation - shows how important proper discernment will be (is!) in our day.

My comment (below) was in response to a blogger named Andrew. Here is what he wrote:

One could say that there are two fundamental components to the kingdom of God - salvation (I am forgiven and am going to heaven) and then sanctification (I am becoming more and more like Christ). It starts with salvation, and salvation here is salvation from the penalty of sins. But before one can be saved, a person has to come to the realization that they are a sinner and need saving.

Jesus said, “Go and learn what this means: ‘I want mercy and not sacrifice,’ because I did not come to call righteous people, but sinners.” If by calling homosexuality a sin will help but a single soul to realize their need for a savior and cause them to repent and turn to Christ for forgiveness and salvation all the effort and criticism should be worth it. “In the same way, I tell you that there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who don’t need to repent.”

Saving marriages in this world is indeed important but saving souls for heaven is most important. “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage”.



My response:

You have made some really good points, Andrew.

I think that we now need to ask people who call themselves Christians, whether or not they have been born again. Jesus told us in Scripture, “you must be born again.” It is NOT an option. It is not a “denominational” difference. It is a fact.

The liberal side never seems to want to talk about repentance. Why is that? They also don’t like talking about the cross of Christ.

When Jesus walked the earth, he began his ministry by proclaiming, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.”

What you wrote regarding the joy of celebration (both in heaven and on earth) when even just one sinner being called to repent is born again in Christ as a result of their repentance, goes to show how important both repentance and being born again in Jesus really is! They go hand in hand. Can’t have one without the other.

I agree that the sanctification process takes time -perhaps our entire lifetime and beyond. A person who has truly given their life over to the Lordship of Jesus Christ is a changed life. It is no longer the bondage of the flesh that rules them. They are set free in Jesus Christ. Their desire is towards holiness and righteousness. No one (on this side of heaven) ever completely “arrives,” but Scripture tells us “by their fruits you shall know them.”

A telltale sign of true repentance, salvation, and agape love for Jesus is our obedience to him and His Word. Jesus did tell us, “if you love me, keep my commandments.”

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Oct. 1st Webcast For Marriage!

Important Webcast for Marriage!

While only those 18 and older will be voting on Proposition 8 next month, their decision will have the greatest impact on those unable to vote: children. Young people are constantly bombarded with messages in the media and at school that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are acceptable and good for our society. Many are confused by the conflict that arises between the culture and their family's morality. Pastor Miles McPherson of Rock Church in San Diego is particularly concerned about the impact of homosexuality on young people.

Tomorrow [TONIGHT! OCTOBER 1ST!] his church will hold a special rally for young people that will be broadcast throughout the state and nation. We encourage you to tune in and help young people you know better understand this crucial issue. The Fine Line: a Rally for Youth, Young Adults, and Parents

The Fine Line: a Rally for Youth, Young Adults, and Parents will be held at 7 p.m., Wednesday, October 1, 2008, at the Rock Church in San Diego. The non-partisan event is free and open to the public.

The Fine Line also will be broadcast live via satellite to approximately 150 churches throughout California who have signed up with the CCN Network. (Locations may be found by going to http://www.iprotectmarriage.com/.)

The iProtectMarriage.com website is also prepared to live stream the event to thousands of users statewide.


"The goal of The Fine Line is to equip and empower young people and their parents to engage on this issue, and go out and DO something," said Miles McPherson, senior pastor of the Rock Church, and a former professional football player with the San Diego Chargers. "The church is under attack. Marriage as designed by God, between a man and a woman, is under attack. We need to motivate young people to be informed, to be strong, to be out there in the real world, confident and active."

The event will be simulcast by Church Communication Network from the Rock Church, San Diego's largest Christian congregation and one of the fastest growing churches in the United States. Known for its multicultural and innovative worship and community service, the Rock features a high-tech sanctuary that seats 3,500. The Mountain View, Calif., based Church Communication Network provides programming in an array of ministry areas.

The youth-oriented evening will include music by rock groups the Katinas and Stellar Kart, and McPherson will speak. Live and video guests will include Ron Luce of Teen Mania, a youth outreach organization; Sean McDowell, a youth oriented Christian apologist; Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason, an organization that trains Christians to think clearly about their faith; Yvette Schneider of Exodus International, a nonprofit, interdenominational Christian organization promoting the message of freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ; skate pros Brian Sumner and Christian Hosoi; and Kyle Loza, pro freestyle motocross rider and X Games gold medalist.

The program will culminate with an interactive panel in which speakers will present information on why we should vote yes Nov. 4 on Proposition 8, the Protect Marriage Amendment.

The Fine Line is one of three planned simulcast events in support of Proposition 8. Others include a broadcast presentation for pastors and Christian leaders which took place last Thursday, Sept. 25, and a future broadcast presentation to churches Sunday, Oct. 19.

Additional Resources:

The Rock Church

Exodus International

Sean McDowell

Stand To Reason

Teen Mania

Additional Upcoming Events to Support Proposition 8

The following are upcoming events sponsored by various Protect Marriage coalition members in support of Proposition 8.

Oct. 02, 2008 Orange County Protect Marriage Townhall
When: October 02, 2008
Where: Covenant Presbyterian Church (St. Andrews Hall)
1855 N. Orange Olive Road
Orange, CA 92865

Oct. 09, 2008 San Bernardino Protect Marriage Townhall
When: October 09, 2008
Where: Echos of Faith Christian Center
11255 Central Ave.
Ontario, CA 91762


Oct.11, 2008 Auburn Town Hall Rally
When: October 11, 2008
11:00 - 12:00 a.m.
Where: Auburn Library Garden Theater
350 Nevada St
Auburn, CA

Oct. 19, 2008 Ventura County Federalist Society, "Same-Sex Marriage in California: Legal Issues"
When: October 19, 2008
Where: California Lutheran University - Lundgren Events Center
60 West Olson Road
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360

More on Proposition 8


Donate to Yes On Proposition 8 Today!


Three R's of Proposition 8


The Ten Declarations For Protecting Biblical Marriage


Legal Rights of Pastors



Is Your Church Participating in Citizen Sunday?



The Legality of Voter Registration in Churches



Quotes on CHRISTIAN CIVIL DUTY

CHRISTIAN CIVIL DUTY

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation, to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."


-- John Jay, President of the Continental Congress
and first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court


"God commands you to choose for rulers, 'just men who will rule in the fear of God.' . . . if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted."


-- Noah Webster, author of the first American dictionary


"When we [Christians] withhold our influence and participation, we yield by default to those who promote immoral and destructive policies."


-- Dr. James Dobson


"If America is to survive, we must elect more God-centered men and women to public office; individuals who seek Divine guidance in the affairs of state."


-- Rev. Billy Graham


THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM

"The rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God."


-- President John F. Kennedy, 1961 Inaugural Address


"We believe that all men are created equal, because they are created in the image of God."


-- President Harry S Truman, 1948 Inaugural Address


"The founding fathers had to refer to the Creator in order to make their revolutionary experiment make sense; it was because "all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" that men could dare to be free."


-- President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in an article
for the Episcopal Churchnews Magazine



RELIGION AND MORALITY

"How could a society fail to perish if, while the political bond is relaxed [for freedom], the moral bond were not tightened? And what makes a people master of itself if it has not submitted to God?"


-- Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America


"And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government."


-- President George Washington, 1796 Farewell Address


"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."


-- President John Adams, 1798 letter
to a Massachusetts militia division


"The principal of equality . . . follows inevitably from belief in the brotherhood of man through the fatherhood of God."


-- President Calvin Coolidge, 1924
address to the Holy Name Society


"The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we can emphasize that enough these days.

"If we don't have a proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the State."



-- President Harry S Truman, 1950 address
to the Attorney General's Conference





*Note: many of these quotes are taken from William J. Federer's Three Secular Reasons Why America Should Be Under God


HT: Yes On Proposition 8.com

Friday, September 26, 2008

Don't Believe the Gay Hype

My "Official Voter Information Guide" arrived in the mail the other day. Today, I took some time to read what is stated about Proposition 8.

On the "title and summary" page, we read the biased selection of terminology which was prepared by the attorney general - who is obviously in the tank with gay activists.

It reads:

Eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry. Initiative constitutional amendment.

* Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.
* Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.


Now if a person who is in favor of marriage remaining the union of one man and one woman - as it has been defined for thousands of years, btw - had been in charge of the wording, you can be sure that it would have read "RESTORES MARRIAGE." That is what the YES ON PROPOSITION 8 advocates are doing. (More about this in the argument for YES ON PROPOSITION 8 - below.)

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

In March 2000, California voters passed Proposition 22 to specify in state law that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. In May 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that the statute enacted by Proposition 22 and other statutes that limit marriage to a relationship between a man and a woman violated the equal protection clause of the California Constitution. It also held that individuals of the same sex have the right to marry under the California Constitution. As a result of the ruling, marriage between individuals of the same sex is currently valid or recognized in the state.

PROPOSAL

This measure amends the California Constitution to specify that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. As a result, notwithstanding the California Supreme Court ruling of May 2008, marriage would be limited to individuals of the opposite sex, and individuals of the same sex would not have the right to marry in California.

FISCAL EFFECTS

Because marriage between individuals of the same sex is currently valid in California, there would likely be an increase in spending on weddings by same-sex couples in California over the next few years. This would result in increased revenue, primarily sales tax revenue, to state and local governments.

By specifying that marriage between individuals of the same sex is not valid or recognized, this measure could result in revenue loss, mainly from sales taxes, to state and local governments. Over the next few years, this loss could potentially total in the several tens of millions of dollars. Over the long run, this measure would likely have little fiscal impact on state and local governments.

The text of Proposition 8 states the following:

SECTION 1. Title

This measure shall be known and may be cited as the "California Marriage Protection Act."

SECTION 2. Section 7.5 is added to Article I of the California Constitution, to read:

SEC. 7.5 Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.


Ah! Now we see the TRUTH OF THE MATTER! PROPOSITION 8 IS A MEASURE THAT IS MEANT TO PROTECT MARRIAGE AS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN DEFINED - THE UNION BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN! So, the question needs to be asked - why wasn't this title used in the text of the Proposition 8 title page?

Answer: BIAS!!

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 8

Proposition 8 is simple and straightforward. It contains the same 14 words that were previously approved in 2000 by over 61% of California voters: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

Because four activist judges in San Francisco wrongly overturned the people's vote, we need to pass this measure as a constitutional amendment to RESTORE THE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE as a man and a woman.

Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it's not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn't take away any rights or benefits for gay or lesbian domestic partnerships. Under California law, "domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits" as married spouses. (Family Code 297.5.) There are NO exceptions. Proposition 8 WILL NOT change this.

YES on Proposition 8 does three simple things:

It restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and human history has understood marriage to be.

It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people.

It protects our children from being taught in public schools that "same-sex marriage" is the same as traditional marriage.

Proposition 8 protects marriage as an essential institution of society. While death, divorce, or other circumstances may prevent the ideal, the best situation for a child is to be raised by a married mother and father.

The narrow decision of the California Supreme Court isn't just about "live and let live." State law may require teachers to instruct children as young as kindergartners about marriage. (Education Code 51890.) If the gay marriage ruling is not overturned, TEACHERS COULD BE REQUIRED to teach young children there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.

We should not accept a court decision that may result in public schools teaching our kids that gay marriage is okay. That is an issue for parents to discuss with their children according to their own values and beliefs. It shouldn't be forced on us against our will.

Some will try to tell you that Proposition 8 takes away legal rights of gay domestic partnerships. That is false. Proposition 8 DOES NOT take away any of those rights and does not interfere with gays living the lifestyle they choose.

However, while gays have the right to their private lives, they do not have the right to redefine marriage for everyone else.

CALIFORNIANS HAVE NEVER VOTED FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. If gay activists want to legalize gay marriage they should put it on the ballot. Instead, they have gone behind the backs of voters and convinced four activist judges in San Francisco to redefine marriage for the rest of society. That is the wrong approach.

Voting YES on Proposition 8 RESTORES the definition of marriage that was approved by over 61% of voters. Voting YES overturns the decision of four activist judges. Voting YES protects our children.

Please vote YES on Proposition 8 to RESTORE the meaning of marriage.

RON PRENTICE, President
California Family Council
ROSEMARIE "ROSIE" AVILA, Governing Board Member
Santa Ana Unified School District
BISHOP GEORGE McKINNEY, Director
Coalition of African American Pastors

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

It's Not Political, It's A Spiritual Battle

California Religious Leaders Call for Fasting, Prayer to End Gay Marriage.

Excerpt:

Hundreds of pastors have called on their congregations to fast and pray for passage of a ballot measure in November that would put an end to gay marriage in California.

The collective act of piety, starting Wednesday and culminating three days before the election in a revival for as many as 100,000 people at the San Diego Chargers' stadium, comes as church leaders across California put people, money and powerful words behind Proposition 8.

Some pastors around the state and nation are encouraging their flocks to forgo solid food for up to 40 days in the biblical tradition.

Jim Garlow, the pastor of the evangelical Skyline Church in San Diego County, said he expects up to 100 young adults to spend five-plus weeks on his campus, subsisting on soup, juice and the promise of societal salvation.

"This is not political to us. We see it as very spiritual," said Garlow, a leader of an interfaith coalition that has held monthly teleconferences, shared sermons and solicited donations for the ballot measure.

Alarmed by a California Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage, churches of many faiths have banded together in support of a measure that would amend the state constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. They have become the single largest force behind the measure, recruiting volunteers, raising money, registering voters, manning phone banks and distributing campaign literature.

Continue reading here.

HT: Fox News Website

*******
Update @ 8:26 p.m. PT

Found a website with detailed commentary and valuable resources. Although it is from a Catholic viewpoint, many points contained in the material also agree with Biblical, Evangelical Christianity.

Why Catholics [Are] Against Same-Sex "marriage."

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Write Letters to Restore CA Marriage

As we get closer to election day on November 4, 2008, it is very important for California Christians to write letters to the editor in support of Proposition 8!

Here are sample letters to consider:


To the Editor:

Marriage is a holy thing which our culture needs to respect more than it does. Same-sex "marriage" is not the way to do this. Same-sex "marriage" is not marriage. It is an imitation of the real thing. Our laws cannot enshrine the imitation without harming the real thing. Once the imitation is in place, you have to teach children that the imitation is real. You have to force ministers and the general public to violate their conscience and compel them to endorse the imitation. It's already happening. Catholic Charities can no longer offer adoption services in Massachusetts because they're forced to include homosexual adoption. So much for religious liberty! The imitation drives out the genuine and is cruel both to those who fall for the fake and to those who resist. I urge my fellow Californians not to fall for the imitation.

To the Editor:

Homosexual marriage is cruel to the innocent children doomed to grow up without one of their parents. Homosexual "marriage" denies that to the little boy who needs his daddy or the little girl who needs her mommy! How can grownups be so cruel to innocent children? Worse, homosexual "marriage" means the adults are doing this deliberately, all for their own selfish reasons. It's not as if death has cheated a child of a parent. Homosexual "marriage" purposely takes one parent away and tries to replace it with two of the same parent! Why would adults do that to a child? How can they be so selfish? I can't bring myself to vote for something like that. That's why I'm voting to support marriage: one-man, one-woman for life. It's the right thing to do.

HT: Concerned Women for America

Sunday, September 21, 2008

Religious Freedoms At Risk

My sister in Christ, Carlotta, has an important and eye-opening blog post which points out exactly why same-sex marriage laws need to be opposed! Gay Unions Don't Affect Religious Freedoms? Think Again!

She writes:

Listed [at Carlotta's blog] are a few examples of what has transpired within this decade to many religious organizations and/or individuals where they were sued, forced or had ceased operations altogether to accommodate or avoid accommodating the newly defined “families.”


Go over there and read them. People, this is just the tip of the "homosexual agenda silencing religious freedoms" iceberg!

From a biblical and Christian standpoint, I add my comments:

You are exactly right, Carlotta. When sexual orientation/behavior/perversion “laws” are written, they inevitably are used to trump freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of association rights. Guess who gets discriminated against?

Your examples plainly show the answer to that question.

The “equality” and “tolerance” mantra is just a not-so-subtle guise that is designed, and determined, to silence Christians and God’s Word. Period.

In the secular humanistic and gay “christian” movement world, it appears that some are more “equal” than others and that “tolerance” is a one way street.

There is something seriously wrong with this picture.

God’s Word has told us what that is.

Jesus, himself, specifically refered to how it would be the closer we get to His return:

The Days of Noah Are Here

As In The Days of Lot

We need to share those links with every Christian. Many are either ignorant or unaware of the dire consequences involved in the same-sex marriage issue.

God bless you, Carlotta, for writing openly about this topic. We need to keep Proposition 8’s YES votes in our prayers and share the TRUTH with as many voters as possible! Thank you for doing your part in the TRUTH war!

In Christ’s service,
Christine

Thursday, September 11, 2008

I Protect Marriage

I Protect Marriage Website.

"It's not just about marriage."

"The way you vote will change your world."

"Who has the right to change marriage?"

"No society has ever lasted with an "anything goes" attitude."

"Which parent doesn't matter? A mom or a dad?"

"If you redefine marriage - what's next?"


"New Moral Code" on the Rise:

(Aug. 25, 2008) -- More adults under 25 are spurning traditional morality, according to longtime pollster George Barna. "We are witnessing the development and acceptance of a new moral code in America," said Barna. More...

Prop. 8's Interfaith Alliances:
(Aug. 24, 2008) -- Prop. 8's growing interfaith partnerships built on a commitment to traditional marriage are catching the eye of political analysts and media, such as the Los Angeles Times. More...

Unfair Ballot Title:
(Aug. 8, 2008) -- Supporters of Prop. 8 will appeal the decision to let stand an unfair description of the Nov. 4 ballot measure imposed by Attorney General Jerry Brown. More...


If You're Catholic:
(Aug. 4, 2008) -- The California Catholic Conference has thrown its support behind Prop. 8, declaring that same-sex unions are not the same as opposite-sex unions. More...

HT: I Protect Marriage - VOTE YES ON 8 !!!

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Slap in the Face Against Traditional Marriage

How ridiculous is it going to get before the nonsense is stopped???

California bans 'brides,' 'grooms'
License rejected for couple seeking traditional marriage


Did you see that? A MARRIAGE LICENSE WAS REJECTED FOR A COUPLE SEEKING TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE!!

Excerpt:

Pastor Doug Bird of Abundant Life Fellowship in Roseville, Calif., was alarmed to find the state now rejects the traditional terms after he officiated his first marriage ceremony last week following the California Supreme Court decision to overturn Proposition 22.

The couple had written the words "bride" and "groom" next to "Party A" and "Party B" because they wanted to be legally recognized as husband and wife.

However, the Placer County marriage license was denied.

"I received back the license and a letter from the Placer County Clerk/Recorder stating that the license 'does not comply with California State registration laws,'" Bird said in a statement from the Pacific Justice Institute.



So...I wonder where the advocates who usually say, "how does my same-sex "marriage" negatively affect yours?"

Well...here ya go!

This is only the beginning.

God save us from this madness!

VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 8 IN CALIFORNIA ON NOVEMBER 4, 2008!!!

HT: World Net Daily

Additional resource:

Alliance Defense Fund and Family Research Council's letter to thousands of pastors informing them of their free speech rights.

Saturday, August 16, 2008

Debate Is About Accepting Bad Behavior

Over at Illinois Family.org, there is an excellent article which gives us the deep down truth of the matter regarding the debate between homosexual activists, conservative Christians, and the marriage definition issue.


The debate is not about respecting people, but about accepting bad behavior.


Here is a copy of the article:

Respecting Homosexuals
7/30/2008 7:00:00 AM
By Thorin Anderson -Illinois Family Institute

Whenever there is conflict between homosexual activists and conservatives regarding the issues such as the acceptance of same sex marriage, we on the right are accused of a lack of respect for homosexuals.

But, I would like to make one thing clear. The debate is not about respecting people, but about accepting bad behavior. There are many human behaviors which we conservatives believe to be unacceptable. They range from lying and cheating to promiscuity before or during marriage. They include murder and rape and a host of other deeds, criminal or otherwise. To say that we don't respect someone when we disagree with their conduct is to suggest that confronting any bad behavior is inherently disrespectful. Are we to stop speaking about all wrong conduct? Should we stop confronting lying, stealing, or murder? Such a suggestion would be ludicrous.

All humans are worthy of respect as humans, period. But it is utter folly to imagine that behaviors people engage in are automatically respectable simply because a certain number of people are involved in them. Sad to say, many things we human beings do are not only unworthy of respect, but are destructive and dangerous. There is a reason why no one writes in any detail, in public, regarding the activities of homosexuals. And there is a reason why homosexuals have significantly shorter than average life expectancies. There is not a newspaper in the country that would detail their private conduct, and most of our stomachs could not handle it. Yet, we are told we MUST accept such conduct as perfectly normal. Get out your Websters and look up "normal." Homosexuality in no way fits the definition of "normal." And, it requires no special genius to understand that!

No doubt many practitioners have found themselves harassed or worse by those who don't respect homosexuals and have taken it upon themselves to mock or injure them. Such actions are wrong. It is legitimate to demand respect as people, but it is absolutely illegitimate to demand respect for conduct that is simply disgusting on its face. And, consider the homosexual's attitude toward such virtues of fidelity and loyalty. No self-respecting woman would tolerate infidelity in her husband, but in the homosexual community, infidelity is not only allowed, it is a given. It is ironic that homosexuals demand such respect from the general community when they quite obviously have little respect for themselves or one another. Such proclivities reveal that, in fact, the homosexual lifestyle really is much less about deep abiding relationships than satisfying inappropriate sexual desires.

Let us be clear about something: Christian conservatives oppose the wanton satisfying of inappropriate sexual desires in anyone whether straight or homosexual. Those of us who disagree with homosexual conduct based upon the principles of the Bible and nature can do nothing to stop homosexuals from practicing their chosen lifestyle. But it is an egregious violation of our freedoms, principles, and character to demand that we accept it as normal.

Thorin Anderson is a member of the Pastor Advisory Council to Illinois Family Institute and the pastor of Parkwood Baptist Church on the south side of Chicago. Pastor Anderson is also the President of Men for Christ, an association that organizes annual weekend men's rallies in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Illinois on a rotating basis.



HT: PFOX email

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Stop Making Biblical Judgments?

[Note: These articles and links have been brought over from my Talk Wisdom blog. They are all VERY informative as to why Christians should (and must!!) support Proposition 8 on the upcoming November ballot here in CA.]

Over at my Protect Biblical Marriage blog [this blog], I had posted a three-part series with links called "In Defense of Marriage." There are several comments to read there. Many of them were arguing in opposition to what was posted.

However, Wayne from Jeremiah Films had a great point in his comment:



I'm not going to debate if marriage is between a man and a woman in the Bible; clearly it is, over and over again.

I will add however that if you go to the ends of the earth where nobody has heard of McDonald's or Cola, or Jesus. They understand the concept of a marriage being between a man and a woman.

Roman 2:15 - They show that what the law requires is written in their hearts, a fact to which their own consciences testify, and their thoughts will either accuse or excuse them.


Wayne is right. The affirmation that marriage is the union between a man and a woman is written in the Bible many times. In fact, it was directly affirmed by Jesus Christ:



Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Mat 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Mar 10:7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.


No other type of union is affirmed as marriage.

It is also "written on our hearts." In our heart of hearts, not matter what the homosexual agenda tries to push on us, WE KNOW that same-sex sexual behavior is a sin and an abomination to God. The fact that certain people refuse to recognize that fact does not change the truth. As Roman 2:15 informs us - their thoughts will either accuse or excuse them!

The gay christian movement is in the business of excusing themselves. They have chosen "to exchange the truth for a lie."

And, what's more, they will do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to attempt to cover their sin and excuse themselves rather than what is truly needed - repentance! Why? Because whether one admits it or not, one's own conscience and God's Word accuses them.


In reply to Wayne's comment I wrote:

Really good points, Wayne. The gay christian movement is all about excusing sinful, same-sex behavior. As was pointed out by Romans 2:15, either one is accused of one's sin - or - one does all that he or she can to excuse one's own sin. That is precisely what is going on in this, as well as many other heretical and worldly elements raging against true Biblical Christianity in our world today.

The "do not judge" mantra being elevated by homosexuals who want to be Christians while willfully continuing in sinful sexual behavior may indicate that they have not truly repented and are still under the judgment of God.

Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;

Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. (KJV)

I think that a post done by Gary DeMar called, A Fool's Wager – Does the Bible Condemn Homosexual Marriage? reiterates what Wayne and I wrote. Romans 2:15, 16 directly address this as well. In fact, all of Romans 2 is very instructive on this issue.

Gay Christians often quote only a portion of this chapter that they think "favors" their "do not judge" mantra. However, a closer look (especially concerning correct judgment) tells us that proper judgment is imperative!

Romans 2

Matthew Henry's commentary goes into great detail about this portion of Scripture. Note this section:



(2.) In dispensing his frowns (v. 8, 9). Observe, [1.] The objects of his frowns. In general those that do evil, more particularly described to be such as are contentious and do not obey the truth. Contentious against God. every wilful sin is a quarrel with God, it is striving with our Maker (Isa. 45:9), the most desperate contention. The Spirit of God strives with sinners (Gen. 6:3), and impenitent sinners strive against the Spirit, rebel against the light (Job 24:13), hold fast deceit, strive to retain that sin which the Spirit strives to part them from. Contentious, and do not obey the truth. The truths of religion are not only to be known, but to be obeyed; they are directing, ruling, commanding; truths relating to practice. Disobedience to the truth is interpreted a striving against it. But obey unrighteousness—do what unrighteousness bids them do. Those that refuse to be the servants of truth will soon be the slaves of unrighteousness. [2.] The products or instances of these frowns: Indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish. These are the wages of sin. Indignation and wrath the causes—tribulation and anguish the necessary and unavoidable effects. And this upon the soul; souls are the vessels of that wrath, the subjects of that tribulation and anguish. Sin qualifies the soul for this wrath. The soul is that in or of man which is alone immediately capable of this indignation, and the impressions or effects of anguish therefrom. Hell is eternal tribulation and anguish, the product of wrath and indignation. This comes of contending with God, of setting briers and thorns before a consuming fire, Isa. 27:4. Those that will not bow to his golden sceptre will certainly be broken by his iron rod. Thus will God render to every man according to his deeds.

2. There is no respect of persons with God, v. 11. As to the spiritual state, there is a respect of persons; but not as to outward relation or condition. Jews and Gentiles stand upon the same level before God. This was Peter’s remark upon the first taking down of the partition-wall (Acts 10:34), that God is no respecter of persons; and it is explained in the next words, that in every nation he that fears God, and works righteousness, is accepted of him. God does not save men with respect to their external privileges or their barren knowledge and profession of the truth, but according as their state and disposition really are. In dispensing both his frowns and favours it is both to Jew and Gentile. If to the Jews first, who had greater privileges, and made a greater profession, yet also to the Gentiles, whose want of such privileges will neither excuse them from the punishment of their ill-doing nor bar them out from the reward of their well-doing (see Col. 3:11); for shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

V. He proves the equity of his proceedings with all, when he shall actually come to Judge them (v. 12–16), upon this principle, that that which is the rule of man’s obedience is the rule of God’s judgment. Three degrees of light are revealed to the children of men:—

1. The light of nature. This the Gentiles have, and by this they shall be judged: As many as have sinned without law shall perish without law; that is, the unbelieving Gentiles, who had no other guide but natural conscience, no other motive but common mercies, and had not the law of Moses nor any supernatural revelation, shall not be reckoned with for the transgression of the law they never had, nor come under the aggravation of the Jews’ sin against and judgment by the written law; but they shall be judged by, as they sin against, the law of nature, not only as it is in their hearts, corrupted, defaced, and imprisoned in unrighteousness, but as in the uncorrupt original the Judge keeps by him. Further to clear this (v. 14, 15), in a parenthesis, he evinces that the light of nature was to the Gentiles instead of a written law. He had said (v. 12) they had sinned without law, which looks like a contradiction; for where there is no law there is no transgression. But, says he, though they had not the written law (Ps. 147:20), they had that which was equivalent, not to the ceremonial, but to the moral law. They had the work of the law. He does not mean that work which the law commands, as if they could produce a perfect obedience; but that work which the law does. The work of the law is to direct us what to do, and to examine us what we have done. Now, (1.) They had that which directed them what to do by the light of nature: by the force and tendency of their natural notions and dictates they apprehended a clear and vast difference between good and evil. They did by nature the things contained in the law. They had a sense of justice and equity, honour and purity, love and charity; the light of nature taught obedience to parents, pity to the miserable, conservation of public peace and order, forbade murder, stealing, lying, perjury, etc. Thus they were a law unto themselves. (2.) They had that which examined them as to what they had done: Their conscience also bearing witness. They had that within them which approved and commended what was well done and which reproached them for what was done amiss. Conscience is a witness, and first or last will bear witness, though for a time it may be bribed or brow-beaten. It is instead of a thousand witnesses, testifying of that which is most secret; and their thoughts accusing or excusing, passing a judgment upon the testimony of conscience by applying the law to the fact. Conscience is that candle of the Lord which was not quite put out, no, not in the Gentile world. The heathen have witnessed to the comfort of a good conscience.


What the gay christian movement is attempting to do by professing that they are Christians - while at the same time NOT repenting of their sin - yet requiring all (including Biblical Evangelical Christians) to have "tolerance," "acceptance," and even going so far as labeling their aberrant sexual behavior as a "blessing" (with or without "marriage") - is actually an example of trying to get God and His people to be "respecters" of them and their sinful fleshly desires.



Act 10:34 ¶ Then Peter opened [his] mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:


Act 10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.


Of course, what I have just shared is definitely not politically correct in today's world of moral relativism. The point is, many of the most prominent and widely honored and accepted Biblical scholars (like Henry) are not being consulted by groups such as "Soulforce." No. They prefer the "new would-be scholars" of today who condone their sin for political, social, intellectual, and even spiritual expediency. That is the truth - my friends.

If you haven't already read Gary DeMar's article, here is a copy:



A Fool's Wager – Does the Bible Condemn Homosexual Marriage?
By Gary DeMar

State representative Alvin Holmes (D–Montgomery, Ala.) is putting his money where his worldview is. He is offering $5000 to anyone who can prove the Bible actually condemns homosexual marriage. Of course, it’s quite easy to prove the Bible does not support homosexual marriage, so why would a man make such a preposterous wager? No matter what evidence you put before him, he will explain it away, because he wants to support homosexual marriage. We’ve seen this same type of “reasoning” on the abortion issue. No matter how you go about showing that abortion kills a preborn child, there are those who still support abortion. There are some who even recognize that abortion kills a proborn baby, and they still support baby killing for “high social reasons.” The same is true on the homosexual issue. If homosexuality is explained away when it is self-evident in the Bible, then so much else can be explained away, including adultery and other sexual sins. The Bible becomes no more authoritative than Aesop’s Fables.

The nature of unbelieving thought is to interpret evidences in terms of a pre-constructed worldview. The resurrection of Jesus is denied because skeptics begin with the premise that resurrections can’t happen. When evidence is shown to the contrary, the evidence is explained away. The rich man appealed to Abraham to send Lazarus to his brothers to warn them of the consequences of their lifestyle choices. They would certainly listen to a man risen from the dead. Abraham’s response is not what the rich man wanted to hear: “They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them. . . . If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead” (Luke 16:19-31). The Bible is plain enough on these issues. Rep. Holmes doesn’t want to listen.

The creation account sets the standard for proper sexual relationships, including marriage. Adam was incomplete until God created someone “suitable” (KJV: “meet” not “mate”) for him. God did not create a man and a woman, thereby giving Adam a choice. God created a woman, setting a standard. Even if the Bible never condemned homosexual behavior, the creation account alone would be enough to establish what God wants in marital and sexual relationships. Even the physical makeup of men and women is a rational defense of heterosexual relationships. The command to be “fruitful and multiply” can only apply to heterosexual relationships. The NT supports the one man, one woman standard: “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; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh” (Mark 10:6–8). The Bible couldn’t be any more clear. In any normal world, Rep. Holmes would be $5000 poorer.

Then there are the direct prohibitions of homosexual behavior found in the OT and NT. If homosexual behavior is prohibited, then it follows that a marriage that is built on homosexual marriage has to be wrong as well. The story of Sodom should be enough to convince anyone that homosexuality is prohibited by the Bible (Gen. 18-19). But if this detailed and irrefutable story isn’t enough, there are the stated prohibitions in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.

Leviticus 18:22 “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”

Leviticus 20:13 “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act.”

Pro-homosexual advocates argue that these laws are found among “purity laws,” therefore, they no longer apply. The same purity laws found in Leviticus that prohibit homosexuality also prohibit rape, theft, putting obstacles in front of blind people, sex with animals, and murder. Why haven’t these laws been abrogated under the new covenant?

Paul describes homosexual behavior as “degrading,” “unnatural,” and “indecent” (Rom. 1:26–27). If homosexual behavior is described using these terms, it’s hard to see how marriage makes the behavior Paul condemns legitimate. If two murderers marry, does this mean that now they are married, murder somehow becomes legitimate? Rep. Holmes is living in a world of his own making. The Bible condemns him because he “gives hearty approval to those who practice” homosexuality (Rom. 1:32). The leadership of Hutchinson Missionary Baptist Church should discipline him for his rejection of God’s Word, and the people of Montgomery, Alabama, should vote him out of office.


HT: The American Vision

Center for Christ and Culture

*******
Add-On:

Wanting the kind of respect that many today are looking for from God is sort of like the pot telling the potter how it should be made.

Isa 64:8 But now, O LORD, thou [art] our father; we [are] the clay, and thou our potter; and we all [are] the work of thy hand.

Jeremiah's verse shows us that sometimes the "pot" needs refashioning.

Jer 18:4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make [it].

I have heard the skeptics argue, "since the pot was marred in the hand of the potter, it's his fault."

But notice. The pot was not marred at the hand of the potter, it states that it was marred in; the symbolism meaning that the pot (nation of Israel) was marred because of the freewill choice they made to sin and disobey God's Word. But despite that, they were still in God's hands of protection to fulfill the promises, if, and when, they would turn back to Him.

The same could be said of each individual who turns to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Discipline has a role in the love and justice of God. In the following verses, we get a glimpse of the purpose of discipline and why it is often necessary.

Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?


Rom 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:


Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,


Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

Elsewhere, we read that God is not a respecter of persons.

Rom 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

Proverbs tells us why.

Pro 24:23 These [things] also [belong] to the wise. [It is] not good to have respect of persons in judgment.

Pro 28:21 To have respect of persons [is] not good: for for a piece of bread [that] man will transgress.

Justice requires that those who do wrong receive "for the wrong which they had done."

Col 3:25 But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.

1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning [here] in fear:

It is important to remember the purpose for discipline:

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Once born again, believers cannot be snatched out of his hands!

THIS is why genuine, Spirit-led born-again believers in Jesus Christ try to evangelize not only the lost - but also those who may think they are Christians - but are more accurately known to be CINOs (Christian in name only). Though it may appear to be a put-down, ITS NOT! It is SERIOUS CONCERN for those who may still be under condemnation - but don't realize it (or want to face that fact.)

Our thoughts are not His (God's) thoughts. This is because we are separated spiritually from Him because of the Fall. It is only when we are each individually born again in Christ that our thoughts begin to match up, so to speak, with His.

Prior to this, much of God's Word can seem very foreign in the eyes of the non-believer. Without the guidance of the Holy Spirit, who reveals the truth of the Scriptures to us, it's almost like we are reading another language without the training for full understanding of what we are reading.

I have found that many agnostics, atheists, and skeptics often claim to have "read the whole Bible."

But what have they gleaned from the Word?

Instead of comprehending the love of God from the poetic sections, and the salvation promises of the gospel through Jesus Christ, they point out perceived "errors" ad nauseum that don't affect the truth of the gospel at all.

Most of the so-called "errors" are easily solved with continued research and study.

There are Bible difficulties, but no errors. The error is often in our own fallible judgments and/or understandings of what we are reading. This is why the Holy Spirit's leading is crucial! It is also why we need God's Word as the ultimate source for absolute truth. Scripture interprets Scripture. Sola Scriptura takes away any denominational traditions that could skew what the Bible is telling us.

We have archeological finds that support what the Bible has revealed; even hundreds of years later when skeptics would scoff at such things until the real proof of certain peoples or places that existed back then emerges from excavations in the Holy Land.

I do realize that people with different worldviews may come to read at this blog. Many will not ever agree with what I write. Perhaps my sharing of God's Word may not convince others of Biblical Christian beliefs, but it's good to share them anyway. Who knows where it may lead and who might be affected by our conversations here at Talk Wisdom for all eternity?!

*******
Second Add-On:

I finally got around to adding Bill Muehlenberg's blog Culture Watch to my Christian blogroll. [Thanks to Duane for recommending Bill's writings.]

While reading there, I found this excellent article - It's Time to Start Judging.

I think it adds a lot to the current culture dilemma that we find ourselves in today. Here's a segment:

One thing both Christian and non-Christian critics have in common is to cite the most abused passage in all of Scripture: “Do not judge, lest you also be judged” (Matthew 7:1). Turek picks up on this passage, after relating a story about a self-proclaimed “Christian lesbian” who chewed him out for being judgmental.

Says Turek:“As with most slogans shouted by the left, the truth is exactly opposite to what they claim. Liberals take the judgment statements of Jesus out of context because they want to avoid any moral condemnation for their own actions, and they don’t want you to notice that they are making judgments too.”

He reminds us to read this passage in context.

So here it is, Matthew 7:1-5: “Do not judge lest you be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”

Says Turek, “Notice Jesus isn’t telling us not to judge - Jesus is telling us how to judge. He actually commands us to take the speck out of our brother’s eye - that involves making a judgment. But he also commands us to stop committing the bigger sins ourselves so we can better help our brother. In other words, when you judge, do so rightly not hypocritically.”

He continues, “Jesus expressed this same idea when he said ‘stop judging by mere appearances and make a right judgment’ (John 7:24).

Jesus would never tell us to stop judging - that would be suicide! Just think about how impossible life would be if you didn’t make judgments. You make hundreds, if not thousands, of judgments every day between good and evil, right and wrong, dangerous choices from safe ones. You’d be dead already if you didn’t make judgments.”

“What does this have to do with politic? Every law is a judgment about what’s best for society. Homosexual activists are making a judgment that same-sex marriage would be the best law for society. It’s a wrong judgment as I’ve argued in this column before, but it’s a judgment nonetheless. So in addition to being self-defeating, the belief that we ‘ought not judge’ is completely impractical and even dangerous.
Making judgments is unavoidable both personally and politically. If you want to meet a sudden and premature demise, just stop making judgments.”

He concludes, “Unfortunately, liberals are propelling our society toward a premature demise by making the disastrous judgment that we ought not make judgments about their behavior. They, of course, can judge our behavior as immoral when we oppose same-sex marriage or the killing of the unborn. But we are not to judge their behavior. This is exactly the kind of hypocrisy that Jesus warned against. The passage they quote actually convicts them! For folks so concerned about the ‘separation of church and state,’ it’s amazing how fast liberals quote the Bible when they think it helps their case. Don’t let them get away with that. If they believe the Bible when they think it condemns judging (which it doesn’t), then ask them why they don’t believe the Bible when it certainly condemns homosexuality. If they want to use the Bible as their standard, then they will be judged by that same standard.”

Quite so. I began this piece by quoting from the English church leader who “married” the homosexual couple. He said he believed he was doing what was right. He could only say such foolishness because he has stopped judging. He has stopped making moral evaluations. Indeed, he has totally capitulated to the spirit of the age. The Bible tells us to “test all things” Obviously this rector has stopped testing things a long time ago.

Instead of judging everything by the word of God, he has simply stopped making biblical judgments. Interestingly, Peter tells us that “judgment must first begin with the household of God”.

We need to start judging whether some of our church leaders have lost the plot, and need to find a new day job.Those church leaders who abandon biblical discernment in the name of tolerance and acceptance are helping no one. Indeed, all they are doing is relegating themselves and others to the moral cesspit that is contemporary culture. I judge that this is not a very good thing.

Link:Why You OUGHT to Judge