Protect Biblical Marriage

Good News For Biblical Marriage!

2011-11-18T07:05:00.000-08:00

Even the very liberal CA Supreme Court could not deny the defenders of Proposition 8 (where the rights of voters who voted to keep the definition of marriage as "The Union of One Man and One Woman") standing in the CA Proposition 8 lawsuit! Here is a blog post and several emailed articles about this development:

California Sup. Ct.: Prop 8 defenders have standing to defend marriage law

posted by William A. Jacobson at Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion - 19 hours ago

The California Supreme Court has just resolved a major procedural issue as to Prop. 8, which codified the “one man, one woman” definition of marriage into the California Constitution after the California S...

Here is a portion of an email I received from Brian Brown of Nation For Marriage:

Thursday, November 17th, 2011

Dear Chris,

In a huge victory for NOM and supporters of Proposition 8, the California Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that the proponents of the initiative have the legal right to defend the initiative in court.

This is a major victory for the Prop 8 Legal Defense Fund and the lead Prop 8 attorney, Chuck Cooper.

Had the Supreme Court not agreed with the backers of Prop 8 that the Proponents have the legal standing to defend the initiative, it is very likely that the ruling of a rogue judge that overturned Prop 8 would have gone unchallenged. This is because Governor Jerry Brown, his predecessor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Kamala Harris have shamefully refused to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to defend the marriage initiative in court, despite it being passed with the support of over 7 million California voters.

In an email from Karen England of Capitol Resource Institute, she writes:

Earlier today the California State Supreme Court ruled that Protect Marriage, the official sponsors of Proposition 8, have legal standing to appeal Judge Walker's decision to overturn California's marriage amendment.

In their ruling the state's highest court concluded that:

"...because the official proponents of an initiative are the most obvious and logical persons to assert the state's interest in the initiative's validity on behalf of the voters who enacted the measure, we conclude that California law authorizes the official proponents, under such circumstances, to appear in the proceeding to assert the state's interest in the initiative's validity and to appeal a judgment invalidating the measure."

"The State Supreme Court ruled to uphold the integrity and validity of our initiative process," stated Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute. "Elected officials do not have the constitutional right to essentially let a people-enacted law, or in this case constitutional amendment, be deemed null simply because it was not given a fair treatment in the courts."

In an article defending Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), John Eastman wrote, "we should all be able to agree that a collusive suit, involving questionable conduct by the Attorney General of a state, is not the appropriate way to resolve monumentally important policy or even constitutional questions." Dr. Eastman was right in his assessment and our state's highest court agrees.

The ruling answers the question posed to the CA Supreme Court by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals can take the legal opinion of the state court and allow the official proponents of Prop. 8 to defend the law in federal court.

The ruling, although important and a victory, does not settle the constitutionality of California's marriage amendment; it simply states that proponents have legal standing.

The following is a portion of an email from Andy Pugno, who is the General Counsel of the Protect Marriage initiative:

Dear Friend,

Today the California Supreme Court ruled UNANIMOUSLY to uphold our right, as the official proponents of Proposition 8, to defend the vote of over seven million Californians to restore traditional marriage in 2008! This victory is an ENORMOUS boost for traditional marriage, as well as the integrity of the initiative process itself!

The Court held:

“[W]e conclude that when public officials decline to defend a voter-approved initiative or assert the state’s interest in the initiative’s validity, under California law the official proponents of an initiative measure are authorized to assert the state’s interest in the validity of the initiative and to appeal a judgment invalidating the measure.”

The Court also exposed the obvious flaw in our opponents’ arguments, observing that denying us legal standing to defend Prop 8 would give politicians an illegal “veto” over the people’s initiative power:

“Neither the Governor, the Attorney General, nor any other executive or legislative official has the authority to veto or invalidate an initiative measure that has been approved by the voters. It would exalt form over substance to interpret California law in a manner that would permit these public officials to indirectly achieve such a result by denying the official initiative proponents the authority to step in to assert the state’s interest in the validity of the measure or to appeal a lower court judgment invalidating the measure...”

Meanwhile, this ruling is a HUGE disaster for the homosexual marriage extremists. The Supreme Court completely rejected our opponents’ demands that their lawsuit against Proposition 8 should proceed without any legal defense, and thus win by default! This is devastating for them because their entire legal strategy relied on finding a biased judge to rule in their favor, and then winning on appeal by keeping the voters completely unrepresented. Today that all crumbled before their eyes.

Today’s decision is a critical milestone in our three-year battle to uphold marriage between a man and a woman in California after the passage of Proposition 8. Now we can return our focus to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and our appeal to reverse the lower court’s decision declaring Proposition 8 and traditional marriage itself “unconstitutional.”

Of course, this fight is not finished. But as Mr. Pugno states in his email, this ruling is a HUGE victory for traditional marriage!

I thank God for all of the individuals who have spent so much treasure and in some cases, endured ridicule, physical assaults, death threats, and rabidly hateful rhetoric while stepping out and defending the Proposition 8 decision by the voters of California!

*******

I think that this commentator over at Legal Insurrection has a good point:

retire05 | November 17, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Perhaps all this is based on the belief of Antonio Gramsci, a committed Marxist, who believed that in order to create a society that was loyal to the state, the family unit, based heavily on religious doctrine, must be destroyed, or at least have its importance reduced. A person loyal to family and faith, would not be loyal to the Marxist state.

Gramsci also wrote that in order to indoctrinate someone to the Marxist view, it was important to complete that indoctrination by the age of 12, otherwise children would start to form their own opinions and be reluctant to accept Marxist doctrine.

So we see traditional marriage being challenged, and courts ruling that schools, not parents, have control over children and what they are taught.

When Jesus Would Be So Profaned - I Never Thought I'd See The Day [Transcript]

2011-10-06T09:11:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow, October 4, 2011 is the date for release of Dr. David Jeremiah's new book, I Never Thought I'd See The Day - Culture at the Crossroads. I already pre-ordered my book so I hope it arrives tomorrow! Meanwhile, I have thoroughly enjoyed the first three broadcasts on Turning Point T.V., and highly recommend this series.

The three broadcasts are available for viewing at David Jeremiah.org or they can also be seen at LightSource.com. At the beginning of the video, you will see short presentation of The Account - which is Dr. Jeremiah's way to explain the campaign for moral change that started back in the 1960's - through a public relations campaign for a particular "client."

Excerpt:

Not long ago in America, Jesus Christ was honored and respected as the One worshipped by the majority of citizens. But today Jesus and His name are profaned throughout our culture, especially in entertainment. Once Jesus is known for who He is, profanity will turn to praise.

Yesterday's broadcast entitled When Jesus Would Be So Profaned brought back to my memory the post I shared back on September 19th - The Paganism of the LBGQT Agenda Within the post, I had a cut and paste link to a blog that exposed one of the most vile demonstrations of profanity against Jesus Christ that I have ever seen.

During Dr. Jeremiah's sermon, he stated, quite emphatically, that the example he shared (Stephen Colbert's show which included both mockery of Christ and the act of receiving communion) was without doubt one example of utter blasphemy against Jesus Christ that saddened and angered all of us . But Dr. Jeremiah confessed that he was unable to show the utterly disgusting examples he found via the Internet. Perhaps he also saw what I did at that homosexual event in San Francisco.

This sermon was so awesome that I am compelled to work on transcribing it here. That way, when anyone does a search for Dr. Jeremiah's book and ends up visiting here, they can not only click over to view the video presentation, but also read the powerful biblical message that Dr. Jeremiah presents about our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ!

It is for this very reason that my blog, Talk Wisdom exists:

Talk Wisdom's goal is to defend the tenets and values of Biblical Christian faith. We defend our Constitutional Republic and Charters of Freedom, especially when speaking out against destructive social and political issues. As followers of our Savior and Lord, we should boldly stand up for Jesus Christ in our present circumstances. He is our Savior, Lord, and King, and His love needs to be shed abroad in our hearts and in our world - now.

We must continually pray for the lost. We must pray that their mocking would turn to worship once they know about the REAL Jesus!

Again, don't miss this opportunity to learn about THE REAL JESUS!

Transcript will be forthcoming as time permits. The following outline will assist you in searching for the Scriptures mentioned during the video sermon presentation.

I NEVER THOUGHT I’D SEE THE DAY
Dr. David Jeremiah
“When Jesus Would Be So Profaned”
Hebrews 1:1-3
October 2, 2011
Hebrews 8:1
I. Jesus: The Final Word From God
Hebrews 1:1-2
John 1:1
II. Jesus: The First Cause of Creation
Genesis 1:1
Hebrews 1:2
John 1:1-3
Colossians 1:16
III. Jesus: The Fullness of the Godhead
Hebrews 1:3
Colossians 1:19
John 1:18
1 Timothy 3:16
John 14:9
Hebrews 1:8
IV. Jesus: The Facilitator of All Things
Hebrews 1:3
Colossians 1:17
V. Jesus: The Forgiveness of Our Sins
Hebrews 1:3
Hebrews 9:25-26
VI. Jesus: The Finisher of Our Faith
Hebrews 1:3
Hebrews 12:2
VII. Jesus: Our Faithful High Priest
Hebrews 2:17-18
Hebrews 4:15
John 14:6

Hat tips to all links.

*******

Transcript:

Question: How Do You Picture Jesus?

Dr. Jeremiah: The way people view Jesus in America has changed dramatically. Jesus has gone from the revered Son of God, to the subject of ridicule and jokes. I'm David Jeremiah welcoming you to the third part in a series called "I Never Thought I'd See The Day: Culture at the Crossroads." Today's message, "I Never Thought I'd See The Day When Jesus Would Be So Profaned" focuses on how our modern culture views Jesus Christ. In today's world, many people give Jesus Christ less respect than any other religious leader. And unless Christians aren't careful, they will find themselves in a culture where they treat their Savior with shocking disrespect, something I have rarely seen before. But if we present the picture of Jesus Christ presented in the book of Hebrews, we will see Him as He truly is. That biblical picture is coming up on today's edition of Turning Point.

Chorus: I exalt Thee, I exalt Thee, Oh oh Lord. Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, there is just something about that name. Master, Savior, Jesus, like the fragrance after the rain. Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Let all heaven and earth proclaim. Kings and kingdoms will all pass away. But there is something about that name.

Dr. Jeremiah: I have been in ministry four decades and over that time I have seen incredible changes in our world. Some developments have been beneficial, but others have taken our culture away from it's spiritual and moral foundations. In my latest book, I Never Thought I'd See The Day, I discuss some of the ways our moral values have declined and most importantly, how we as Christians can reverse this downward spiral.

Dr. Jeremiah: Stephen Colbert, who is the host of Comedy Central T.V. show The Colbert Report, spoofed a controversial ad designed for television that was about the Doritos brand of corn chips. In 2010, the makers of the Doritos product created a contest to choose a video commercial that would be shown sometime during the 2011 Superbowl. The commercial spoofed by Colbert was one of the entries received by Doritos though it was not chosen and did not air during the Superbowl. Nonetheless, it was picked up by various websites and ultimately spoofed on the Colbert Report. In the commercial, a priest is worried about how to boost attendance in his church. As he is praying for ideas heaven reveals the solution. Replace the bread or communion wafers in the service with Doritos.

[Audience groans]

After the commercial didn't air, Stephen Colbert decided to spoof it on his T.V. show. I will read this to you with the caveat up front that it almost made me cry and I'm sure it will have the same effect on some of you.

Colbert begins, "Now folks, I may be a devout Catholic."

And the audience cheers and laughs. He pulls out a bag of Doritos nacho chips from beneath his desk.

"I know that Eucharist is usually bread, but through transubstantiation, it becomes the body of Christ. So I honestly can't understand why Jesus can't be a Dorito. Doritos are unleavened and after all, He did "snackrafice" Himself for us and our sins. And remember at the Last Supper according to Mark 14:20, Jesus said he would be betrayed by one of the twelve - the one who dips with me in the bowl."

Once again, there is audience laughter and an image of the Bible and the text of Mark 14:20 appears on the screen.

"They had dip," said Colbert, "therefore Jesus was a chip. Everybody knows the Catholic Church could use a little extra scratch right now. What better way than product placement. Next Wednesday, we can all get our foreheads marked with Dorito dust. For the right price, there is no reason why people can't be baptized in Mountain Dew. That would be the most extreme baptism ever. Once and for all, it would show Islam which religion is more radical."

Dr. Jeremiah: Unless you saw Colbert's commercial spoof on his show or on another website, you probably didn't hear much about equating Jesus with a corn chip, or about the saying, "he snackrificed Himself for our sins." Indeed, incorporating Jesus Christ into profane situations here in America is so common that it hardly gains any attention anymore. Never before has the biblical portrayal of Christ been so foreign to our culture.

In fashion, He appears on Urban Outfitters as "Jesus is my homeboy" tee shirts. On television he often appears in the animated shows of The Simpsons and South Park. On the big screen he has been the subject of The DaVinci Code. In a 2010 interview, Elton John provocatively stated that Jesus "was a compassionate, super intelligent gay man that understood human problems." Renowned atheist Richard Dawkins claimed that "reborn Jesus would gladly wear an atheist for Jesus tee shirt today and "we owe Jesus the honor of separating the genuinely original and radical ethics that he held from the supernatural nonsense which he espoused as a man of his time."

In their book, "Dethroning Jesus," - opposing biblical scholars popular views of Christ - scholars Daryl Bouk and Daniel Wallace claim that the popular view of Jesus today is not of biblical Christianity, it is "Jesusanity." Jesusanity is a coined term for the alternative story about Jesus Christ. At the center of the story is still Jesus, but Jesus as a prophet or teacher of religious wisdom. His role is one of teacher, guide, or example. Jesus' special insight is into the human condition, and the enlightenment he brings to it. In this story, the key is that Jesus inspires others but there is no throne for Jesus. He is one among many; the best perhaps, and certainly one we can learn from and follow. I never thought I'd see the day in America where Jesus Christ was fair game for comedians and commercial entrepreneurs. Especially those who profess to believe in Him, like the self-professed Catholic Stephen Colbert. My point is not to pick him out and criticize him above the others because he is actually one of the more tell-able stories in this report. Some of the material that I gained in my research I would never tell or speak of because it is so profane and vile.

The point is how easy it is for us Christians to get squeezed into the mold if we are not constantly filtering what we find entertaining and at whose expense.

Someone did some homework on the Colbert Report and said in the months just before the episode where I cited there were 1.2 million viewers of that program. And, according to an ABC Beliefnet poll, 83% of Americans say they are Christians I know that's an inflated number and I know that's not true but that is what they claim. So that means that 83% of the 1.2 million viewers of the Colbert program that night saw what I told you about. Using these unscientific numbers let me ask you why nobody ever said anything about it and you never heard about it, and it never got in the news? It went nowhere. If that's true then somewhere around 800,000 Christian people heard Colbert do that. We are so tolerant these days and so afraid of criticism we let it go by and we never raised our voice.

The Jesus that we need to know will not be found in the secular media. John Piper said that the degree to which the church is trained to distrust the Jesus of the gospels and to look for ever new human creations of Christ, the real Jesus will be blurred and his power to break free from the unbiblical traditions that bind him will be blunted.

Some of you know what "muzak" is. It is elevator music. It is the music that plays in elevators that you don't even know about until you stop and think - oh, there is music playing. When you are in an elevator alone, there is some music playing. It is background music. It plays in elevators and malls, and in department stores. It sort of just gets into your consciousness without an invitation. Elevator music is always there so we don't pay to much attention to it. But our subconscious mind takes it in.

Cultural messages like the one I just told you that tends to be tolerated is like background music. Little by little it tends to slip into the consciousness of Christian Americans. It is like cultural noise, whether its in our lives from a late night comedian or whether it's from a pastor of a mega church, or it's in the news from the media, or from a new leader of a mainline denomination. Messages about Jesus are always screaming into our heads. And if we are not careful, those messages like a silently stored song, subconsciously change the way we think about the Jesus who is our Savior.

In the midst of this sordid view of Jesus Christ in our culture we have the Bible. And in the Bible, we have the New Testament. And in the New Testament we have the book of Hebrews. And I don't know if you know this, but there is more about Jesus in the book of Hebrews than in any New Testament book except the four gospels. If you want to know about Jesus, obviously, read the four gospels. If you want to know even more about Jesus, read the book of Hebrews. For the book of Hebrews is all about Jesus Christ.

Hebrews was written to a group of first century Christians, most of whom had been saved out of Judaism. Many of them had been exposed to the danger of giving up. They were under great pressure, having been ridiculed and persecuted by their families for having turned from Judaism to Jesus Christ. Many had accepted this adversity joyfully but others were ready to quit. So the letter of Hebrews appeals to these believers to keep their faith anchored in truth and confident in Christ. And the writer of Hebrews, whose identity we do not know, teaches us that no believer can cope with adversity unless Christ fills his horizons and sharpens his priorities and dominates his experiences.

And more importantly from a theological perspective, Hebrews is the only book that begins with the word God. Did you know that? It's the only one. Now, in the Greek it's not like that. For some reason, God caused the book to be translated into English so that the first word in the book of Hebrews is God. Most other books begin with the name of the human writer, Paul, Peter, or John. But, we do not know who the writer of Hebrews was so it begins with God. We have to allow Him to be the writer, right? God is the writer of Hebrews, as He is of all the other books. And the theme of Hebrews, as I have mentioned, is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the one that these young Hebrew Christians need to know. He's the one they needed to wrap their lives around. Only Jesus Christ, in a full orbed [Note: means "emblem of sovereignty" in this context] understanding of who He was could get them through the difficulties they were facing. And, my friends, I think that is true of our world today. I believe as Christians we get our thoughts and our minds on a lot of things and we turn away from Christ, and we wonder why we are having such a difficult time.

Jesus Christ is the one who has promised to be closer to us than a brother and keep us in the midst of every situation. And just as the Hebrew Christians needed Christ we today need Christ in our lives - not as just our Savior, but as the constant friend and companion in our lives. Not every book is so up front about what it's about, but if you turn to the eighth chapter of the book of Hebrews you will discover what this book is about.

This is what it says in Hebrews 8:1 (NKJV) Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.

That is what the book of Hebrews is about. It's about Jesus! In the book of Hebrews, we learn that Jesus is better. He's better than everything. He's better than the angels. He's better than Moses. He's better than Joshua. He's better than the old covenant. He's better than the priests. In fact, the word betteris in Hebrews thirteen times! Jesus is better!

I remember reading a book some years ago by Max Lucado, and he was talking about Hebrews. He said, "the best just got better has become the favorite slogan. It's not because the previous product was poor, it's just that the current one is superior."

The book of Hebrews might well use the same slogan. The best just got better. Here in the first few pages of the book of Hebrews is the REAL Jesus. And I think that instead of spending our whole time railing on the world's comprehension of who Jesus is, we do well to focus our attention on what the Bible says about him. You know, there is an old adage that when you are trying to figure out whether a bill is counterfeit - don't study the counterfeit bill - study the real bill. When you know what that looks like, you will spot a counterfeit bill wherever you go! It's easy.

So we need to get back to knowing who Jesus is, according to the Scripture. Now in the first three chapters of Hebrews we learn several; things about him and I'm just going to take you through this because I'm so excited about preaching Hebrews because I get to teach about Jesus straight on. You know I preach about Jesus all the time but he is kind of like in the places between other things. But when you teach Hebrews, Jesus is the focus of every lesson. First of all, Jesus is the final word from God.

In Hebrews 1:1-2a:

Hbr 1:1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,

Hbr 1:2 has in these last days spoken to us by [His] Son...

Now watch carefully what that says. That says that in the Old Testament, God spoke in various ways and in various times. He spoke to Adam a little bit, He spoke to Moses a little bit, He spoke to Abraham a little bit. He spoke to David and to Solomon here and there. He spoke in various seasons; from Moses in the Pentateuch all the way through the prophets ending with the book of Malachi. But listen, He never spoke it all to any one person or at any one time. So, it what "here a little" and "there a little" and we are blessed because we have the collection of what He said to all of them. But, there was never a time in the Old Testament where there was a full orbed, final word from God! But when you come to the New Testament we are told, "but in these last days he [God] has spoken unto us by His Son..." (Hebrews 1:2 NIV). We know that one of the titles of Jesus is He is the Word. In the beginning was the Word. Jesus is God's last word to man. When Jesus came into his place on this earth, he was simply God walking around in a body. When God wanted to communicate who He was to us, He took Deity and poured it into humanity. This is who I Am and Jesus walked upon this earth!

[audience applauds]

So Jesus is God's final word to man. If you are looking for another word from God besides Jesus, you are going to wait a long time. He has spoken finally, and Jesus is the message. Jesus us God's final word to man. When He spoke in Christ, He said everything that He meant to say. If you want to know who God is, study Jesus! If you want to know what God is like, God is a Spirit. If we try to understand a Spirit, we cannot, so God incarnated Himself in a human body so that now we can know how God is through watching Jesus. Jesus is God in the flesh. Jesus is the final word from God. But if you keep reading in the book of Hebrews you find that Jesus is the First Cause of Creation.

A lot of people read Genesis 1:1 that "God created the heavens and the earth..." and we all believe that but when you get to the New Testament we discover that the part of the Trinity that was involved in the Creation process was Jesus Christ! Did you know that Jesus Christ is the Creator God. You say Jeremiah, where did you find that? Well, I'm glad you asked. Hebrews 1:2 states that, "through whom (Jesus) He also made the worlds." If you didn't get that listen to John 1:1 -

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jhn 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.

Jhn 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

Dr. Jeremiah: Now that's about as clear as you can get and I want to say to people who don't believe that Jesus is the Creator God, what part of that don't you get?

Col 1:16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.

Dr. Jeremiah: So we are building a little picture of Jesus. He is the last word from God and He is the first cause of Creation. Then the Bible tells us that Jesus is the fullness of the Godhead.

Hbr 1:3 Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Colossians 1:19 For it pleased [the Father that] in Him all the fullness should dwell,

Dr. Jeremiah: That means that Jesus Christ is exactly the same as God for He is God! This is one of the clearest statements in the Bible of the Deity of Jesus Christ.

John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

We can't see God, He is a Spirit. The Bible says you can't see God and live but you can see Jesus in the pages of the New Testament the Bible says you have seen God.

In his letter to Timothy, Paul says:

1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Dr. Jeremiah: And Jesus says if you have seen me, you have seen the Father.

John 3:19 He who has seen me has seen the Father.

Dr. Jeremiah: I want to be clear about this because one of the great debates about Jesus Christ today as I have read to you in the "Jesusanity" quote is that he is a good man but he's not God. You cannot believe that and call yourself a biblical Christian. Because the Bible teaches that Jesus is not just a good man, he is the God-man! And if we do not understand that we cannot understand Christianity.

[audience applauds]

Dr. Jeremiah: Here in the first chapter of Hebrews is one verse that is the clearest of proof texts the Deity of Jesus Christ:

Hbr 1:8 But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Dr. Jeremiah: Here is God the Father calling Jesus, His Son God! You say 'I don't believe Jesus is God' well you and God don't agree! God says He is God and if you don't think He is God well then you have a problem with the Father! Because the Father said to Jesus, "Your throne O God, is forever and ever."

I read this about a biblical scholar named Scott McKnight who took his students in class through an exercise. On the opening day on Jesus of Nazareth, he gave a standardized, psychological test divided into two parts. The results are nothing short of astounding. The first part is about Jesus. It asks students to imagine Jesus' personality with questions such as, "does He prefer to go his own way or by acting by the rules?" Is he a worrier? The second part asks the same question of the students. But instead of asking "is he a worrier," it asks, "are you a worrier?" And the test is not about right or wrong answers, it is not designed to help students know Jesus. Instead, if given to enough people the test will reveal that we all think Jesus is like us. Introverts think that Jesus is introverted. And on the basis of the same questions, extroverts think Jesus is extroverted. Spiritual formation experts would love to hear that students in my Jesus class are becoming like Jesus. But the test actually reveals the reverse! Students are fashioning Jesus to be like them!

If the test were given to a random sampling of adults, the results would be measurably similar. To one degree or another, we all conform Jesus to our own image - and that's where we get into trouble. Because Jesus isn't who we want him to be - Jesus is who He is! Jesus is who the Bible says He is! The Bible tells us who Jesus is and if we would read our Bibles we wouldn't go down that strange road.

I don't know if this ever happens to you, but people come up to me periodically and if I preach on hell or judgment or something I'll get a letter or email. Invariably, I've had people come up to me and say, "Dr. Jeremiah, my God would never send anybody to hell." And do you know what I tell them? That's exactly right because your god doesn't exist!

[laughter and clapping]

Dr. Jeremiah: He doesn't exist - you made him up! We love to take our faith and when there are hard parts of it that we struggle with, we take the out! We excise them from our understanding. Like hell, we do away with it. You want to find a way to get everybody into heaven? Write a book about it, get on T.V., and everybody will think it is true. But that's NOT true! The Bible says that "it is appointed unto men to die and after that comes the judgment." Do whatever you want to it but you can't take it out of the book. Some people think that 'if I don't want it to be true, then it is not true.' Well, you know what? It's true whether you want it to be true or not!

So, if you want to get any place in your life, find out what is true and get on the bus! But don't go down all of these blind alleys trying to make the Jesus you say you love just like you are. Jesus is not! He wants you to be just like He is. When you get on that track then something good will happen.

[applause, cheering]

Jesus is the final word from God. Jesus is the First Cause of Creation. Jesus is the fullness of the Godhead. And the Bible says in Hebrews 1:13, Jesus is the facilitator of all things.

Hbr 1:3 Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

He keeps this whole world from flying off in a different direction or going out of orbit and finally destruct. Jesus has got it into control. He was before history, he was at the beginning of history, he will be at the end of history, and he is the one that controls history. He is the Sustainer and upholder of this world. This is what Paul communicated in his letter to the Colossians when he said to these believers, "He is before all things:

Col 1:17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.

There has never been a moment from the beginning of Creation that Jesus has not been performing this mighty work, holding everything together as the facilitator of the universe.

Jesus is the final word from God. Jesus is the First Cause of Creation. Jesus is the fullness of the Godhead. And the Bible says in Hebrews 1:13, Jesus is the facilitator of all things. And here is my favorite on all the list - He is the Forgiveness of Our Sins. Listen to what it says in verse three. In verse three it says:

... when he had by himself purged our sins,...

Christ is not only the revealer of God, He's the redeemer of man. This book of Hebrews is a book about cleansing, and here we are told that Christ purged our sins. He cleansed us. Please note where these words appear in the context of this verse. He who is before all things, and in whom all things are summed up, the one who is the Father's delight and the Father's glory, the one of infinite power and infinite glory; it was He Himself who purged our sins.

For what purpose did he come? He didn't come down to set up his kingdom; primarily he came to seek and to save those who are lost. The Bible says in Hebrews "he came to taste death" for every man. And not one of these things that people talk about when they say these wonderful things about Jesus is worth anything if He didn't come down here to purge our sins.

Think of it, folks. He who created the universe is the one who died for you.

The only one who could do that work on the cross was Jesus Christ. And the Bible says that He Himself purged our sins.

Now remember, I've been telling my people I've been teaching the book of Hebrews for a while and I always tell them about every week that the book of Hebrews was written to that group - the Hebrews. That is a really important thing to keep in mind that it was written to us but it was primarily written to the Hebrews. Now remember, the Jewish Christians knew all about the purging of sins. They had been brought up in Judaism and they knew through Judaism that the blood of bulls and goats and all of that - that their sins were forgiven in advance of the cross. In the Old Testament, the purging of sins was never, ever finished.

Hebrews 9:25-26 says:

Hbr 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

Hbr 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

I want to tell you some Good News, this Jesus that I'm telling you about that you could tell I'm a bit excited over - this Jesus who is the final word from God, and Jesus is the First Cause of Creation and Jesus is the fullness of the Godhead and is the facilitator of all things, this Jesus is the forgiveness of our sins. And when we come to know Him, He not only hears our prayer for forgiveness, but because of who He is, He can do something about it.

{clapping and cheering from audience]

He can heal us from our sin. He's the final word from God. He's the first cause of Creation. He's the fullness of the Godhead. He's the facilitator of all things. He's the forgiveness of our sin. And He's the finisher of our faith.

Listen to what He says here:

Hebrews 1:3 And He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.

In the Old Testament tabernacle, did you know that the high priests never sat down? In fact, in all of the tabernacle with all of its wonderful furniture; there was a lampstand, there was a laver, there was an altar, but there was no chair. If you were an Old Testament high priest you could never sit down because your work was never done. There was always somebody who needed forgiveness and you needed to be there as the high priest. But when Christ entered the Holy of the Holies in High Heaven, the Bible says that He sat down. Say that with me, "He sat down." And I want to tell you something friends, he didn't sit down because he was tired, he sat down cause He was finished!

[clapping and cheering from audience]

He sat down because what He cried on the cross was true. When he was dying on the cross, at the end of it he said, "IT IS FINISHED." And he paid the price for all of our sin and when he went back to heaven and sat down at the right hand of the Father, He sat down to signify that nothing else ever needs to be done for sin. He did it all and it's DONE!

[Audience claps and cheers]

Hbr 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of [our] faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

You may be thinking well there is something that I need to do in order for me to go to heaven. Something I need to do for my sins to be forgiven. No, there is not anything that you need do - Jesus did it all. He did it all so well that when He got done He sat down! And He's not waiting for you to do anything except accept what He already did for you! And I'll tell you some more about that in a moment. I'm almost finished, but let me go through this list one more time. He's the final word from God. He's the first cause of Creation. He's the fullness of the Godhead. He's the facilitator of all things. He's the forgiveness of our sin. And He's the finisher of our faith. And here's that last one for all of us faithful Christians - He's our faithful High Priest. Did you know that? This Jesus who created the world. This Jesus who holds it all together. This Jesus who Himself purged our sins on the cross and went to heaven and sat down at the right hand of the Father. The Bible says that He is at the right hand of the Father, always there making intercession for the saints.

And over in the second chapter of Hebrews:

Hbr 2:17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like [His] brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

Hbr 2:18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted.

What that means is that Jesus became for a limited time a little lower than the angels. That He might be one of us and walk among us, and live as we have lived on this earth. And the Bible says over in the fourth chapter:

Hbr 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.

Let me expel some of the nonsense that is out there about this fact. People say, "well if Jesus couldn't sin, how could he be tempted like we are?" Let's face it, I can't not sin. So if Jesus wasn't able to sin, there is this big argument. Was Jesus not able to sin or was he not to sin? Well, I believe Jesus was not able to sin. He was the sinless Son of God. So now they say, "well how could he have been tempted like we are?"

Now I remember reading this somewhere that "is a bridge tested fully when the first car drives over the bridge or is it tested fully when cars have been driving over that bridge for years and years and years? Let me ask you this question. Is a bridge tested when it is found first not to fail? Or is it tested when it is found never to fail?

Jesus didn't give in to any temptation so he felt the full brunt of it all. Whatever it is that you went through, you haven't faced anything like what Jesus faced. You know why that's true? Because you gave in! And the temptation of Jesus was to the fullest extent, yet He never sinned. And the Bible says that when I go to Jesus with my trouble, I can talk to someone who knows what it's like to be a human. He became like us and he exposed himself to all the hazards and perils of life and death and He was not protected from troubles and adversity. When we find ourselves immersed in the harsh realities of human experience where do we go? We go to Jesus.

Think of the blessing of it all. How He shares our labors. How He knows the dull, drab drudgery of some of the common tasks we have to do. The heavy misery of back-breaking toil. He shares our trials and limitations. He was poor with no place to lay his head. He was hungry. He was thirsty begging water from a Samaritan woman. He was weary and exhausted and sat for a while on the well. He bore our sorrows and our heartaches. When there was death in the home it brought tears to his eyes. When he looked upon the crippled, the leper, the blind and the helpless, his heart was moved to compassion. Anybody could approach the Lord Jesus and be welcomed. The poor, the weak, the publican, the simple. In Jesus, God is with us.

In all love and infinite blessing, my favorite name for Jesus outside of the name Jesus is Immanuel - God with us.

Yes, He is the Creator of the universe. He's the one that holds it all together. He's the one that purged our sins. But He's the one who hears your prayer when you cry out to Him in the darkness of the night. When you are going through that thing that you thought you never would go through. When you go through that thing that I've written about - a bend in the road. And you wonder if you know of anyone who has experienced what I've experienced. I'm telling you - there is One. There's One who felt the pressure of it all! And He is our High Priest.

Now I'm going to tell you something - if you haven't figured this out - I'm recommending Jesus to you. I'm recommending Him to you. The book of Hebrews says that we need to do something with Jesus. The Bible says you have to receive Him, you have to accept Him. The book of Hebrews says you need to consider Him, you need to accept Him. You need to be careful that you don't harden your heart against Him. In fact, in chapters 3 and 4, on four occasions we are warned against hardening our hearts against God. And the Bible says today - if you will receive Him do not hardened your heart.

You know people come to churches and they come to events like this and they've heard the Gospel so many times - on Christian radio, on Christian television, in their churches, in their Bible studies, but they still haven't yet received Him. And every time you hear the Gospel and you don't receive it, another little callous forms on your heart, and your heart gets harder. And the Bible warns us that now we know who Jesus is, there is something that we need to do with Him. John 14:6 -

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

If you want to go to heaven some day, if you want to spend eternity with your Creator God, if you want to be with other members of your family who are Christians and have already gone ahead you better be sure that you have accepted Jesus into your life. Because He is your Creator, He is your Sustainer, He is the one who purged your sins, He's the one who is coming back some day and those who have received Him with be caught up together with Him and to be with Him and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

[audience clapping and cheering]

I went through my Bible in these first few chapters of Hebrews and I put a circle around the word "today" every place I found it. I've come to this conclusion: today is God's Word, tomorrow is Satan's word.

Let me tell you what I have been learning in studying the book of Hebrews. Also, before that in the study of the book of Galatians. Listen carefully, when God tells us to do something and we hear His voice clearly, the space between having heard what He told us to do and understanding it and doing it, does not belong to God - it belongs to the enemy. The Word from God says, "do this." The enemy says "no, you can do that tomorrow." Some say, "I'm going to do that someday. I'm going to get my affairs in order, then I'm going to take care of Christ." But the Bible says in between the command and obedience is the wasteland of the wilderness and Satan occupies that territory like no other part of your life. When you hear what God tells you to do - you should say, "TODAY!" But if you don't say that, you will hear tomorrow ringing in your ears. And, one of these days there will be a tomorrow that's too late.

D.L. Moody was a great evangelist. When he started to preach in Chicago, he would have four or five days of meetings. His method of preaching was that he would preach the Gospel with enthusiasm and passion. At the end of the service, he would say to the people, "I want you to go home tonight and think about what I've said, and come back tomorrow night ready to make a decision." He did that for a number of years, and one night he did that and the Chicago fire happened. And many of the people who were in his congregation, the night he had told them to go home and think about it and come back the next night, perished in that fire and never had a next night. From that day until he died, Moody never ever did that again. He learned the power of today. He realized that the message of the Gospel, when it comes home to our hearts, usually comes home to our hearts in a meeting something like this. Maybe a light goes on. Maybe you've know about Jesus but you've never trusted Him as my Savior. When that happens and you know God is speaking to you, the time to do something about it is not tomorrow, not the next time you meet with God's people, but TODAY!

Dr. Jeremiah's final comments:

Has your picture of Jesus been influenced by how our culture depicts Him? Do you find yourself laughing along with comedians when Jesus is made the object of crass humor? There is no better way to keep a biblical picture of Jesus in mind than by dwelling on the embodiment of Him in Scripture.

*******

Please go to David Jeremiah.org to get the resources that will help you in your decision making about Christ, and/or your current walk with Christ if you are already a born again Christian.

If you are not already a Christian, please see my sister site, Angels Helper: Becoming a Christian

May God richly bless each and every reader who took the time to either view the video message or read the transcript.

Yours in Christ's service,

~ Christine

Hat tips to all links.

Paganism Of The Gay-ness Cult

2011-09-21T09:08:00.000-07:00

My fellow Christians who support the protection of Biblical Marriage as the union of one man and one woman and desire to counter the cult of the LBGQT agenda wreaking havoc upon our nation - please see the following blog posts:

Talk Wisdom: The Paganism of the LBGQT Agenda

Political Christian: The Gay-ness Cult

The Gospel Abridged: A review of Andrew Marin's 'Love is an Orientation'

2010-11-01T17:10:00.000-07:00

I apologize for not keeping up with this blog as often as I have in the past. Perhaps my preoccupation with our current pResident in chief and his Marxist cronies and terrible bills and policies have been keeping me too busy.

However, whenever I get an email or message from a fellow Christian believer on the subject of the acceptance of LGBT orientation and/or the "same-sex" marriage controversy in the light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I feel motivated to pass such information along to my readers.

Here is the email review (and links) written by Andy Comiskey at Desert Stream Ministries about a book called 'Love is an Orientation':

The Gospel Abridged:
A review of Andrew Marin's 'Love is an Orientation'
by Andy Comiskey
(Part 3 of 4...click here for Part 1 & 2)

This is the third article I have written in a four-part effort to present a whole gospel to gays, and to point out a couple of trends that distort that gospel. One such lop-sided approach is described in ‘Love is an Orientation’ by Andrew Marin.

The book interested me for several reasons. First, it is published by IVP, a solidly evangelical press that happens to be my publisher. Second, ‘Love is an Orientation’ has been very popular among progressive evangelical pastors. Some asked my opinion on it; I write this review to respond to their request.

The book’s theme corresponds with what I observe to be the lopsided approach of many churches to gays: embrace them with a broad message of ‘love’ but provide no clear track for their restoration once inside the church.

The deficit? Evangelism with no discipleship—new life without the cost, a personal resurrection requiring no crucifixion. On such uneven ground, some evangelical churches I know have begun to shift the boundary lines of truth concerning (homo)sexuality. Unwittingly, Marin’s book may encourage that shift, especially with Christians seeking to resolve the tension they feel between gay loved ones and their ‘old ideas’ of sexual morality.

Andrew Marin is a young evangelical who has sought to build a bridge between Christians and the GLBT (gays, lesbians, bisexual, transgender) community. His love for that community is more apparent than his love of truth, which skews the good news he offers them. Embrace his heart for the lost while walking carefully: the bridge he builds to unite the church with the gay community is missing some significant planks.

Too bad. His heart at times shines through the pages. He is an evangelist with a background in sociology. His expressed purpose is to ‘elevate the conversation’ with the gay community by ‘humbly learning and listening’ to them.

All good. No evangelical I relate to would deny that a heavy-handed approach to a community that exists in reaction to (its perception of) the church won’t work. Marin wisely suggests that sensitive and patient relating is key to making Him known.

The question is: how do we become the new body that Jesus employs to replace the gay identity and community? Making that transition is tough for all concerned, especially for a gay person baptized and confirmed as a member of a queer nation. How do we lovingly help him or her shed the gay self for the truth?

That has been our challenge from day one at Desert Stream--providing a bridge for the men and women of West Hollywood to the Vineyard Westside. Though the church was just a few miles away, for many it seemed like a bridge too far.

Andrew falters at helping the church become the new community. Instead he focuses on how to keep the conversation going with gay neighbors, yet remains cryptic about crucial points in that dialogue.

I became aware of Andrew a few years back when we were both slated to share on ministry to gays at a conference for urban youth. I wanted to find out where he was coming from, as his course description was vague. He wouldn’t tell me.

That lack of clarity pervades his book, which could be subtitled: ‘If gays ask, don’t tell.’ Marin advises Christians to stay away from pointed conversation with gays about sexuality and ethics as many will use such dialogue to write Christians off.

So Marin remains mysterious in his sexual morality; his book is confusing as to how he understands the transformation Jesus and His body bring to gays.

Gays seeking Jesus face some pretty big decisions about identity, community, etc. Marin advises that instead of sharing our views we simply ‘let it all be in the Lord’s hands and plans as He sees it to be good.’(p.113) Not helpful for the 18-year-old Bible college student about to jump ship and move in with a more ‘realized’ gay man, or the young woman bonding sexually with a fellow athlete, herself a proud member of the GLBT community. (We as a ministry have had to address both cases.)

In light of 30-years of beholding the increase of gay options for at-risk youth (never mind the intervention I have had to do with my own kids for related issues!), I asked myself: Can we do better than a Zen-like surrender of our loved ones to the apparently unknown God?

I say unknown, not because Marin does not manifest the deeply personal love Jesus imparts to His followers; he simply refuses to comment on whether or not Jesus cares about sexual immorality and/or the indignities it engenders on all involved.

How else can he say: ‘If a GLBT person has indicated that it is OK to be gay, the Christian community has to deeply trust and rely on the knowledge that we can never know the end to God’s best journey for someone else’s life.’ (pp. 110, 111)

That may involve turning from homosexuality; it may involve turning toward it. Marin’s gospel will not disclose. In his kingdom, the only solid line one dare not cross is to act as if one knows the way, sexually-speaking, and can help another to find it.

In line with his ‘who knows?’ approach to sexual decision-making, Marin shortchanges the scriptural references to homosexuality. His chapter on the topic does all a disservice. He misinterprets scripture to support his penchant for the GLBT community. He may win their hearts but seriously distorts the meaning of the texts.

Marin frames the 5 obvious references in Scripture that prohibit homosexual behavior as open doors for dialogue with the gay community. He does this by interpreting them in light of his call to build bridges, while stripping the texts of much if any ethical weight in regards to their clear prohibition of gay behavior.

The main sin he warns us of is our homophobia; clear the way, so that gays can ‘choose for God’, says Marin. He is silent as to whether these verses can or should have any authority in deterring those who have chosen Him from repenting of what Paul considers grounds for dismissal from God’s Kingdom.

Dr. Robert Gagnon said it well: ‘The Christian faith cannot be held hostage in its full proclamation of the Gospel because some interest group finds offensive part of that message.’ (For more on Gagnon’s take on Marin’s scriptural errors, click here)

The GLBT community is being held hostage by lies that only the truthful love of Jesus and His community can break. Marin genuinely cares for them; his book manifests that care.

My problem, however, is that he limits that love by so pandering to the GLBT community (in Marin’s own words: ‘I have never met a more loving community…’ Really!?) that he obscures the bridge between them and the church.

Marin the evangelist must meet Marin the pastor who actually walks out the process of integration with gays who surrender their lives to Christ there. He would have to answer the hard questions of morality and self-definition for former members of the GLBT tribe, as well as the joys of inclusion and the possibility of exclusion.

If Marin ever wants to hear real life horror stories of how difficult it is to integrate a group of politicized gay men and women into the local church, just give me a call. Docile seekers roar when they discover you have no intention to bless their same-sex unions.

Marin glorifies the gay kingdom; he romances the GLBT community by amplifying its ‘we-them’ defense—gay is glorious, compassionate and dimensional, straight is flat and provincial. Unwittingly, he perpetuates the divide between ‘gay and straight’.

That is a shame. Jesus and Paul would insist on both groups finding common ground in one body through the cross. Marin overlooks a real key in reaching the gay community: Christians reaching beneath the surface of their ‘straight’ selves, discovering the damage done then repenting unto the Crucified.

If we lived honestly (and many churches do) in this day of fractured families, multiple heterosexual partnerships, Internet porn, the ravages of abuse, and growing numbers of people with same-sex attraction, we would not throw stones at a particular community. We would make ample room next to us for whoever cries for mercy.

What Marin does is challenge us to make a bridge between the GLBT community and ours. I hear that challenge. His witness of love inspires me to take it.

Yet in a day when the world and the worldly church is only too quick to confirm young teens as gay, ordain gays as bishops, and bless homosexual ‘marriage’ as a triumph of justice, we evangelicals cannot afford to be cryptic like Marin about God’s clear message of grace and truth for same-sex strugglers. His bridge is too weak to under gird the pilgrims he invites into the community of faith. I thus cannot recommend this book.

Despite the deficiencies of Marin’s gospel, the man conveys a passionate, provocative heart for people who will perish without the love of Christ’s body. May God continue to grow him and all of us in truthful love.

‘If our Gospel be hidden, it is hid toward those who are perishing.’ (2Cor 4:3)

Hat Tips:

Desert Stream.org

Rob Gagnon.net

*******

Update:

Also read Rob Gagnon's response to this book:

Truncated Love: A Response to Andrew Marin’s Love Is an Orientation
Part 1 [NOTE: ARTICLE IS IN PDF FORM.]

'Gay' Judge Who Overturned Prop 8 Quitting

2010-10-03T12:17:00.000-07:00

Good news here in California regarding the ongoing battle to keep marriage defined as the union of one man and one woman! 'Gay' judge who overturned Prop 8 quitting
Vaughn Walker's decision reversed votes of more than 7 million

Excerpt:

The homosexual federal judge in California who said that gender "no longer forms an essential part of marriage" when he ruled that voters in the state were constitutionally prohibited from defining marriage as being between one man and one woman is quitting.

The announcement regarding U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker comes from Rich Wieking, clerk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The announcement, released late yesterday, said Walker will step down as chief judge Dec. 31 and leave the court entirely in February 2011.

The change could create huge new possibilities should the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the Prop 8 case now is pending, return any or all of the case to the lower court for further action, which is not unusual for the much-overturned appellate district.

Matthew McReynolds, counsel for the Pacific Justice Institute, one of the many pro-family organizations that have worked on the Prop 8 case, said it's about time.

"The retirement of Judge Walker is significant because of the possibility the Prop 8 case will be sent back to the district court at some point," he said. "Judge Walker's exit from the federal bench can't come soon enough for the people of California, who are still reeling from his pronouncement that the majority of voters are irrational."

Walker, whose homosexual lifestyle has been documented locally, wrote in his opinion that overturned the votes of millions of California residents to amend the state constitution to include the traditional definition of marriage, that:

* "Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians."

* "Rather, the exclusion exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage. That time has passed."

* "The gender of a child's parent is not a factor in a child's adjustment."

* "The evidence shows beyond any doubt that parents' genders are irrelevant to children’s developmental outcomes."

* "Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage; marriage under law is a union of equals."

* "Many of the purported interests identified by proponents are nothing more than a fear or unarticulated dislike of same-sex couples."

Continue reading HERE

Hat Tip:

WorldNetDaily

Re: Marriage Controversy - What Can The Righteous Do?

2010-08-09T20:20:00.000-07:00

Received a great email today from Andy Comiskey of Desert Stream Ministries:

August 9th, 2010

'When the foundations [of marriage] are being destroyed, what can the righteous do'? (PS 11:5)

Prayerfully fight, with our minds, hearts and spirits fully engaged for the battle ahead. Will Proposition 8 become the Roe vs. Wade of marriage? Or the Magna Carte that allows US citizens to define marriage according to conscience?

As most of you know, on Wed. August 4th, in the Federal District Court of San Francisco, Judge Vaughn Walker struck down Prop. 8 on the basis that denying gays the right to marry denied them equality under the US Constitution.

What disturbs you more: Walker, a homosexual judge, who kicked off the case's closing arguments two months ago with a twinkle in his eye and a lilt in his voice as he demurred: 'Well, June is the month of weddings', to the delight of the 'married' lesbian plaintiffs who fawned and giggled over their judicial advocate?
Or the tragic truth that Walker is the mouthpiece for America in the 21st century, a nation no longer certain that marriage was designed to create, protect, and raise children in order that they might emulate their parents' example?

Not only was Walker's decision an abuse of power (one biased man defied the majority of CA voters who through Prop. 8 waged and won the biggest political battle ever for a proposition in CA's history), it reveals the fault lines on which we stand as a nation concerning our views of marriage, equality, and personal rights.

Consider this: Walker struck down Prop. 8 on the grounds that CA citizens who were unwilling to redefine marriage to include gays were motivated by prejudice, an irrational anti-gay bias that compelled them 'to believe that same-sex couples are not as good as opposite-sex couples.'

He missed our point entirely. Prop.8 was simply the will of CA citizens to affirm the rationality of marriage. We also affirmed that marriage is not a 'right' given to any two people who want to privately contract a life together but rather, in the words of Robert George, 'an institution that serves the interest of children and society as a whole by uniting men and women in a relationship whose meaning is shaped by its unique aptness for the begetting and rearing of children.'

That definition, which has always been the fundamental meaning of marriage across religious and cultural lines, always will be the meaning of marriage.

We must prayerfully fight for that definition to be upheld by the law of our land. We thought we had fought and won in CA. Judge Walker just picked a fight.

To ensure that the Walkers of this world do not prevail, please pray:

For the hold placed on Walker's decision that does not permit gays to marry in CA until further consideration from the Court. Pray that this 'stay' endures until the case is heard by a higher court.

For the Prop. 8 defense team as they seek consideration from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Pray for a smooth pathway in this process.

For the case to move swiftly to the Federal Supreme Court, where the fate of marriage will ultimately be decided by one-Justice Kennedy-who appears to be the swing vote in a Court divided right down the middle.

Pray for Kennedy, that he and the Court will hold fast to the true definition of marriage, or at least the people's right to define it according to their conscience.

Will Walker's decision be the earthquake that devastates marriage in the USA? Or the decision that provokes its true declaration: Roe vs. Wade, or Magna Carte?

Let us prayerfully fight together, that CA's Prop. 8 will become a national victory-upholding the true meaning of marriage as well as democracy.

Please join us in our 40-day prayer/fast for marriage, Oct. 16th-Nov. 24th. We know what to do when the foundations are being destroyed.

© 2010 by Desert Stream Ministries

Based on the biblical foundation of compassion, integrity, and dependence on God, Desert Stream Ministries proclaims to the world the transforming power of Jesus Christ. We equip the body of Christ to minister healing to the sexually and relationally broken through healing groups and leadership training for the local church.We invite you to visit our website at: Desert Stream.org

*******

There is a good reason to have hope that the Supreme Court will rule in favor of traditional marriage! Read what law professor and Legal Insurrection blogger, William A. Jacobsen writes:

Ted Olson May Be Too Smart By Half

Ted Olson obviously is a very good lawyer. In the past, that very good lawyer -- and his allegiance to conservative values -- has been viewed by liberals as the devil incarnate because of his role in winning Bush v. Gore.

Now that very good lawyer, along with David Boies, has pulled off a major coup in obtaining a ruling from a Judge who did not need much convincing, that there is a federal constitutional right to gay marriage, thereby invalidating California Prop. 8.

The video of Olson being interviewed by Chris Wallace (embedded below) has brought cheers for Olson because of lines such as "Well, would you like your right to free speech -- would you like Fox's right to free press put up to a vote ...."

There is a logical flaw, however, in Olson's primary legal argument that the Judge merely followed Supreme Court precedent on the issue of marriage (emphasis mine):

As a matter of fact, since 1888 the United States Supreme Court has 14 times decided and articulated that the right to marriage is a fundamental right. We're not talking about a new right here.

We're talking about whether a fundamental right, something that the Supreme Court has characterized as the most fundamental relationship we have in this country, can be deprived of certain individuals because of the color of their skin or because of their sexual orientation.

The problem with this argument is that the marriages the Supreme Court has addressed in the past were marriages between one man and one woman, which the Court -- in Olson's characterization -- has deemed "the most fundamental relationship we have in this country...."

On that, the supporters of Prop. 8 could agree. The traditional marriage has been recognized as being of fundamental importance to society, unlike other relationships, such as polygamy, which also have a historical and religious basis, but as to which society has made a value judgment.

By focusing on the fundamental right to marry, but ignoring that that right arose on the basis of the Supreme Court recognizing the fundamental role in society of traditional marriage, I think the legal team opposing Prop. 8 has set itself up for failure.

Olson's argument is something of a circular firing squad. In order to prove that society has no constitutionally rational basis for making a value judgment in favor of traditional marriage, Olson needs to prove that traditional marriage is not the most fundamental relationship in society. But, according to Olson, on 14 occasions the Supreme Court has said otherwise.

Hat Tips:

Desert Stream.org

Legal Insurrection

The Spiritual Problem of the Homosexual Agenda

2010-08-06T10:07:00.000-07:00

One homosexual judge overturned the votes of 7 million California voters! What could be more unfair, undemocratic, unconstitutional and outrageously biased against the state of California, biased against the majority of voters in our state, and radically disparaging against our Constitutional Republic than that?

Christian News Wire:

Chief Judge of Federal District Court in San Francisco Vaughn R. Walker Overturns Proposition 8
Contact: Karen England, Capitol Resource Institute, 916-212-5607

MEDIA ADVISORY, Aug. 4 /Christian Newswire/ -- Proposition 8, the 2008 California Constitutional amendment defining and recognizing marriage between a man and a woman, suffered a severe blow. Judge Walker ruled against the voters who approved Proposition 8 by 52 percent of the vote.

After California's Supreme Court overturned proposition 22, the statute approved by voters defining marriage, the voters took to the polls in reaction to the court's judicial activism.

"Today's ruling is indicative of an out-of-control judiciary willing to circumvent California's direct democracy by imposing their point of view," said Karen England Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute (CRI). "Family values are under constant assault now more then ever. CRI was instrumental in passing proposition 22 in 2000 and we fought to get proposition 8 on the ballot and subsequently in California's Constitution. We will continue to battle interest groups who wish to redefine one of our oldest institutions; the institution of marriage. We will continue to represent the 7 million Californians who took to the polls in favor of marriage."

The case will head to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, a court popularly known for its left-of-center rulings.

Homosexuality isn't just a behavioral problem. It isn't just a "rights" problem. It isn't just a legal problem. It isn't just an emotional problem. It is a spiritual problem.

Even though the following essay was written years ago, Pastor DL Foster's Gay Christian Movement Watch: Gay Marriage - the Days of Noah Return post is one of the best I've ever read on the topic.

As you read the post at GCMWatch, you will notice a link between the "Days of Noah" and the "Days of Lot." This was an awesome discovery! Jesus himself likened the "signs of the times" of his return as being "as in the days of Lot" and "as in the days of Noah."

Excerpt:

Folger recounts how what we are seeing happen now before our very eyes is the beginning fulfillment of what Jesus said would happen before his return. Moreover, the people had sunken into such a perpetually degenerative moral condition these things were celebrated and viewed as normal.

As I wrote about in my book, “The Criminalization of Christianity,” Jeffrey Satinover, who holds an M.D. from Princeton and doctorates from Yale, MIT and Harvard, was on my radio program one day and I asked him about where we are in history. He explained that according to the “Babylonian Talmud” – the book of rabbis’ interpretation of the scriptures 1,000 years before Christ, there was only one time in history that reflects where we are right now. There was only one time in history, according to these writings, where men were given in marriage to men, and women given in marriage to women.

Want to venture a guess as to when? No, it wasn’t in Sodom and Gomorrah, although that was my guess. Homosexuality was rampant there, of course, but according to the Talmud, not homosexual “marriage.” What about ancient Greece? Rome? No. Babylon? No again. The one time in history when homosexual “marriage” was practiced was … during the days of Noah. And according to Satinover, that’s what the “Babylonian Talmud” attributes as the final straw that led to the Flood.

Folger’s article also contains astonishing commentary by Rabbi Aryeh Spero on what the Talmud reveals about homosexuality, state sanctioned homosexual weddings and the coming judgment of God.

25But first must He [Christ] suffer many things and be rejected by this generation. 26And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man:
27They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. 28“Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; 29but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. 30“Even thus shall it be in the Day when the Son of Man is revealed.

Notice that Jesus compared Noah’s day to Sodom and Gomorrah and then linked it to the time of his return.

Because the inhabitants of the earth had become so evil, God anointed Noah to preach righteousness and repentance right up until the time the door of the ark closed shut. He preached the same message for over 100 years. This was the mercy of God in action, a window of opportunity to repent. Some listened at first, but then overcome by the sin around them, eventually ignored Noah. Noah was openly vilified, mocked and called a liar. Why? Because the people saw no rain and they did not want to believe their activities were wrong.

Read the entire essay HERE.

In June of 2008, I linked to Pastor Foster's post and wrote an essay here at Talk Wisdom:

The Days of Noah Are Here.

Hat Tips:

Christian News Wire

Gay Christian Movement Watch

*******
Cross posted at Talk Wisdom

Prop. 8 Lawsuit is Attack Against Natural Marriage & Our Republic

2010-06-16T20:38:00.000-07:00

SAVECALIFORNIA.COM NEWS RELEASE
June 16, 2010 -- For Immediate Release

Randy Thomasson’s comment on Prop. 8 Closing Arguments
“The lawsuit against Prop. 8 by Ted Olson and David Boies is more than an attack against natural marriage, it’s an attack against our republic and our democracy.”

WATCH: Randy Thomasson's comments on News10 Sacramento 6/16/10

Sacramento, California – California pro-family leader Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, issued the following statement about closing arguments in San Francisco today in the federal lawsuit against Proposition 8, the California Marriage Amendment that reserved marriage licenses for “a man and a woman”:

“The lawsuit against Prop. 8 by Ted Olson and David Boies is more than an attack against natural marriage, it’s an attack against our republic and our democracy. Our republic, because a judge took this case and made a circus out of it, despite the word ‘marriage’ not being in the U.S. Constitution and the Tenth Amendment protecting states’ rights to define marriage. Our democracy, because the voters of California have twice passed ballot measures defining marriage, even defining marriage in the California Constitution. If the federal courts strike down Prop. 8, they will have declared war on the voters in 30 states that have defined marriage in their state constitutions.

"What will be the outcome of this case? Judge Walker, a homosexual himself, has been demanding answers to questions about issues that are not in the written federal or state constitutions, but are designed to set up the federal courts to unscientifically declare homosexuality an 'immutable' class, like race or sex. Doing this dirty judicial deed would trample religious freedom and free speech, which is specifically enshrined in the First Amendment.

“This kangaroo court is a public relations coup for homosexual-marriage advocates, who want to keep their ‘gay marriage’ drum beating loudly in hopes of stirring up donors and volunteers to reverse Prop. 8 on the ballot in 2012 or 2014. But it won’t work, because the natural, beautiful relationship of a man and a woman, united in marriage, is a standard indelibly etched on the human heart.”

-- end --

Randy Thomasson and SaveCalifornia.com are not party to the Prop. 8 case. Randy Thomasson has been defending marriage licenses and marriage rights for one man and one woman throughout California since 1994.

SaveCalifornia.com is a leading West Coast nonprofit, nonpartisan organization representing children and families. We stand for marriage and family, parental rights, the sanctity of human life, religious freedom, financial freedom, and back-to-basics education.

Hat Tip:

Save California.com

Marriage: The Image of God

2010-05-03T22:23:00.001-07:00

Recently, I shared the following link to Pastor Miles McPherson's awesome sermon on "Marriage: The Image of God" with a Facebook friend. I decided to watch the sermon again. It was originally presented back in February, 2008. Pastor Miles and several pastors from other Christian churches in the area actively encouraged people to sign the petition to get Proposition 8 on the ballot in November, 2008, and he visited churches as a guest speaker all around California to let Christians know how important it was to vote YES on Proposition 8. . As we all know, the measure made the ballot and was passed by the people of California. The majority of voters wanted marriage to remain defined as the union of one man and one woman.

If you are encountering opposition to such beliefs (especially if the opposition is coming from the liberal leftist churches), then you need to watch this sermon and find out exactly why God's plan for marriage is, was, and always will be defined as the union of one man and one woman.

Pastor Miles spells out why any other type of union (particularly homosexual unions) is a perversion of God's plan for marriage. God invented marriage! NOT THE GOVERNMENT! Therefore, government should not be twisting God's plan for the marriage covenant.

If you feel led to share your thoughts after viewing the video message, I encourage you to do so.

God Bless!

Christine

Protect Your Children From "Day of Silence" Propaganda

2010-04-14T09:46:00.000-07:00

The need to be continually vigilant in protecting biblical marriage includes countering the huge amount of indoctrination that is being heaped upon children in public schools. Please read the following and take the necessary action needed to prevent your children and grandchildren from being influenced by the progressive, liberal-leftist, Saul Alinsky methods being imposed upon students in public schools through the so-called "Day of Silence."

Christine

*******

Tell parents, "Protect your children!"

Hand out flyers about this Friday's pro-homosexuality "Day of Silence"

On Friday, public schools from high school on down will allow "gay and lesbian" students and their liberal friends and liberal teachers to remain defiantly silent. The purpose? To disrupt the school day, bring attention to themselves, and label themselves as "victims" -- conveniently forgetting that those who practice homosexuality have more political "rights" than heterosexuals!

These confused, liberal activists will wear pro-homosexuality t-shirts, deliver pro-LGBTQ speeches in classrooms of supportive teachers, refuse to answer teachers' questions in other classrooms, make it difficult for other students to concentrate, and generally take over campuses for the entire day.

According to the "Day of Silence" website, two years ago, this political takeover happened nationwide in 8,000+ elementary, middle, and high schools, as well as some colleges. School administrators will deny sponsoring, participating in, or allowing the "Day of Silence." But they will allow students to be silent nonetheless!

As the homosexual activists themselves explain: "The Day of Silence is a perfect tool for creating change. We wanted a queer-friendly prom, and after showing that many students and staff care -- we got a queer-friendly prom. We said we wouldn't be silenced and we won't." "The Day of Silence can be a great tool to catapult change at your school! Do you want a more LGBT inclusive library, teacher training, LGBT inclusive nondiscrimination policies or something else?"
TAKE QUICK ACTION -- WALK OUT!

1. PUBLIC-SCHOOL PARENTS: If you're a parent or grandparent of a child in government-run schools, resolve to keep them home on Friday to counter protest the pro-homosexuality "Day of Silence." Absent children cost the school district, and a school district that allows politically-correct disruption deserves financial consequences. Get more information

2. EVERYBODY ELSE: Whether you're a parent or not, help parents in your community to protect their children and stand against immoral influences. Download our Action Flyer and hand out to parents picking up and dropping off their children in front of campuses on Wednesday and Thursday. Tell them, "Protect your children!"

He who walks with the wise grows wise, but a companion of fools suffers harm.
Proverbs 13:20 NIV

Hat Tip:

Save California.com

Homosexual Activists Try 'End Around' on Marriage

2010-04-07T10:11:00.000-07:00

Homosexual Activists Try 'End Around' on Marriage

by Nima Reza, managing editor

Legislation takes another shot at divorcing marriage from its true intent.

A bill on the California Senate floor would further undermine the institution of one man, one woman marriage.

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the bill on a 3-2 party-line vote.

SB 906 would confuse the issue by renaming "marriage" as "civil marriage," opening the possibility for future multiple marriage categories, according to California Family Council Legislative Coordinator Everett Rice.

California voters passed Proposition 8 in 2008, defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

"SB 906 is actually a direct assault against the more than 7 million voters that supported Proposition 8," Rice said. "These multiple marriage designations would lead to new definitions of each, eventually giving the courts the opportunity to redefine marriage."

Caleb Price, social research analyst with Focus on the Family Action, said activists are simply redefining terms "to suit their purposes."

"Gay activists are now attempting to do an end run around the will of the people and redefine the term in the Legislature," he said.

Closing arguments in the California marriage amendment court challenge, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, are expected this month.

Many legal experts expect the case could make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hat Tip: Citizen Link.org

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Read more about the California marriage debate.

Gay Activists Politically Powerless?

2010-03-01T21:36:00.000-08:00

I couldn't believe my eyes when I read the headline in an email I recently received from Ron Prentice. It read: "Political Powerlessness in Action." And, as you will read in the first paragraph, the homosexual-affirming plaintiffs' lawyers want Californians to believe that "in their bid to overturn Prop 8, asserted during the Perry v Schwarzenegger federal trial that homosexuals are “politically powerless.” They tried to make the case that this alleged political disadvantage is so extreme that it must be corrected by providing homosexuals special protection under the United States Constitution."

WHAT???? Have you ever read anything as ludicrous as that? The power that homosexual activists and their supporters have here in California (and the millions of money that is collected and spent for their causes) is astronomical compared to what Prop. 8 supporters ever had!

Let's face it. The gay lobby lost - and lost big in the 2008 election concerning Prop. 8's desire to keep marriage as the "union of one man and one woman." The gays need to get over it and call their unions something else!

Here is the entire email:

Dear Friends,

You may recall from one of my earlier e-mails that the plaintiffs’ lawyers, in their bid to overturn Prop 8, asserted during the Perry v Schwarzenegger federal trial that homosexuals are “politically powerless.” They tried to make the case that this alleged political disadvantage is so extreme that it must be corrected by providing homosexuals special protection under the United States Constitution.
When our team of able legal experts questioned the plaintiffs’ witnesses on this matter, they were forced to acknowledge that the “gay agenda” has a bevy of esteemed and active elected officials in their stable of support, including both California U.S. Senators, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Governor, the current, openly homosexual California Assembly Speaker, several openly homosexual state senators and/or assembly members, the current mayors of California’s largest cities and the state’s Attorney General.

By that measure alone, it is difficult to accept the notion that homosexuals are a politically powerless lot. Let’s not be naïve, the homosexual lobby holds powerful sway over what goes on in the halls of our state Capitol.

Further, last Friday was the final day lawmakers could introduce legislation in the current session. And guess what? California’s largest homosexual advocacy group, Equality California, sponsored three bills to further advance their agenda, one of which would eliminate what they consider a barrier to legalizing same-sex marriage.

Senate Bill 906 was introduced by openly-gay Senator Mark Leno, who has carried the gay lobby’s water since he was elected. It removes from current law any obligation by clergy to “marry” same-sex partners and prevents their refusal from having any negative implications on a synagogue or church’s tax-exempt status.

While “divorcing” religious marriage from civil marriage, this bill further exemplifies just how cunning the homosexual lobby can be. In fact, much can be read into Senator Leno’s comment in the Bay Area Reporter when he said religious entities “have no business interfering with the fundamental right of everyone's access to marriage."

Equality California may promote this bill as nothing more than a way to clarify the issue for people who are “confused about the difference between civil marriage and religious marriage,” but what they are really after is a way – any way – to invalidate the votes of 7 million Californians who voted to keep marriage between a man and a woman.

Parsing words the way they are with SB 906 is just another clear example of how powerful the homosexual lobby is in exerting its political influence on the rest of society.

On another note, Friday was a big day for our legal team in the Perry v Schwarzenegger case. After weeks of work following the conclusion of the evidentiary portion of the trial, our team submitted our post-trial briefings to Judge Vaughn Walker.

We appreciate all of your prayers and financial support throughout these trial proceedings. This is just the first step in a long legal battle to preserve traditional marriage. We are now waiting for Judge Vaughn Walker to announce the date for closing arguments and we will have much work to do for that step in the journey as well. We ask for your continued support through both prayer and financial sacrifice during this time as we move closer toward the completion of the district court trial and then on to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

We will keep you informed as we learn more from Judge Walker.

God Bless you,

Ron Prentice, Executive Director

Monogamy Not Central Feature of Gay Unions

2010-02-11T18:00:00.000-08:00

How homosexual “marriage” is intended to change traditional marriage

We heard consistently from our opponents during the Prop 8 campaign that “love is love” and that legalizing same-sex marriage would have no impact on traditional marriage. However, recent research reveals that most homosexual relationships do not share one of the most fundamental elements of marriage – a commitment to fidelity and monogamy. Paradoxically, according to a recent article in the New York Times, some “experts” are now advocating that traditional marriage must evolve to incorporate the values of homosexual marriage, “for the very survival of the institution.”

A study due out this month from San Francisco State University is, according to the Times article, set to reveal that monogamy is simply not a central feature of homosexual relationships. The study reportedly finds that most gays engage in an “open” relationship where sex outside the relationship is accepted as the norm. To illustrate the point the Times interviews two couples: one married lesbian couple spoke of how they have redefined their marriage to include “play” with other women, and a married male couple spoke of “transparency” rules they follow as part of having sex with other men.

According to the Times article, “none of this is new to the gay community, but few will speak publicly about it…They also worried that discussing the subject could undermine the legal fight for same-sex marriage.” The Times acknowledged that opponents of same-sex marriage have argued that legalizing same-sex “marriage” is an effort to rewrite societal norms. And in a rare example of journalistic honesty, the paper went on to say, “Quietly, outside of the news media and courtroom spotlight, many gay couples are doing just that, according to groundbreaking new research.”

One so-called expert who believes that sex outside marriage makes relationships stronger told the Times that homosexual couples bring a “fresh perspective” to matrimony. The Times noted that these relationships “defy the traditional definition of marriage” yet presented the view of “experts” who say “boundary changing gay relationships represent an evolution in marriage – one that might point the way for the survival of the institution.” Indeed, Joe Quirk, author of the best-selling book “It’s Not You, It’s Biology,” said, “If innovation is going to occur, it will be spearheaded by homosexual marriages.”

Not once during the many testimonies by plaintiffs’ “experts” in the Perry v Schwarzenegger case did a single person proactively make the case that marriage should be redefined to eliminate sexual exclusiveness and fidelity in order to accommodate homosexual promiscuity. Instead, they argued that same-sex marriage would have no impact on society’s definition of marriage.

But this New York Times article, and the coming study, make it crystal clear that changing society’s understanding of marriage to downplay (if not eliminate) the notion of fidelity as a central element is exactly what many gay leaders have in mind.

I don’t have enough space to discuss all the possible ramifications of eliminating fidelity as a societal norm of marriage. The implications for family stability for children, as adults hop from married partner to play partners, and then back again, are staggering. What is important, however, from the perspective of upholding Proposition 8 is that the people, not the courts, have the constitutional right to decide the meaning of marriage, and whether or not to change it. By passing Prop 8 the voters made a perfectly reasonable and rational choice to restore the traditional definition of marriage in California as it has been understood since the beginning of statehood.

As we continue to fight to uphold Prop 8 and traditional marriage, we ask for your support. Our attorneys are working hard to prepare our final legal briefs and closing arguments. We’ve exhausted our available financial resources and we are counting on you and other supporters to make a contribution to sustain our efforts.

Thank you for your support.

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice, Executive Director

Protect Marriage.com

© 2009 ProtectMarriage.com Action Fund. All Rights Reserved.

Received via email.

Prop 8 Defense Team Scores Major Points on Day 2 of Trial

2010-01-13T09:28:00.000-08:00

Our stellar team of defense lawyers had another strong day undercutting the arguments of the plaintiffs’ experts in the federal court challenge to Proposition 8 (Perry v Schwarzenegger). As our General Counsel Andy Pugno reported earlier in the day the cross examination of Harvard Professor Nancy Cott was “a disaster” for the plaintiffs’ case.

Under cross examination by David Thompson, one of our defense litigators, Professor Cott first had to concede that she is not a neutral, independent expert as she had been presented for people to believe. In fact, Thompson got her to admit that she is an advocate for gay marriage and has testified in favor of same-sex marriage before legislatures, contributed to groups advocating for gay marriage and signed onto legal briefs in court cases seeking to legalize gay marriage. One of the groups that she has financially supported has openly encouraged polyamory as an alternative to traditional marriage. Polyamorous relationships are those involving three or more people who have a sexual relationship within a ‘group marriage.’

From a legal perspective, Cott made a particularly damaging concession that the public interest in promoting the raising of children by both a mother and father is a purpose that is promoted by traditional marriage. She also undermined the plaintiff’s characterization of marriage as a purely private decision when she conceded marriage is a highly public relationship in which society has great interest.

Professor George Chauncey of Yale University was the next plaintiff expert. He delivered interesting testimony about the history of discrimination that homosexuals have felt in America. His testimony included examples of gays and lesbians being jailed for engaging in homosexual sex, losing their jobs and being denied access to public accommodations because of their homosexuality. What Professor Chauncey didn’t explain, however, was what relevance past discrimination has to do with the constitutionality of Proposition 8. As the day was coming to a close, David Thompson began his cross examination and elicited an admission that, like Professor Cott, Chauncey is a gay marriage supporter who has contributed to several groups advocating the legalization of same-sex marriage. Tomorrow, Thompson is expected to question Professor Chauncey over his views that the messaging of the ProtectMarriage.com campaign is simply a continuation of past discrimination against homosexuals.

We have many days to go in the trial over traditional marriage. Today was a very good day. Several of our supporters in the courtroom asked our attorneys to dinner, in order to thank them for their efforts! Unfortunately, each of them declined because they needed to return to their temporary offices in San Francisco to immerse themselves in preparation for tomorrow’s hearing.

I hope that our communications over the past two days have given you a sense of the monumental effort being put forth to defend your vote and preserve traditional marriage. Please continue to support us with your prayers and financial sacrifice.

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice, Executive Director

Also see:

Protect Marriage Blog

The Manhattan Declaration Impacts California

2009-12-14T19:28:00.000-08:00

The following is an email I received today from Ron Prentice of the "Yes on Proposition 8" campaign which passed in November, 2008. Since then, many people (especially prominent ones in the Christian community) have been targets of vicious attacks by rabidly obsessive homosexual activist radicals who cannot stand the success of the Proposition 8 vote results here in California. Now that the Manhattan Declaration has been signed by almost 300,000 additional people (as of 12/14/09), the original creators and signers of the declaration are being harrassed and targeted by homosexual activists and their advocates. If you are financially able to do so, please consider a gift to this worthy cause in the protection of biblical marriage!

Sincerely,
Christine

*******

Dear Friends,

A few weeks ago, a coalition of prominent Christian clergy, ministry leaders and scholars drafted an impressive document which addresses the sanctity of life, religious liberty and traditional marriage, and calls on Christians to answer the clarion call to act on their conscience. The Manhattan Declaration is thoughtful, moving in its simplicity and truth, and has predictably drawn the reflexive ire of supporters of gay marriage.

The Declaration states, in part, that its drafters are “especially troubled that in our nation today…the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable ideologies.” The Declaration also articulates serious concern that “freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized by those who would use the instruments of coercion to compel persons of faith to compromise their deepest convictions.”

As the Declaration points out, centuries of human experience confirm that marriage is the sustaining institution for the health, education and welfare of every person and every society. The Declaration also makes three salient points about the need to legally support traditional marriage and the dangers inherent in changing its definition based on the selfish desires of the politically powerful.

1. If the covenantal union of a man and a woman is indistinguishable from
homosexual “marriage,” the religious liberty of those for whom this is a
matter of conscience is jeopardized.

2. The rights of parents are abused as family life and sex education programs
in schools are used to teach children that an enlightened understanding
recognizes as “marriages” sexual partnerships that many parents believe are
intrinsically non-marital and immoral.

3. The common good of civil society is damaged when the law itself, in its
critical pedagogical function, becomes a tool for eroding a sound
understanding of marriage on which the flourishing of the marriage culture
in any society vitally depends.

Where marriage between a man and woman is honored, and where there is a flourishing marriage culture, everyone benefits—the spouses themselves, their children, the communities and societies in which they live. That is precisely what our exceptional team of attorneys is fighting for in federal court right now.

Therefore, and contrary to the core of what our opponents in federal court contend, it is out of love and concern for the greater good of society -- not animus and prejudice – that we forge ahead to defend the definition of marriage that millions of Californians adopted last year.

Since the Declaration was published November 20th, nearly 300,000 people have signed it, indicating their belief that marriage between a man and a woman is society’s most fundamental institution. Opponents have wasted no time going on the attack, threatening to cause disruptions in the diocese of every Catholic bishop who signed the Manhattan Declaration.

Eight days after the Declaration was made public, a post appearing on GayBuzz.blogspot urged homosexual activists to punish Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of the Catholic Diocese of Oakland for signing the declaration.

Please take the time to support our legal efforts to defend your vote for Prop 8, add your name to the growing list of Manhattan Declaration supporters, and share the document with your friends, family and colleagues.

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice
Executive Director

Protect Marriage.com

© 2009 ProtectMarriage.com Action Fund. All Rights Reserved.

Marriage Has Been Preserved in Maine

2009-11-04T10:43:00.000-08:00

Nov. 04, 2009
Defeat In Maine A Harsh Blow To Gay-marriage Drive
Analysis: Loss In Maine Could Be Staggering Blow To Gay-marriage Movement Nationwide

AP) The stars seemed aligned for supporters of gay marriage. They had Maine's governor, legislative leaders and major newspapers on their side, plus a huge edge in campaign funding. So losing a landmark referendum was a devastating blow, for activists in Maine and nationwide.

In an election that had been billed for weeks as too close to call, Maine's often unpredictable voters repealed a state law Tuesday that would have allowed same-sex couples to wed. Gay marriage has now lost in all 31 states in which it has been put to a popular vote - a trend that the gay-rights movement had believed it could end in Maine."

Today's heartbreaking defeat unfortunately shows that lies and fear can still win at the ballot box," said Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

With 87 percent of the precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 percent of the vote. They prevailed in many of Maine's far-flung small towns and lost by a less-than-expected margin in the state's biggest city, Portland.

"The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation," declared Frank Schubert, chief organizer for the winning side.

Read the rest here.

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative group that steered substantial funds to fight gay marriage in both California and Maine, was elated by Tuesday's result, saying it shows that "that even in a New England state, if the voters have a chance to have their say, they're going to protect and defend the commonsense definition of marriage."

Thank God that WE THE PEOPLE are making the CORRECT DECISIONS AT THE BALLOT BOX to keep marriage as the union of one man and one woman!

Cornerstone Of Our Civilization

2009-09-24T06:24:00.000-07:00

Marriage between a man and a woman is the cornerstone of our civilization. - Congressman Steve King. Be sure to go to the World Net Daily Radio America site to listen to the entire interview. It's excellent!

Which Study Tells the Truth?

2009-08-12T21:45:00.000-07:00

The following is an email that I received from Ron Prentice of Protect Marriage.com. The fact that the media would release one report (that favored "strong warnings against therapists attempting to reorient homosexuals to heterosexuality," but refused to report on the fact that "therapeutic work to alter one’s sexual “orientation” has been successful, and remains consistent over time" demonstrates the blatant bias of the press. The article goes on to say, "Therapeutic work, if undertaken, is especially successful when teamed with religious faith. This study has received little to no attention in the media."

More proof that the Lamestream media is very biased. They only pick and choose what THEY want to report - not the facts of the matter at hand. Remember this the next time you read whether or not homosexuality is immutable; that is, can a person’s sexual orientation change? It depends on which study you want to believe.

Aug. 12, 2009

Dear Friends,

Two important events took place in the past week, but only one has found its way into the mainstream media. First, the American Psychological Association (APA) issued a report from its task force on “therapeutic responses to sexual orientation.” In the report, strong warnings were issued against therapists attempting to “reorient” homosexuals to heterosexuality. This one got significant press.

Yet at this week’s APA convention held in Toronto, two psychologists released the most recent statistics from their longitudinal study of sexual “reorientation" through therapeutic treatment. This study found that therapeutic work to alter one’s sexual “orientation” has been successful, and remains consistent over time. Therapeutic work, if undertaken, is especially successful when teamed with religious faith. This study has received little to no attention in the media.

While the APA task force issues strong warnings against psycho therapeutic goals of changing one’s sexual “orientation,” another reputable study presents data showing long-term success with reorientation.

Why does it matter? Because the issue of the day is whether or not homosexuality is immutable; that is, can a person’s sexual orientation change? This is one of the critical questions that will no doubt be addressed in the courts of America.

In the battle over marriage’s definition, now moving toward the U.S. Supreme Court, the homosexual lobby proclaims that sexual orientation cannot be changed. In carefully chosen words, pro-gay communications state that gays are “born that way.” They do not say, however, that homosexual orientation is genetic, because research does not agree. But you can bet that immutability will be argued in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case now underway in the federal district court in San Francisco.

Perry v. Schwarzenegger is growing in size and costs, and is shaping up to be the legal case that may decide the fate of marriage’s definition in every state of the country. Issues such as immutability, rights, compelling government interests, and child development will all figure in to materials presented to the Court.

The Proposition 8 Legal Defense Fund has been granted the right to intervene in this case on behalf of the official proponents of Prop 8, to singularly represent the majority of California’s voters who placed traditional marriage into the constitution of the state. Our committee, alone, is defending the will of the voters. And as the importance of this legal case builds, so do the expenses of top-rate legal representation! Our coffers were significantly depleted in defending the constitutionality of Prop 8 before the California Supreme Court. This new Perry v. Schwarzenegger federal court challenge means we will need to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to ensure that lawyers for gay marriage activists do not convince federal judges that marriage can be redefined “willy nilly” (as Justice Joyce Kennard famously commented of state court efforts to overturn Prop 8) and replaced with homosexual, genderless marriage. Please consider a generous gift today to the Prop 8 Legal Defense Fund.

The pro-gay lobby’s claim of immutability is one of the things that upsets the African-American community, as gay activists demand their “civil rights,” likening their “plight” to the decades of public and private discrimination suffered by African-Americans.

However, a former administrator at the University of Toledo brings clarity to the issue. Crystal Dixon, fired from her position as Assistant Vice President of Human Resources for her remarks, wrote this in a column to the Toledo Free Press:

As a Black woman... I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are ‘civil rights victims.’ Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman. I am genetically and biologically a Black woman and very pleased to be so as my Creator intended.

And Ms. Dixon was terminated because she spoke her conscience, as a private citizen. This is the course that is being paved in our legislatures and courts across the land: those who disagree with political correctness will be silenced by the imbalanced, irrational laws of “tolerance.”

Please help the Prop 8 Legal Defense Fund today!

Thank you!

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice, Executive Director
ProtectMarriage.com

www.protectmarriage.com

© 2009 ProtectMarriage.com. All Rights Reserved. ProtectMarriage.com is a project of California Renewal (I.D. #1302592)

Study Finds Fathers Crucial to Child Development

2009-08-06T11:59:00.000-07:00

No matter what the homosexual activists would want you believe, more and more proof is being shown that children need both a mother and a father for the best development scenario while growing up.

New America Media: Study Finds Fathers Crucial to Child Development

Excerpts:

The study found that children whose fathers had become more involved in their daily care did not show any increase in aggressive behavior or hyperactivity over the next two years, according to Supporting Father Involvement researcher Carolyn Cowan.

“However,” Cowan added, “children of the parents in the control group increased their behavior problems in the same time period.”

The research suggests that a father’s increased involvement in his child’s daily life provides emotional benefits for both the child and the parents.
In order to best reach the participants, the research sites worked to make sure the sessions were both clinically and culturally competent.

[T]he study is unique for several reasons: It is one of few studies to focus on the role of fathers in childrearing. It also focuses on the five integral aspects of life: self- esteem, a couple’s relationship, the parent-child relationship, family legacies or rituals, and community support and stressors. Unlike other studies, each group has a male and female facilitator, which organizers say provides a model to encourage shared responsibilities.

The "Higher Law" Argument Re: SS Marriage Debate

2009-07-16T20:32:00.000-07:00

The following article link asks the question, "Why is the morality question missing in the same-sex marriage debate?" [Note: You may need to enter your email address to view the online newspaper. Also, use the arrows at top of page to get to page 5 where the article is located. Sorry for the inconvenience - I wasn't able to copy and paste it here.]

Excerpt:

If we are mere animals, then there are no moral laws other than what any group of people may choose. If we are created in the image of God, then there are moral laws that transcend all of humanity. This has been called the "Higher Law" argument.

The author discusses what our founding fathers meant when they wrote the words, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

This section is most important when it comes to the same-sex marriage debate:

They saw it to be "self-evident" that the moral basis for law came from our Creator and therefore certain laws could be deemed immoral based on the premise of higher law.

It is important to read the entire article. However, the author makes his greatest point (IMHO) when he wrote:

There is a world of difference between the establishment of a religion and the establishment of morals based on higher law.

That is truly an excellent point! How often have biblically-based Christians gotten the complaint from homosexual activists and their cohorts, "don't push your Christianity upon me," or something similarly worded to make the baseless claim that we are "forcing our religion down their throats?"

Nothing could be further from the truth!

Most Christians know that we do not have the power to "force our religion" on anyone. A person is called by the Holy Spirit towards repentance and the saving grace through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior! All we can do is point a person in the direction of salvation. Christ does the saving through the power of the Holy Spirit!

The fact that there are "morals based on higher law" is indisputable. Whether a person recognizes that Higher Law or not doesn't make a difference. It is there.

We all know that murder is wrong. If a person doesn't want to believe that homosexual behavior is wrong, too, then he is denying the sexual design and purpose for which God made him or her!

The author is correct! Our founding fathers "were tethering the morals of our nation to a higher law."

In the body of the essay, you will read about the immoral Communistic atheism that led to the slaughter of millions of people in the Soviet Union. When people ignore the moral law set into motion by our Creator which was established by His Higher Laws, then we have moral decay, moral depravity, death and destruction. The chaos that results when reprobate minds ignore the Higher Law's call for morality and righteousness is evident every day in this life. The evidence is seen in the evil, sin and death that man inflicts upon his fellow man when he does not have the indwelling Spirit of God to guide him away from the abyss of spiritual oblivion and back to reconciliation with God.

The author shares what many of us who voted YES ON PROPOSITION 8 here in California already have experienced.

The attack on sexual morality will not stop at marriage. There will be no higher law to stop the next moral descent to the lowest common denominator. There must be something in this life that is much more than common. There must be some things sacred. The moral foundation of this nation is one of them.

Thank you, Pastor Jim Reed, for telling it like it is!

A Warning About Vile "Bruno" Movie

2009-07-08T22:26:00.000-07:00

This was not the type of movie that I would ever see, but when I read the following email, I felt it necessary to warn readers about this disgusting movie. If you feel led to donate to Movieguide: The Family Guide to Movies and Entertainment then CLICK HERE.

This Friday Universal Pictures, one of the six major Hollywood studios, is releasing BRÜNO.

Based on our screening of it, and the opinion of many other critics, BRÜNO is the most vile, perverse movie ever made by a mainstream movie studio. This disgusting, abhorrent movie contains (among other things) extremely graphic scenes of heterosexual and homosexual sex acts, explicit scenes and extended close-ups of full male and full female nudity, an extended scene of a totally nude heterosexual woman repeatedly whipping a homosexual man in his bikini briefs, partial nude scenes (including full rear male nudity) where body parts are partially covered up with black bars placed in strategic places, obscenely graphic verbal descriptions of perverse sex acts in dialogue and conversations with real people, and images of a male black baby from Africa in a hot tub with white adults who are clearly interested in doing some kind of sex acts with one another.

This movie is going out to thousands of theaters in neighborhoods like yours. Many of these theaters are located in shopping malls and movie multiplexes where children of all ages congregate, with and without parents or adult guardians.

Time is short, so we have to act now!

Studies have shown conclusively that movies like this will harm the psychological development of children and teenagers of all ages. Other studies have shown that almost half of all movie theaters do not card underage children who try to get tickets to such vile R-rated movies as BRÜNO by themselves, unaccompanied by adults.

This despicable type of pornographic paganism and child abuse must be stopped and stopped completely!

The physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well being of your children and grandchildren is at stake!!!

Right now you and I have the ability to notify city managers, prosecutors and elected officials in cities and communities all across the country to ask them to ban this movie before it opens in your community.

BUT, since this movie opens on Friday, you must act now!

Please pray for this project to notify about this disgusting movie. We have many, many communities to notify because this will need to be stopped at a local, not a national, level. We simply can't do this without your immediate help!

Please CLICK HERE and make a donation so we can alert hundreds of communities. Each donation of $79 sends the letter to 200 local District Attorneys in order to mobilize this effort.

Please help us now!

Below is the fax that we have prepared to send. Act now and we can stop this pornographic atrocity. Together, we can make a difference in the lives of your children and grandchildren, and the future of America.

God bless you.

Yours truly,

Dr. Ted Baehr

Donate here.

July 8, 2009

Dear City Manager:

Our organization has just viewed the upcoming “R-rated” movie “Brüno,” which is scheduled to come out in local movie theaters Friday, July 10. Having attended a screening of the movie, we can factually state that the movie contains the following obscene, pornographic and offensive material (and more besides):

• Extremely graphic sex scenes (including depicted heterosexual intercourse, depicted oral sex (including anal licking), depicted homosexual sodomy, and sadomasochistic whipping of a homosexual in his bikini briefs by a fully nude female “Dominatrix”);
• Scenes of full frontal male and female nudity (including extended close-ups of a man swinging his fully nude penis)
• A mocking, sexually explicit interview with a pastor who specializes in “making gay people straight” that is clearly intended to provoke the pastor by crudely offending him in a vulgar manner;
• Adopting an African child as a fashion accessory and “man magnet” to be “in” with American culture like Madonna and Angelina Jolie (then shipping that baby – whom the protagonist names “OJ” – on a plane through
checked baggage in a cardboard box);
• Images of a black baby from Africa in a hot tub with white adults who are clearly interested in performing sex acts at some point with one another;
• Making light of the Holocaust and Jews, including mentioning Adolph Hitler in a positive light and a homosexualized outfit mocking traditional Jewish dress;
• A sequence mocking African Americans and black people; and,
• Explicit verbal descriptions of sex acts.

Regardless of your views on sexuality, or your definition of humor, one thing is clear: the content of this movie should not be seen by children of any age, including underage teenagers. Originally rated NC-17, “Brüno” has since been given an R rating. An R rating simply suggests that theaters restrict viewing by children under 17 unless they are with an adult. However, Federal Trade Commission studies have shown that almost half of movie theaters do not enforce the Motion Picture Associations restrictions, and that one-third of unaccompanied 13-year-olds have purchased tickets for an R-rated movie. Additionally, many children sneak into R-rated movies or get tickets from some sick adult who finds it humorous to flood an impressionable child’s mind with obscene content. Clearly, however, “Brüno” still contains NC-17 content as well as pornographic content.

With this reality in mind, we formally ask your City Council to file an injunction against the showing of this movie in your city, or at least restrict the film to 17 and over regardless of adult accompaniment. To determine whether this movie fits the community standards of your locality, as legally defined by the United States Supreme Court, you may have to require your local movie theaters to screen the movie ahead of time for the Council, or a duly designated committee of the Council, to determine what formal action to take regarding “Brüno.”

Please let us know if there is something we can do to help you in this battle for our children.

Sincerely,

Ted Baehr, Juris Doctor
Publisher of Movieguide®

Shattering Myths

2009-07-02T08:01:00.000-07:00

All I can say is IT'S ABOUT TIME!! FINALLY a journalist tells it like it is without the liberal leftist hateful ideology that is often spewed against conservative Christian women who happen to be beautiful, but more importantly, also are great women in wonderful families, with intelligent minds, great hearts, true Christian faith, and hope (the REAL kind) to change this nation for the better.

If it were me writing the article, I would have included much more of the accomplishments of Sarah Palin as Governor of Alaska. But I really liked what was shared about Kathy Ireland.

The Washington Times: Opinionated Prejean, Ireland shatter myth
Attractive, articulate not incompatible.

Excerpts:

Take former supermodel Kathy Ireland, who is now the chief executive officer of a $1.4 billion company. She unabashedly says her faith guides her in everything she does and that it's possible to be for women's rights and also be pro-life.

Carrie Prejean, the former Miss California and Miss USA contestant who spoke out against gay marriage, says her future includes "me speaking out and taking a stand for what I believe in."

Miss Ireland credits education for another recent change in her life. She says she has always been a passionate supporter of women's rights, but she recently changed her views on abortion.

"I was pro-choice," she says. "It wasn't something I would ever choose for myself, but I felt, 'Who am I to tell a woman what to do with her body?' " Miss Ireland says her revised approach is based on science, not faith.

"You can be an atheist and know it is not OK to take a life," she says. "I dove into the medical books. I said, 'Please show me some evidence that an unborn baby is not a human being.' But there wasn't any. I read everything I could get my hands on. I called Planned Parenthood. I talked to my pro-choice friends. Nothing. The moment life begins, there is a blueprint for DNA.

"Some people assume because I am pro-life I am anti-woman, but that could not be further from the truth," she says.

Sarah Anne Sumpleoc of Fredericksburg, Va., who writes the blog Girls, God and the Good Life, says she thinks the culture may be heading to a time when conservative role models may not be such a rarity. She tries to write about role models on the blog often "because girls are looking for it."

"Whether you are 13 or 30, we all look for role models," she says. "We want to say, 'I want to be like that.' There are a whole lot of women doing amazing things, living what they believe and not afraid to show it."

Read entire article here.

Hat Tip:

Washington Times

Biblical Fallacies of Pro-Gay Theology

2009-06-29T09:02:00.000-07:00

Neil of Eternity Matters blog has an excellent post up entitled, "The Sin of Sodom."

Quote:

The sin that resulted in the destruction of Sodom & Gomorrah has traditionally been viewed to be homosexuality (hence the term sodomy).

But many pro-gay theology apologists now try to say that it was due to inhospitality or other reasons, but definitely not homosexual behavior. They point to some verses that appear to support their view but ignore many others.

Check out this excellent piece for a thorough analysis supporting the traditional view — Stand to Reason: What was the Sin of Sodom and Gomorrah?

Piecing together the biblical evidence gives us a picture of Sodom’s offense. The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was some kind of activity—a grave, ongoing, lawless, sensuous activity—that Lot saw and heard and that tormented him as he witnessed it day after day. It was an activity in which the inhabitants indulged the flesh in corrupt desires by going after strange flesh, ultimately bringing upon them the most extensive judgment anywhere in the Bible outside of the book of Revelation.

Here’s an example of the flawed theologically liberal reasoning. Some claim that the punishment was because the men of Sodom tried to rape the angels in attendance, but that doesn’t make sense.

Was the city destroyed because the men of Sodom tried to rape the angels? The answer is obviously no. God’s judgment could not have been for the rapacious attempt itself because His decision to destroy the cities was made days before the encounter (see Genesis 18:20). Further, Peter makes it clear that the wicked activity was ongoing (”day after day”), not a one-time incident. The outcry had already been going up to God for some time.

The inhospitality claim also falls flat.

. . . are we to believe that God annihilated two whole cities because they had bad manners, even granting that such manners were much more important then than now? There’s no textual evidence that inhospitality was a capital crime. However, homosexuality was punishable by death in Israel (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13). Does God ignore the capital crime, yet level two entire cities for a wrong that is not listed anywhere as a serious offense?

Read the whole article and bookmark it for the inevitable objections you’ll get from theological liberals. It is a great example of how to properly analyze biblical texts, and especially so for controversial or difficult passages.

Also see Responding to Pro-Gay Theology, which addresses the most common biblical fallacies of the movement. /quote

*******

At Neil's blog, I told him that this is an excellent analysis! I am so grateful that he shared it.

Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason is one of the best Christian apologists of our day.

More and more “pastors” are (unfortunately) buying into the “church” gay activist rhetoric – to the detriment of their own congregations.

I have good friends who are attending a church that did absolutely nothing to help pass Prop. 8 here in California. In the past, I attended several Bible studies there However, while participating in discussion that arose during study time, I noticed that when I brought up the dangers of the homosexual indoctrination issues going on in the schools and expressed the opinion that the gay “marriage” push was something to fight against, the leaders of the study (and some of the attendees) gave me the cold shoulder.

So, years later, when I observed that they didn’t join Pastor Miles McPherson, Dr. David Jeremiah, Pastor Shawn Mitchell and several others in the fight to pass Prop. 8, I knew that they were in the liberal boat along with so many others. What a shame!! I wanted to be a member of that church but that certainly turned me off.

What is also very disturbing is the fact that the church appeared to be very biblically oriented! But on this subject? Silence. Or, more like complicity. I'm not sure what the church's pastor was thinking, but to not get involved in one of the most important moral issues of present day Christian faith is quite disappointing. I would even go so far as to state that it was a sin of omission.

Jesus told us that the signs of his coming would be as "in the days of Lot," and as "in the days of Noah." Please read my previous posts with analysis on why Jesus likened the rise of violence and the increase of immorality (and the sin of Sodom - homosexuality) as signs of his return for his Church.

The Times of the Signs: The Days of Lot

Jesus Said: As in the Days of Noah

The Days of Noah Are Here

Controversy Over Homosexual Behavior Affirming Clergy

Also, read about how the secular culture is bombarding our youth with homosexual indoctrination:

It's About Manipulation

Caught Up In a Lie

Striving for Truth Against Deception

Queer Theology Exposed

Jesus Never Said?

Hat Tip: Eternity Matters

Redeeming the Rainbow

2009-06-24T21:21:00.000-07:00

Received an email this evening from MassResistance. Scott Lively has written and released a free online book entitled, Redeeming the Rainbow: A Christian Response to the 'Gay' Agenda

I have not started reading this book yet, but I have read many excellent commentaries and articles written by Scott Lively over the years at his "Abiding Truth Ministries" site. I first learned about Dr. Lively's efforts to combat homosexual indoctrination in schools when the infamous "Fistgate" controversy occurred in Massachusetts several years ago.

This book reveals 20 years of experience that Dr. Lively has gained in fighting against the radical homosexual agenda.

You can go to the link and download the entire 232-page book (PDF format), or, download individual chapters (PDF format).

Please feel free to post comments about the book. I plan to read it over the next few days.

Right now, I am reading Glenn Beck's book - Common Sense. The first few pages are already awesome!

A Good Question

2009-06-24T20:51:00.000-07:00

Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com asks:
Who will be the next governor of California? And where are the candidates on marriage licenses and marriage rights?

SaveCalifornia.com does not support or oppose candidates for public office, and provides the following information solely for educational purposes.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the former head of the ACLU of Southern California, former Speaker of the California Assembly, and former husband before his wife divorced him over his chronic adultery, says he won't run for Governor of California in 2010.

You might remember last year when Villaraigosa blasphemied Jesus Christ by publicly claiming that the Savior supports homosexual "marriages."

This leaves two top contenders for the Democratic nomination: California Attorney General and former governor Jerry Brown vs. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom.

On the subject of respecting marriage for a man and a woman, Newsom was reelected mayor in 2007 despite his affair with a married woman. More than any mayor in the state or nation, Newsom has led the charge for homosexual "marriages" in the courts, the law and the culture.

What about the other candidates? Jerry Brown also supports homosexual "marriages," trying to strike down Prop. 8 at the California Supreme Court, and now calling for Prop. 8 to be struck down in federal court.

On the Republican side, major contenders Steve Poizner and Meg Whitman both say they voted yes on Prop. 8. Poizner also says he's "fine with domestic partnerships and all." And Whitman says she supports the court validating 18,000 homosexual "marriages," and also supports homosexual adoptions and homosexual "civil unions" with all the rights of married spouses.

Second-rung Republican contenders include former congressman and state senator Tom Campbell, who has been a prominate voice in favor of homosexual "marriages" and against Prop. 8. Another possible Republican candidate is Ventura County supervisor Peter Foy, who supports marriage licenses and marriage rights for only a man and a woman.

Given that 52.3% of California voters said marriage should only be between "a man and a woman" last November, will they remain consistent on this point when voting for their next governor? It's a serious, valid question, given that the next governor will likely sign or veto homosexual "marriage" legislation.

But Israel has rejected what is good;

an enemy will pursue him.

They set up kings without my consent;

they choose princes without my approval.

With their silver and gold

they make idols for themselves

to their own destruction.

Hosea 8:3-4 NIV

Hat Tip: Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia via email

Gay Activist Haters & Cohorts Finally Got Their Way

2009-06-10T19:23:00.000-07:00

Why am I not surprised about this? Because the endless, relentless attacks against Miss California, Carrie Prejean, would not end until the gay activist haters and their cohorts got their way and had her dethroned.

Miss California USA Prejean dethroned.

However, they have no power over her steadfast relationship with Jesus Christ as her Lord and Savior. Her eternal crown of life cannot be taken away from her. It is, indeed, worth far more than any earthly pageant crown.

Those who have rejected Christ are the eternal losers.

All of those meanspirited people who are now celebrating Prejean's loss of the Miss California title should be aware of what Jesus warned them about "losing [their] own soul":

Mat 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Mar 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Court Upholds Only Half of Prop. 8??

2009-05-26T13:07:00.000-07:00

'An arm and a leg cut off marriage'

California Supreme Court upholds only half of Prop. 8

Sacramento, California -- Today's ruling by the California Supreme Court that some 18,000 homosexual "marriages" are valid, despite the vote of the people to prohibit such legal recognition, has frustrated and disappointed pro-family citizens who voted for true protection of marriage licenses for a man and a woman.

"While it was good that the majority of the justices ruled only man-woman marriages could be performed after Prop. 8 passed, it's wrong and unconstitutional for the judges to permit counterfeit marriages in clear violation of Prop. 8," said Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, a statewide pro-family organization that has been fighting for natural marriage in California for more than a decade. "An arm and a leg have been cut off the natural institution of marriage in California."

Prop. 8 proponents' rebuttal arguments in the voter information guide stated: "Your YES vote on Proposition 8 means that only marriage between a man and a woman will be valid or recognized in California, regardless of when or where performed." Thomasson said, "'Regardless of when...performed' obviously means that pre-existing same-sex 'marriages' are not valid in light of Prop. 8. Why is it so hard to understand what the words 'is' and 'when' mean?"

"The judges have ignored the straightforward, retroactive effect of Prop. 8, which specified that the only valid marriage in California 'is' between a man and a woman, 'regardless of when' the marriage was performed," said Thomasson. "This is unconstitutional and unjust. The court's own rules require that the counterfeit marriages be declared null and void. But instead of respecting the clear text of Prop. 8 and by ignoring the clarifying ballot statements, the court has gone with its own feelings and its own social agenda in violation of the judges' solemn oaths to uphold the written constitution. The voters have been handed back an altered ballot." Today's decision means every homosexual couple that wanted a "same-sex marriage" last year, got one. The decision also means some 18,000 counterfeit marriages will be held out as role models to impressionable children. "By allowing these numerous false marriages to stand, the Supreme Court is holding out to impressionable boys and girls the unnatural role model of homosexual 'marriages'" said Thomasson. "This is not what the people of California voted for. They voted to ensure that the only marriage in California is a marriage between a man and a woman."

The California Supreme Court's own rules depend on ballot arguments to determine voter intent: "In construing constitutional and statutory provisions, whether enacted by the Legislature or by initiative, the intent of the enacting body is the paramount consideration.... We are mindful that the goal of statutory construction is ascertainment of legislative intent so that the purpose of the law may be effectuated." -- In re Lance W. (1985), 37 Cal.3d at 889. Evidence of the legislative or popular intent of an enactment includes not merely the text of the amendment, but also other "indicia of voters' intent," including ballot summaries and arguments. -- Legislature v. Eu (1991) 54 Cal.3d at 504; Lance W., 37 Cal.3d at 888 n.8.

Prop. 8 was approved last fall by 52.3% of the voters. It added Section 7.5 to Article 1 of the California Constitution, reading, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The vote of the people overruled the California Supreme Court, which, on a 4 to 3 vote, had invented "same-sex marriages" in May 2008.
-- end --

SaveCalifornia.com is a leading West Coast nonprofit, nonpartisan organization representing children and families. We stand for marriage and family, parental rights, the sanctity of human life, religious freedom, financial freedom, and back-to-basics education.

Feminist Verbally Abuses Miss California

2009-05-02T19:39:00.000-07:00

By now, it is a well known fact that far left liberal loons in the media are doing their utmost evil best to viciously spew verbal attacks against Miss California (who was the Miss U.S.A. runner-up) Carrie Prejean for her HONEST ANSWER concerning HER OPINION AND BELIEFS that marriage is, and should remain, the union of one man and one woman, just as it is revealed through God's Word, the Bible!

Please see my Talk Wisdom post: Conservatism is the Antidote to Tyranny, [Note: Now posted in its entirety below.] which reveals the reasons why secular progressive far left liberals (a.k.a. "Statists") refuse to allow this young woman the liberty to express her God-given beliefs without being verbally harrassed in some of the most despicable ways.

Don't pass up watching the first video. It will make the point of argument in the next video much more poignant.

Next, take special note of the video argument between radio talk show host, Laura Ingraham (who subbed for Bill O'Reilly on T.V. last evening) and a self-professed "feminist" - Gloria Feldt - who, instead of defending a young woman and her heartfelt beliefs, instead, disparages her even further!

The following is a copy of the entire post at Talk Wisdom.

Conservatism is the Antidote to Tyranny

Found the following video today - quite by accident actually. It is absolutely riveting! In the beginning, it asks the question, "Humanity, what have you become? When animals become more human than us...there is a real problem. Near the end you will see the statement, "when animals become more compassionate than humans, it is a sign of the end times. Wake up people." [Note: Some of what is written on the screen of the video doesn't actually apply to this post.]

As I watched this video, a thought jumped out at me. The parallels of the attacks we view in that video and what is happening in our nation today between the current soft tyranny of government which is incessantly attacking the patriots who believe in liberty, freedom, conservative values and ethics, free speech rights, low taxes etc. cannot be missed or denied. [Note: A few paragraphs down, you will see a second video that serves as a perfect example of the far-left liberal haters and their attacks against anyone who does not believe as they do.]

I started reading Mark Levin's book, "Liberty and Tyranny - A Conservative Manifesto" today. Get this book! It is excellent! I have only completed the first two chapters, but Mark has already brilliantly exposed the differences between the liberal leftist progressive "Statists" and their worldview for America, vs. the Conservative ideals that were the foundation of our nation. I have highlighted so many paragraphs that I would love to share.

Levin explains why he doesn't use the term "liberal," but rather the term "statist" to describe the Modern Liberal in the United States today.

The Modern Liberal believes in the supremacy of the state, thereby rejecting the principles of the Declaration and the order of the civil society, in whole or part. For the Modern Liberal, the individual's imperfection and personal pursuits impede the objective of a utopian state. In this, Modern Liberalism promotes what French historian Alexis de Tocqueville described as a soft tyranny, which becomes increasingly more oppressive, potentially leading to a hard tyranny (some form of totalitarianism). As the word "liberal" is, in its classical meaning, the opposite of authoritarian, it is more accurate, therefore, to characterize the Modern Liberal as Statist.

Oftentimes, a video is worth a thousand word essay. Please watch this exchange between radio talk show host, Laura Ingraham (who subbed for Bill on the O'Reilly Factor yesterday) and Gloria Feldt on the subject of the verbal bashing that Miss California has been receiving from the Lamestream Media and the SILENCE of "feminist" groups (that are supposed to come to the rescue of women being verbally attacked like that).

Certainly doesn't remind us of how the herd of buffalo came back (with reinforcements) to rescue the young calf that was viciously being ganged up on by many tigers in the first video above...does it?

In the following paragraph quotes from Levin's book you will see exactly WHY Ms. Gloria Feldt could not bring herself to defend Miss California for her own personal beliefs (despite the fact that she does not agree with them) and actually jumped on the bandwagon to continue the attacks against this young woman.

Levin's book [with my comments added]:

The Statist [think Gloria Feldt in previous video as just one example] veils his pursuits in moral indignation, intoning in high dudgeon* [see update below] the injustices and inequities of liberty and life itself, for which only he can provide justice and bring a righteous resolution. And when the resolution proves elusive, as it undoubtedly does -- whether the Marxist promise of "the workers' paradise" or the Great Society's "War on poverty" -- the Statist [think Obama and many in Congress today] demands ever more authority to wring out the imperfections of mankind's existence. Unconstrained by constitutional prohibitions,[Obama] what is left to limit the Statist's [Obama and most in Congress] ambitions but his own moral compass, which has already led him astray? He is never circumspect about his own shortcomings. Failure is not the product of his beliefs but merely want of power and resources. Thus are born endless rationalizations for seizing ever more governmental authority. [Obama admin, Congress, courts]

In the midst stands the individual,[think Laura Ingraham defending the free speech rights of Miss California in that video] who was a predominate focus of the Founders. When living freely and pursuing his own legitimate interests, the individual displays qualities that are antithetical to the Statist's [Feldt] - [qualities like Laura's and Carrie Prejean's] initiative, self-reliance, and independence. As the Statist [Feldt, Obama, many in Congress] is building a culture of conformity and dependency, where the ideal citizen takes on dronelike qualities in service to the state, [think ObamaBorg Bots] the individual must be drained of uniqueness and self-worth, and deterred from independent thought or behavior. This is achieved through varying methods of economic punishment and political suppression. [the spending bills, promotion of abortion with tax-payer money, silencing conservatives etc.]

The Statist also knows that despite his successful usurpations, enough citizens are still skeptical and even distrustful of politicians and government that he cannot force his will all at once. [this is where Obama and the majority in Congress are making HUGE mistakes - because they are both forcing their will upon the people at a rate that makes the average patriot's head spin!] Thus he marches in incremental steps, [well - used to do it that way], adjusting his pace as circumstances dictate. [like using a financial crisis to get taxpayer money for 9,000 earmarks and porkulus spending]. Today his pace is more rapid, [yup!] for resistance has slowed. [NOT ANYMORE! TEA Party power!!] And at no time does the Statist do an about-face. But not so with some who claim the mantle of conservatism but are, in truth, neo-Statists, [like that traitor Arlen Spector, Olympia Snowe, and Susan Collins] who would have the Conservative abandon the high ground of the founding principles for the quicksand of a soft tyranny. [Obama & cohorts]

Mark goes on and describes the fact that "liberty's treasures defy cataloguing." The Statist's scorn for liberty is misplaced and highly corrosive. Levin observes:

Liberty's permeance in American society often makes its manifestations elusive or invisible to those born into it. Even if liberty is acknowledged, it is often taken for granted and its permanence assumed.

WOW! What a powerful point he makes! In fact, this is why I think that many college students were led astray into the Kool-Aid cult of Obamaland during the campaign. They don't study history and know not of the dangers of socialism. To them, it was something knew (that is...if they even knew what Obama meant by his brand of "hope" and "change.")

I have seen many bumper stickers that have the "COEXIST" word accompanied by different religious symbols on it. That's all well and good, one might say. The fact that we live in a primarily Christian nation allows such freedoms. But the trouble is, when it comes to governing, the Marxism/Socialism/Communism/Islamism agenda of the Obama Admin. doesn't so easily "coexist" with the liberty of our Constitutional Republic. All of those "isms" are, each and of themselves, an increasingly corrosive threat to liberty!! As Mark states in chapter 2 - "the Statist's Utopia can take many forms (see above) but they are all of the same species - tyranny." What's more, as we saw in the Laura Ingraham vs. Gloria Feldt conversation (more like argument!), "the primary principle around with the Statist organizes can be summed up in a single word -equality."

Now watch this. Mark Levin brilliantly lays out the differences between what the Founders meant by the term "equality" vs. how the Statists use (actually - misuse) the term.

Equality, as understood by the Founders, is the natural right of every individual to live freely under self-government, to acquire and retain property he creates through his own labor, and to be treated impartially before a just law. Moreover, equality should not be confused with perfection, for man is also imperfect, making his application of equalism, even in the most just society, imperfect. Otherwise, inequality is the natural state of man in the sense that each individual is born unique in all his human characteristics. Therefore, equality and inequality, properly comprehended, are both engines of liberty.

The Statist, however, misuses equality to pursue uniform economic and social outcomes. He must continuously enhance his power at the expense of self-government and violate the individual's property rights at the expense of individual liberty, for he believes that through persuasion, deception, and coercion he can tame man's natural state and man's perfection can, therefore, be achieved in Utopia. The Statist must claim the power to make that which is unequal equal and that which is imperfect perfect. This is the hope the Statist offers, if only the individual surrenders himself to the all-powerful state. Only then can the impossible be made possible.

During the campaign, Obama is quoted as saying, "[O]ur individual salvation depends on collective salvation." But Mark Levin points out that "salvation is not government's to give. Indeed, it is not a grant to mankind from mankind. Under the wrong conditions and in the wrong hands, this deviant view is a powerful tool against humanity."

This is what millions of Americans, including the TEA Party participants, are sensing from Obama. They are all seeing this soft tyranny creeping up and are highly concerned of what it will look like four years from now. One good thing to note is that our American history and traditions make it more difficult to transform our civil society towards tyranny. And Mark makes this excellent point:

[S]till, tyranny is a threat that looms over all societies, preventable only by the active vigilance of the people.

Levin concludes the first chapter:

The Conservative does not despise government. He despises tyranny. This is precisely why the Conservative reveres the Constitution and insists on adherence to it. An "effective" government that operates outside its constitutional limitations is a dangerous government. By abandoning principle for efficiency, the neo-Statist,[think RINOS] it seems, is no more bound to the Constitution than is the Statist.

[T]he Conservative is alarmed by the ascent of a soft tyranny and its cheery acceptance by the neo-Statist. He knows that liberty once lost is rarely recovered. He knows of the decline and eventual failure of past republics. And he knows that the best prescription for addressing society's real and perceived ailments if no to further empower an already enormous federal government beyond its constitutional limits, but to return to the founding principles. A free people living in a civil society, working in self-interested coorperation, and a government operating within the limits of its authority promote more prosperity, opportunity, and happiness for more people than any alternative. Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny precisely because its principles are the founding principles.

Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny for many reasons. But perhaps one of the most important reasons of all is because we believe, as the Founding Fathers did that prudence must be exercised in assessing change.

Levin:

Prudence is the highest virtue for it is judgment drawn on wisdom. The proposed change should be informed by the experience, knowledge, and traditions of society, tailored for a specific purpose, and accomplished through a constitutional construct that ensures thoughtful deliberation by the community. Change unconstrained by prudence produces unpredictable consequences, threatening ordered liberty with chaos and ultimately despotism, and placing at risk the very principles the Conservative holds dear.

Sounds EXACTLY like what we are going through right now...doesn't it?

Source:
Liberty and Tyranny - A Conservative Manifesto by Mark Levin; Threshold Editions of Simon and Schuster, Inc. 2009 pp. 4, 8-11, 14, 18-19.

*******

* Update:

I have to confess, I really didn't know the complete meaning of the term "dudgeon" when I first quoted it from Mark Levin's book. I figured that it meant something like "anger" and "hatred." This morning, I decided to look up the word in the dictionary. It is a highly descriptive word and fits EXACTLY to the situation that readers have witnessed in the exchange between Laura Ingraham and Gloria Feldt regarding Miss California.

dudg⋅eon1 /ˈdʌdʒən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [duhj-uhn] Show IPA
–noun a feeling of offense or resentment; anger: We left in high dudgeon.

Origin:
1565–75; orig. uncert.

Synonyms:
indignation, pique.

Notice that the first definition claims that the origin was "uncertain."

Now, look at this "obsolete" entry at dictionary.com:

dudg⋅eon2 /ˈdʌdʒən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [duhj-uhn] Show IPA
–noun Obsolete. 1. a kind of wood used esp. for the handles of knives, daggers, etc.
2. a handle or hilt made of this wood.
3. a dagger having such a hilt.

Origin:
1400–50; late ME; cf. AF digeon

There is more! The following entry describes the "smiling Ms. Feldt" quite well as she systematically shoots daggers of hatred against Miss California!

dudg·eon 1 (dŭj'ən)
n. A sullen, angry, or indignant humor: "Slamming the door in Meg's face, Aunt March drove off in high dudgeon" (Louisa May Alcott).

[Origin unknown.]

dudg·eon 2 (dŭj'ən)
n.
Obsolete A kind of wood used in making knife handles.
Archaic
A dagger with a hilt made of this wood.
The hilt of a dagger.

[Middle English dogeon, possibly from Anglo-Norman.]

The following describes how the term "dudgeon" relates to our current use of the term "daggers" when we use it metaphorically to describe "throwing daggers" in verbal spewings of hate:

Dudgeon

Dudg"eon\, n. 1. The root of the box tree, of which hafts for daggers were made. --Gerarde (1597).

2. The haft of a dagger. --Shak.

3. A dudgeon-hafted dagger; a dagger. --Hudibras.
Dudgeon

Dudg"eon\, n. [W. dygen anger, grudge.] Resentment; ill will; anger; displeasure.

I drink it to thee in dudgeon and hostility.

Sir T. Scott.
Dudgeon

Dudg"eon\, a. Homely; rude; coarse. [Obs.]

By my troth, though I am plain and dudgeon, I would not be an ass. --Beau. & Fl.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
Cite This Source

Notice the synonyms:

Synonyms

huff
miff
pique
resentment
ruffled feathers
umbrage
bitterness
anger
displeasure
fury

Did you see that first one - "huff"?? Reminds me of Ariana Huffington! Sometimes people DO live up to the meaning of their name!!! LOL!!!

P.S. Wayne of Jeremiah Films has placed this post (via my Protect Biblical Marriage blog) in his headline list today.

Thanks Wayne! LOTS of good information to read over there!!

Carrie Prejean - No Compromise, Stand Firm on Faith

2009-04-26T15:07:00.001-07:00

What an AWESOME SERVICE at The Rock Church today!!! Watch the video of Carrie Prejean with Pastor Miles McPherson: No Compromise: Standing Firm On Your Faith

Carrie Prejean, Miss California and Miss USA’s first runner up, will appear at the Rock Church during services on Sunday April 26th. Prejean is a member of the Rock family and actively serves in church outreach ministries.

During the Q&A portion of last Sunday's Miss USA pageant, Prejean expressed her belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman, touching off a firestorm of widely publicized criticism from Pageant judge and nationally known celebrity blogger, Perez Hilton. In subsequent appearances, Prejean has stood fast in her morals and biblical truths, refusing to compromise her faith.

Sunday's services will feature a discussion with the Rock’s Senior Pastor Miles McPherson, who spent time with Prejean in the critical hours following the pageant. They will share the story behind the controversy that we haven’t heard.

Also posted at Talk Wisdom: No Compromise - Standing Firm On Your Faith

God Bless Carrie Prejean

2009-04-21T14:21:00.001-07:00

When I heard the name, "Carrie Prejean," I thought to myself that the name sounded familiar. While texting with my daughter this morning, she reminded me that they had become good friends while they both played on the same softball team years ago. She wrote, "Mom - check out the softball photo of the team in red on the shelf above your computer desk. She had brown hair back then."

Yep...now I remember her! When I have some time (and guidance on how to do it) I will scan and upload that softball team photo.

For now, I want to share a link to the video of Carrie's answer to the homosexual man (who called her a very cruel and ugly name afterwards in his own video), and how very proud we all are of her for standing up for her convictions and not sacrificing them for the pageant crown.

Miss California loses for supporting marriage between a man and woman.

Excerpt:

“Good for Miss California,” said Johnny Franks in The Chattanoogan. She was asked a loaded question by an openly gay judge, and held to her morals when it would have been so easy to “sacrifice them for the crown.” Shame on everybody who booed her—“since when do we live in a pink Nazi society that sensors free speech.”

Some good comments there:

JoAnn
Posted April 20, 2009 at 5:23 pm Permalink
Everybody pray for her, she stood up for her cinvictions, I believe God will bless her. We will be put down for anything against the gay agenda but consider the source, they are serving satan and not God. It is a very different world we live in and it isn’t going to get any better so hang in there for what the Bible stands for and we will win in the end.

John Kehoe
Posted April 20, 2009 at 5:36 pm Permalink
My 18 year old grandson and I watched the tournament, and Miss California had won hands down, but when that flaming gay judge asked that question, and she gave a courageous and correct answer we turned to one another and said she was washed up, because she stood on principle. In any event, I thought the Miss USA pageasnt was on looks and not on politial correctness. When did this change? John Kehoe

james dome
Posted April 21, 2009 at 4:28 am Permalink
She is a winner to God and that’s where it matters. Man’s ways are not God’s ways. This life is temporary.

Karen
Posted April 21, 2009 at 10:55 am Permalink
Kudos to Miss California for being a true American, one who stands for her belief in the face of adversity and even at the cost of a crown. Boo to Perez Hilton for being such a hypocrit, not a champion against bigotry. Boo for the Miss America committee who chose the judges. Miss California’s courage will long outlive the Miss America Contest.

Lastly, isn't it ironic that Miss California is getting all of the attention because of her determination to not be "politically correct?" I don't even know who actually won the pageant!

Hat Tip:

Alliance Defense Fund

This post and comments are also available at my Talk Wisdom blog.

*******

Update: A great email letter from Ron Prentice of Protectmarriage.com:

April 20, 2009

Dear Friend,

It seems that there is no place left where gay activists won’t attempt to force their agenda onto the rest of society. Same-sex marriage, of course, is at the top of their list.

Last night during the Miss USA contest, one of the contest judges, gay gossip blogger Perez Hilton, asked Miss California Carrie Prejean that since Vermont has now legalized gay marriage shouldn’t every state follow suit? Ms. Prejean had the courage to express her views and said, “Well, I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you very much.”

Ms. Prejean’s comments were cheered by the crowd, but a smattering of jeers could be heard in the background by a few who were incensed at her answer. According to FoxNEWS.com, arguments broke out in the lobby of the theater, with one gay man shouting, "I think it's ridiculous that she got first runner-up. That is not the value of 95 percent of the people in this audience. Look around this audience and tell me how many gay men there are." Is there an unwritten rule that Miss USA contestants must hold values in agreement with homosexual activists?

For his own part, Hilton immediately cut a video blog where he ripped Ms. Prejean, calling her a “stupid b***h” and referring to her in language so vile that it can’t even be hinted at by its first letter.

Ms. Prejean was named runner-up in the contest and today there was considerable discussion in the blogosphere about whether her answer might have cost her the title. Prejean told FoxNEWS.com that she had “no regrets” and was happy with the answer she gave.

We’re very proud of Ms. Prejean for speaking her mind in support of traditional marriage. She represented the silent majority in America and expressed a point of view that over 7 million California voters also expressed just last November. In fact, in the history of this issue every single state that has voted on it has voted to affirm traditional marriage.

The outcry from some activists in the gay community over Ms. Prejean’s comments are indicative of how far they will go to force their same-sex marriage agenda on society. Miss California is vilified by Perez Hilton in a video blog for respectfully answering his question, and gay men are shouting against her in the theater lobby. Yet we are supposed to take homosexual leaders at face value that if same-sex marriage were legalized they would never force this teaching onto children in the schools.

Thank you, Miss California, for knowing the truth about marriage and standing up for it, even when you knew that your honest answer may hinder your chances for the crown of Miss USA.

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice
Chairman
ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8

www.protectmarriage.com

Majority of Californians Are With Us.

2009-04-11T08:07:00.000-07:00

Received the following email that I found as quite encouraging in the midst of the recent developments in the same-sex marriage battle:

April 6, 2009

Dear Friend,

We continue to wait for the California Supreme Court to issue their much-anticipated decision upholding Proposition 8. As you know, the court heard oral arguments on March 5. A decision is due by June 5, but could come any day. While one can never be certain, most legal experts expect the Court to uphold Proposition 8. We will keep you posted on the outcome.

Key No on 8 Leader Says They Will Lose 2010 Ballot Fight

In a surprising admission, a key leader of the No on 8 campaign has said publicly for the first time that if the homosexual community pursues a new ballot initiative in 2010, “we’re going to lose.” Kate Kendall, Executive Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights and a member of the No on 8 executive committee told a prominent Bay Area gay newspaper that public polls, including the recently published Field Poll, overstate support for gay marriage. “People lie,” she said. “We're at 42 percent or 43 percent. We could claw our way to 48 percent but we never get past 48 percent."

Kendall, who told the Bay Area Reporter that she does not plan to play a leadership role in the next campaign, said that it will take time beyond 2010 for the gay community to mount the kind of public education effort necessary to convince voters to support same-sex marriage. "The 64 million dollar question is when do we go back. No doubt if we lose in court, the only relief is to repeal Prop 8 at the ballot…[H]aving gone through the draining, rigorous Prop 8 campaign I have a better inkling of what it is going to take and in this economy, I worry that we still do not see enough of actual public education conversations that have to happen. We just haven't had enough time."

Protect Marriage is keenly aware of the need to engage the public in education and outreach in support of traditional marriage. We will not sit idly by as the homosexual community attempts to define the same-sex marriage issue on their terms. We are hard at work developing programs to affirm traditional marriage. Those will be announced soon. Stay tuned…

State Settles “Party A/Party B” Lawsuit

You may recall the case of Gideon and Rachel Codding, a young couple who married a few weeks after the California Supreme Court legalized gay marriage. To their dismay, the marriage license provided by the state no longer allowed them to register as bride and groom. Instead, they were forced to register as “Party A” and “Party B.” Incensed, the young couple struck out the references to “party” and instead handwrote “bride” and “groom” on the license. The state refused to accept the license and the couple filed suit seeking to force the state to validate their marriage.

When public outrage began developing about the “Party A/Party B” marriage licenses, the state backtracked and decided to allow couples to refer to themselves as bride and groom. Recently, the state reached a legal settlement with the Coddings and accepted their hand-written marriage license. The state also agreed to pay the couple’s attorney fees.

ProtectMarriage – Yes on 8 Campaign Judged One of the Best in America

The Yes on Proposition 8 campaign has been judged to be one of the best political campaigns waged in America in 2008 by the American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC). The Yes on 8 campaign, managed by Schubert Flint Public Affairs, won numerous “Pollie” awards at the AAPC annual convention last week in Washington DC. Awards included “Public Affairs Team of the Year,” “Best Television and Radio Campaign” for a ballot issue, and “Award of Excellence” for use of cable television. Additionally, our consultants won numerous awards for use of new media activities such as email, online fundraising and Internet advertising.

The executive committee of ProtectMarriage.com commends our consulting team for the recognition they deserve for the winning effort they helped organize on our behalf.

Berkeley to Sacramento March a Flop

In a sign that support for homosexual marriage is fizzling, a much-hyped march of homosexuals between Berkeley and Sacramento was a dismal failure. The march, even though it originated in one of the most liberal communities in the nation, attracted only about 30 participants, according to independent news reports. Organizers had hoped for hundreds of people to make the trek to Sacramento to support gay marriage.

Supporters of traditional marriage have withstood incredible personal and professional attacks since Prop 8 was enacted in November. Countless news reports have chronicled the intolerance of many in the homosexual community in targeting supporters of traditional marriage simply for participating in the democratic process and supporting Proposition 8.

As difficult as it has been to watch the gay community attempt to manipulate public opinion and portray our loyal supporters in the most negative light possible, it is increasingly becoming clear that their efforts are backfiring. Public polls show that support for traditional marriage is on the rise, while support for same-sex marriage is declining. Even leaders in the gay community acknowledge that support for their agenda is over-stated, and they publicly doubt they can gain the support of a majority of voters. Their marches and demonstrations are losing steam.

Sacramento “Insiders” Website Conducting Online Survey on Prop 8 Ruling

The “inside the Capitol” publication Capitol Weekly is conducting an online survey asking people if the ruling of the Iowa Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage in that state should be followed by the California Supreme Court. If you’d like to cast your vote in support of traditional marriage, click here.

Thank you for your continued support of traditional marriage. Though the media doesn’t often report it, the majority of Californians are with us. We are heartened in our faithful support of what God has ordained: marriage is between a man and a woman. On behalf of the leadership of ProtectMarriage.com, we wish you and your family a blessed Easter.

Sincerely,

Ron Prentice
Chairman
ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8

Keep Fighting for our Children!

2009-04-08T07:40:00.000-07:00

The following is a copy of a post from my Talk Wisdom blog. There are several reasons why Christians must continue to fight against the rise of the radical homosexual agenda. The main reason is because religious freedom, and the right to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ depends upon it! We must also do it for the sake of our children!!

The indoctrination of homosexuality going on throughout our nation these days is increasing exponentially now that they perceive Resident Obama as a key ally in the White House.

Here is the Talk Wisdom post:

Have you noticed this? The 'gay rights' political machine is thoroughly intent on steamrolling over the majority of the public opinion that holds to the definition of marriage to remain as one man and one woman. In addition, those who hold objections to the homosexual mafia's continual bullying and enforcement of 'gay' issues almost have the appearance of not mattering to Christians anymore.

But don't you ever believe that!

It is one of Satan's greatest ploys - to get believers in Jesus Christ to care more about being "liked" rather than to preach the need for sinners to repent and apply the true gospel for the salvation of souls.

There are several articles about the current rapid fire of events being forced upon America by the radical homosexual agenda activists over at World Net Daily.

1. Christian college creates homosexual housing
'It's a chance for students to be part of a unique experience'

2. Iowa, Vermont 'marriage' decisions 'aberrations'
30 states have 1-man, 1-woman definitions in constitutions

There are several more to read over at WorldNetDaily. Even Michael Savage, who became a new columnist at that website today, has his say in The Rising Tide of Pink Fascism .

There is hope, though. There is always hope! When and in Whom? It is when Christians and conservatives don't give up the fight, continue to speak their minds which are guided by the Holy Spirit of God. Share the Gospel of Christ and take a stand against the moral decline happening in our society today. Read and study the Bible so that you are properly equipped in this battle between good and evil.

The following article is just one example that shows how persistence often pays off:

3. 'Gay' promo objections get eHarmony attention
Customer confirms refund after opposing moral change

Last, but certainly not least, we can see why this problem is widening with wishy-washy, namby-pamby pastors like Rick Warren:

4. America's wishy-washy pastors

It is just too good and too important to only post an excerpt, so here is the article in it's entirety:

Quote:

America's wishy-washy pastors

Posted: April 08, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

America achieved its independence and freedom in the 18th century in large part because colonial pastors stood up for biblical principles, preached them, lived them and refused to back down from them – even in the face of death.

The American War of Independence has been accurately called a "pulpit revolution" for this reason. It was inspired by great men of God who recognized evil and called it by its right name.

What a difference two centuries, combined with affluence and the corporatization of the 501(c)3 church culture has made.

A good example of this was on display on CNN's "Larry King Live" this week, as "America's Pastor" Rick Warren did a soft shoe act on his role in the same-sex marriage battle over Proposition 8 in California.

"You know, Larry, there was a story within a story that never got told," he said. "In the first place, I am not an anti-gay or anti-gay marriage activist. I never have been, never will be. During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never – never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going. The week before the – the vote, somebody in my church said, Pastor Rick, what – what do you think about this? And I sent a note to my own members that said, I actually believe that marriage is – really should be defined, that that definition should be – say between a man and a woman.

"And then all of a sudden out of it, they made me, you know, something that I really wasn't," Warren continued. "And I actually – there were a number of things that were put out. I wrote to all my gay friends – the leaders that I knew – and actually apologized to them. That never got out. There were some things said that – you know, everybody should have 10 percent grace when they say public statements. And I was asked a question that made it sound like I equated gay marriage with pedophilia or incest, which I absolutely do not believe. And I actually announced that. All of the criticism came from people that didn't know me. Not a single criticism came from any gay leader who knows me and knows that for years, we've been working together on AIDS issues and all these other things."

What are we to make of such mealy-mouthed, wishy-washy, namby-pamby hokum?

It's a great illustration of America's most prominent church leader equivocating and backtracking and saying almost nothing coherent so that he will offend no one.

Let me lay it on the line: This is not the way Yeshua talked or behaved. It is not the example of the one whom Rick Warren claims to emulate and worship. There is nothing prophetic or biblical or courageous or principled about this kind of Christian witness.

If there is a subject upon which the Bible is crystal clear – from beginning to end – it is homosexuality. Another subject about which no one can misinterpret what the Bible says is marriage. Let's examine the text:

Leviticus 18:22 (KJV): "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Romans 1:22-27: "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."

Some suggest Yeshua (Jesus) Himself was silent on these matters. Nothing could be further from the truth. First of all, Yeshua said He did not come to overturn the law but to fulfill it. He taught that He was and is the Word – its living fulfillment. He explained that He is eternal and created the Heavens, the Earth and man. The Bible also says God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. And Yeshua never contradicted any of the law. He quoted from it. He taught from it. He explained it. He affirmed it. On the road to Emmaus, He gave two disciples a Bible study from the Torah, revealing Himself at the very core of it.

The law, in fact, was the measuring stick by which He was judged perfect and worthy of serving as the atonement for the sins of mankind – including the sin of abominations like homosexuality.

But Yeshua also spoke very specifically and clearly on the subject about which Rick Warren appears so self-consciously waffling.

In Matthew 19:4-6, it says: "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 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? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

Here Yeshua had a golden opportunity to explain any middle ground in this issue of men and women – if there were any.

There is no middle ground on this issue.

Either you believe the Bible or you don't.

If you don't, there are consequences. If you do, you are obligated to take a stand for righteousness. Of course, there are worldly consequences for that, too – for some apparently too great to accept.

Followers of Yeshua have a choice: They can please God or please men. They can accept God's laws, which are not burdensome, and obey them, or they can reject them and try to tickle the ears of men. They can offend God or offend men.

But followers of Jesus cannot find some happy medium where they can please God and please the world. Nobody can.

It's time for America's pastor class to decide where they stand – with the world or with the God of the universe.

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. His book "Taking America Back: A Radical Plan to Revive Freedom, Morality and Justice" has gained newfound popularity in the wake of November's election. Farah also edits the online intelligence newsletter Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, in which he utilizes his sources developed over 30 years in the news business.

Hat Tip:

World Net Daily

Gay Activist Lunacy & Selfishness

2009-03-11T19:51:00.000-07:00

Gay activists and their heterosexual supporters in California remind me of the screaming and crying types of little children who throw a tantrum every time they don't get their way. I'm referring to the type of child who obviously has little or no adult supervision at home and therefore, totally lacks any semblance or form of discipline. These are the types of children at school who would stamp their feet, pound the table, and call the lunch room monitor and yell bloody murder just because they didn't get their way about something.

Here's a silly analogy. Four children are sitting at a lunch table at school. They were given the privilege of having 4 cupcakes placed in the middle of a table. Along comes a fifth child, who decides to bully the rest because he/she wasn't given a cupcake. So, he/she would rather throw the 4 treats on the floor, trample on them, and see the destruction of a privilege that was already given to the other four children - just because he/she can't have one too.

Are there no bounds to their selfishness?

Over at Maggie's Notebook, I read a post that, at first, I didn't even want to re-post here. However, I decided that spreading the knowledge of gay and lesbian activist lunacy here in California is a must; in order for others to be forewarned.

California To Get Rid of Marriage.

Here's a copy of what is written at that link:

Quote:

Why is it that I am not surprised at the tactics that Gays and Lesbians will go to force the idea of Gay marriage on the nation. On November 4, 2008 the voters of California passed Proposition 8 which states:

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
This passed 52.3% to 47.7%. Thus the voters of California spoke saying no to Gay marriage.

This is not the end of the argument. The supporters of Gay marriage are not going to take that lying down. They have a new tactic. Get rid of marriage. No I am not joking.

California's top election official says supporters can start collecting signatures for a proposed ballot measure to strike the word "marriage" from all state laws.

Supporters of this ballot measure want to replace it with the term "domestic partnership," while keeping all the rights of marriage in place.

Read the full story here.

Domestic Partnership is not the same as Marriage. In a partnership, one can just leave the partnership without legal recourse. In a Marriage it takes a divorce to dissolve it. One can have multiple partners in a Domestic Partnership. In a Marriage a person can have only one spouse at a time.

Forcing all people in California to give up Marriage in favor of Domestic Partnership is wrong. But knowing the liberals, idiots, nincompoops in California they will now pass this idea overwhelmingly and sound the death knoll of the American Family.

If this measure passes how long do you think it will be before it is brought to every state in the US?

Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege. If it was a right the government would have to supply each and every person in the nation with a spouse. They don't. And a couple planning on marrying should not have to go and get a Domestic Partnership license but a Marriage license.

Changing the name of Marriage to Domestic Partnership is just a bad idea. /quote

Hat tip:

Maggies Notebook

Shameful Sean

2009-02-24T19:45:00.000-08:00

Know what? I am discovering that it takes a rabid, radical pro-gay bigot to turn the term "shameful" upon its head! Did you catch what Sean Penn said during the Oscars the other night?

The following is a portion of an email letter from ProtectMarriage.com about this incident with Penn:

QUOTE:
February 24, 2009

This just in from Hollywood:

“I think it is a good time for those who voted for the ban against gay marriage to sit and reflect and anticipate their great shame and the shame in their grandchildren’s eyes if they continue that way of support. We’ve got to have equal rights.”
Sean Penn, accepting the Oscar for Best Actor
February 22, 2009

This is the message that was communicated throughout the world on Sunday night during the Academy Award show by Hollywood liberals, including their “best actor” Sean Penn.

In fact, viewers weren’t two categories into the awards show when a gay screen writer bashed the Mormon Church, as much as said that supporters of Prop 8 are hateful bigots and promised that, soon, gays would have the right to marry. He even promised that the Obama Administration would make sure gays could marry “federally.” That brought a big round of applause.

It is perhaps not surprising that Hollywood liberals would use their “awards” show to campaign in favor of gay marriage. After all, many of these same liberals donated or raised millions of dollars to attempt to defeat Proposition 8.

What is perhaps surprising is their brazen attempt to influence public opinion against traditional marriage by manipulating people into thinking that this is a “human rights” issue, or a “civil rights” issue, or even an “equal rights” issue. What they don’t tell people is that gay couples in domestic partnerships in California already have equal rights! Gay domestic partners in California enjoy the same legal rights as married spouses.

Liberal Hollywood activists like Sean Penn know a thing or two about reaching audiences. They make millions – tens of millions – learning how to connect with an audience. One audience they no doubt hoped to influence on Sunday night was the California Supreme Court, which is hearing challenges to invalidate Prop 8 in just ten days. Another audience probably watched the show from the upstairs of the White House in Washington. Still another audience is made up of voters here in California, enough of the 7 million of whom they hope to shame into repudiating their votes cast in favor of traditional marriage the next time the issue is on the ballot. Traditional marriage has served society well, and there are many sound reasons why people support one man, one woman marriage – including continuing the best institution to give children both a mother and a father. Prop 8 wasn’t an attack on gay couples, it was an affirmation of traditional marriage – but you didn’t hear that at the Academy Awards.

ProtectMarriage.com has made very powerful, legally sound arguments in our briefs filed with the Supreme Court. Our attorneys, including former Solicitor General Kenneth Starr, are working hard to prepare to present these arguments directly to the justices on March 5 when the challenges to Prop 8 will be heard. We think that attempts to campaign to get the attention of judges, like we saw from Hollywood the other night, will fall on deaf ears. We are confident that the Court will decide the Prop 8 cases strictly on the law, and we have the law on our side.

However, we must also be mindful of the incessant effort from Hollywood and gay activists to portray our support of Prop 8 in hateful, negative terms. From the protests that have been orchestrated against Proposition 8, to the “outing” of countless donors to our campaign, to the violence and vandalism of our churches, supporters of traditional marriage have been subjected to a carefully orchestrated attempt to erode public support and intimidate our donors and volunteers. It’s time that we fought back, and ProtectMarriage.com intends to do just that! /QUOTE

*******

As I stated in a reply to an anonymous commenter in a previous comment thread - FIND YOUR OWN NAME for gay unions! Hey - THAT'S IT! Call them "gay unions" and stop all of this nonsense and attempts to re-define marriage for everyone else! Just because YOU want it re-defined DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD BE!

Conscience Collides With Political Correctness

2009-02-21T13:57:00.000-08:00

How many readers of this blog recall the signs that used to appear in restaurants and bars that said, "We reserve the right to not serve anyone?" At least I think that is how it was worded.

Today, we often find signs that state, "No shirt, no service." or "No shoes, no service."

What was the message behind such signs? The owner of the business had free speech rights to serve, or not serve a person based on their particular behavior.

If a person came into a restaurant without wearing a shirt or shoes, the restaurant owner had the right to refuse service. If a person came into a bar and was boisterous, obnoxious, cursing or - clearly already drunk - the bar tender had the absolute right to not serve that person any alcohol. What's more, the bouncer had the right (as per the instructions of the owner) to escort such a person off the premises!

Our First Amendment rights not only include freedom of speech and freedom of religion; but also freedom of association.

Today, because of ultra-tolerance and political correctness and "hate speech" inferences, the refusal for service by any business owner is often misconstrued as "bigotry," "hatred," "intolerance," etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum. The following link is a case in point:

ADF Truth and Triumph: Point & Shoot
What happens when a photographer's conscience collides with political correctness.

When you read the article, you will see that this Christian woman was CLEARLY TARGETED by the lesbian couple who wanted to punish her for her refusal to photograph their "commitment ceremony." There were PLENTY of other photographers willing to take the job. So, why did they sue this one person?

Gotta run out. Will return to finish this post later.

Why DOMA Matters!

2009-02-04T10:48:00.000-08:00

In the following commentary, Niger Innis states EXACTLY why DOMA MATTERS and MUST BE PROTECTED! The following paragraph from the commentary tells us the utmost importance of DOMA:

In the absence of the federal Marriage Protection Amendment, DOMA provides federal statutory protection to states against activists vowing to use the federal courts to force the destructive decisions of judges in Connecticut and Massachusetts on other states.

Mr. Innis goes on and describes how California has now become a "case study" regarding how radical homosexual activists will attempt to use the courts to overcome the passage of the "YES ON PROPOSITION 8" results that came about as a result of millions of voters in California. Why? Because they don't like the results! Well....TOO BAD! I don't like the results of Roe. v. Wade....oh WAIT! BAD EXAMPLE! Roe v. Wade WAS NEVER VOTED ON BY THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! So, over 70 million aborted babies later, we see the devastating results of an over-reaching judiciary - DON'T WE!!??!!

Let's not let the same thing happen to marriage.

Christine

*******

Here's a copy of the complete article:

Wednesday, February 4, 2009
NIGER INNIS:
Gay marriage harms kids
and democracy
COMMENTARY

President Barack Obama's personal triumph over the generational legacy of a broken home has the power by virtue of example to heal and to strengthen marriage in America for the future of our children and grandchildren.

But we hope that the nation's first black president will not allow great harm to be inflicted upon the future of marriage by aligning himself with those who falsely invoke the legacy of "Civil Rights" for the purposes of radically changing the definition of marriage.

Now an emboldened, radical Democrat Congress and its allies in the media are pushing President Obama to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the legal underpinning of state marriage amendments approved by voters in 30 states.

In the absence of the federal Marriage Protection Amendment, DOMA provides federal statutory protection to states against activists vowing to use the federal courts to force the destructive decisions of judges in Connecticut and Massachusetts on other states.

This statutory protection is now more important than ever, as witnessed by the rapacious lawsuits of radical activists in California. If federal DOMA falls, every state marriage amendment stands to be overturned by activists in federal court.

To truly appreciate the intense level of legal Armageddon certain to be unleashed if DOMA falls in Congress, one only needs to look to California.

In May 2008, in the name of civil rights, the California Supreme Court voided the 4.6 million votes of California voters who in 2000 democratically approved Proposition 22 - the California Defense of Marriage Act.

In response to this egregious act by four judges, California voters rallied again to place on the 2008 Election Day ballot a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. The amendment, known as Proposition 8, passed with over 70 percent of the African-American community voting "Yes" to define marriage as a man and a woman.

But like "Groundhog Day," the very same four judges who voided the democratic votes of Californians voters last May are now deciding the same fate for Proposition 8. A court ruling voiding a second democratic vote on marriage in the nation's most populous state would mark the beginning of the end for democracy in America.

The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), one of the "Big Four" historic civil rights groups in America, believes the most important fundamental freedom for all people is the right to govern themselves. Once this simple ideal is realized, other necessary freedoms will automatically follow.

The abolition of the right of the people to govern themselves - or vote - is only a first step in the taking away of civil rights. Because wherever marriage has been redefined, the freedom of religion, association and conscience have been trampled upon in the name of a brave new social, cultural and legal norm that denies the importance of mothers and fathers for children.

When a Massachusetts court created "same-sex" marriage, Catholic Charities in Boston was forced to shut down its adoption services program because it refused to alter the program's 100-year-old mission of placing children in homes with a home with a mother and a father. What happened in Massachusetts is simply a foretaste of what is to come to every state from California to Missouri to Virginia - with or without state constitutional amendments - if federal DOMA falls. That's why the Congress of Racial Equality has partnered with the Alliance for Marriage to launch ProtectDOMA.org, to protect marriage for the future of our children and grandchildren.

While the battle over the repeal of federal DOMA may largely go unnoticed among a financially battered and worried general public, its outcome will undoubtedly leave a legacy for future generations well beyond the nation's financial meltdown.

Western Europe's wholesale embrace of a radical cultural chic and simultaneous rejection of traditional marriage has led to the demographic crisis in which it is currently embroiled. Europe's population is expected to decrease from 728 million now to 658 million by 2050, due to declining birthrates. This phenomenon will put an overwhelming strain on the largess of Europe's social welfare system and economy.

President Obama truly stands at a crossroads. Rather than destroy marriage, he can in fact be its great protector. It is America's job to convince him.

Niger Innis is an advisory board member of Alliance for Marriage and National spokesperson for the Congress of Racial Equality

Hat Tip: www.afmusa.org

Cartoon of Liberal Hypocrisy

2009-01-24T11:20:00.000-08:00

While visiting a blog called Kevin's Korner I found this great cartoon of liberal leftist hypocrisy. Could not resist posting it here!

Hat Tips:

Kevin's Korner

World Magazine

More Reasons to Protect Marriage!

2009-01-16T09:44:00.000-08:00

Occasionally, there are posts over at my main blog - Talk Wisdom - that deserve to be cross-posted over here. My latest essay is entitled, Inaugural Malignant Narcissism. I hope that you will have time to read all of the links provided. It will give you even more reasons for continuing the effort to protect biblical marriage.

Suit Filed to Prevent Harassment - Prop. 8 YES Voters

2009-01-09T08:48:00.000-08:00

It's certainly about time for this!!! Should have been done a long time ago! The homosexual agenda radicals have been thoroughly abusive in so many ways. They have shown their true colors when they lose: NO TOLERANCE. At least this is a step in the right direction to correct their illegal harassment of voters with whom they disagree.

ADF attorneys file suit to stop harassment of Calif. marriage amendment supporters

ProtectMarriage.com suit challenges campaign finance law’s requirement to publicly disclose identity and employer of donors giving as little as $100

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Alliance Defense Fund allied attorneys together with ADF attorneys filed a lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of ProtectMarriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage California to prevent harassment of citizens who gave as little as $100 to support Proposition 8. The lawsuit documents incidents of harassment and retaliation by opponents who have targeted Proposition 8 supporters after their identities and employers were made public by the state as required by California campaign finance law.

“Putting the names and employers of the people who supported Proposition 8 on the Internet for anyone to see has caused serious problems. No one should worry about getting a death threat because of the way he or she votes,” said James Bopp, Jr., lead attorney for the supporters of Proposition 8. “This lawsuit will protect the right of all people to help support causes they agree with, without having to worry about harassment or threats.”

In November, over 7 million Californians approved Proposition 8. Under a California law, people who gave money to support Proposition 8 had their names, employers, and other personal information listed on the Web site of the Secretary of State of California.

After Proposition 8 passed, people who did not support Proposition 8 used the list of names to go after people who supported Proposition 8. Some people who supported Proposition 8 had their homes and churches vandalized, were forced to resign their jobs, and were even threatened with violence and death. To stop this harassment and these threats, this lawsuit asks the court to stop the release of the names and personal information of people who gave money to support Proposition 8.

“Our laws should ensure free participation in the democratic process, and not result in compromising the free speech and association rights of guaranteed to all Americans,” said ADF Legal Counsel Tim Chandler, who is serving as local counsel in the case. “Citizens shouldn’t have to choose between being involved in the democratic process and subjecting themselves to acts of vengeance.”

The lawsuit challenges parts of California’s campaign finance laws that require people who donate as little as $100 to have personal information revealed on the Internet as unconstitutional violations of free speech. The lawsuit also challenges parts of the campaign finance laws that require reporting of donations after a proposition has been voted on as unconstitutional.

A copy of the complaint filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento Division, in the lawsuit ProtectMarriage.com v. Bowen is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/ProtectMarriageComplaint.pdf.

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

Protect DOMA Website

2008-12-03T09:26:00.000-08:00

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

CA Justices Recall Threat

2008-11-21T03:06:00.000-08:00

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

Battle for Marriage Continues

2008-11-12T10:11:00.000-08:00

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

Crazed Homosexual Activists Attack Woman & Trample Cross

2008-11-11T11:39:00.000-08:00

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

More Evidence of Gay Tolerance /sarc off

2008-11-06T18:52:00.000-08:00

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

Restoring Marriage in California!

2008-11-05T10:14:00.000-08:00

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

More Evidence For YES ON PROP 8!

2008-11-02T07:00:00.000-08:00

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

Commentary: Hate in the Name of Love

2008-10-30T20:48:00.000-07:00

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

What Same-Sex "Marriage" Has Done To Massachusetts

2008-10-21T16:27:00.000-07:00

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

Welcome News for Biblical Marriage!

2008-10-19T05:07:00.000-07:00

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 Español. 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

YES Prop 8 Signs Stolen

2008-10-17T12:23:00.000-07:00

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!!!

How Ironic Is This?

2008-10-13T13:56:00.000-07:00

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

"Fine Line" Event

2008-10-04T11:29:00.001-07:00

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.”

Oct. 1st Webcast For Marriage!

2008-10-01T04:34:00.000-07:00

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

Don't Believe the Gay Hype

2008-09-26T10:12:00.000-07:00

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

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

2008-09-24T20:07:00.000-07:00

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."

Write Letters to Restore CA Marriage

2008-09-23T11:10:00.000-07:00

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

Religious Freedoms At Risk

2008-09-21T09:13:00.000-07:00

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

I Protect Marriage

2008-09-11T16:37:00.000-07:00

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 !!!

Slap in the Face Against Traditional Marriage

2008-09-09T08:21:00.000-07:00

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.

Debate Is About Accepting Bad Behavior

2008-08-16T08:58:00.000-07:00

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

Stop Making Biblical Judgments?

2008-08-14T09:06:00.000-07:00

[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

In Defense of Marriage

2008-08-04T17:16:00.000-07:00

In Defense of Marriage - Part I

Excerpt:

Marriage is far more profound than our contemporary culture would lead us to believe. It is a lifelong commitment that restrains self-centeredness, self-indulgence, and self-gratification. It is the one relationship that effectively prepares and conditions us for living in community with others. By restraining self-centeredness and promoting love of another, marriage then becomes the foundation for social order. When this commitment labeled marriage is reduced to nothing more than a mere contract between two consenting persons, one option among many, or redefined to accommodate any type of participants [or number], it ceases to provide the same societal benefits.

[Note: Click on title link to continue reading.]

In Defense of Marriage - Part II

Excerpt:

Attempting to promote monogamy among homosexual couples by rearranging marriage ignores the fact that homosexual acts are patently obvious distortions of the human biological design. We are born biologically male or female and as such we are sexually dissimilar but in complimentary ways. The male/female sexual union works, in other words. This is true of every species on earth. Every living organism has a particular way of reproducing and rearing offspring; its anatomy is biologically designed to support that way. If one believes we are products of an evolutionary process, then homosexual acts are a deviation from the procreative design and homosexuality is therefore a genetic defect because it fails to propagate the species. If one holds to the belief that we are created, then it defies the design and intent of the Creator. Either way homosexuality violates the given design.

In Defense of Marriage - Part III

Excerpt:

Now let’s examine the historical findings relative to those cultures that once held to a strong sexual ethic—in which monogamy is strictly reinforced through marriage—but later compromised that ethic, as we are now doing. According to Unwin’s thorough survey of history, any and every culture that embraces a philosophy of sexual freedom for a period of at least three generations will inevitably experience cultural decline (Unwin, Sexual Regulations and Cultural Behavior, 1935).

There is not one single example in all of human history where this cultural pattern appears and there does not follow cultural demise consistent with Unwin’s conclusions. (I would estimate that we are in the latter stages of the second generation.)

History is replete with examples that testify to this fact. The Greek, Roman, Babylonian, and Sumerian empires are just a few examples of cultures that began with a strong marriage-centered monogamy and later degenerated into liberal sexual practices (including homosexuality), which, according to the sociological and anthropological evidence, was central to their downfall. Of course, our own culture has suffered enormously in the wake of the American sexual revolution; the societal costs of paternal absence, divorce, and out-of-wedlock births have been staggering.

[It] is the height of arrogance, ignorance, or both that argues against the unique nature of marriage and its necessity to social stability and well-being. However, with more than four decades following the American sexual revolution, this should not be surprising because, as Sorokin pointed out, “in the conditions of spiritual, moral, and mental anarchy … it is difficult to maintain sexual sanity” (Sorokin, p. 55).

In Defense of Marriage - Part IV

Excerpt:

Abuse within male homosexual relationships is as high as 46 percent (“Domestic Violence in Gay and Lesbian Couples,” www.psychpage.com/gay/library/gay_lesbian_violence). Among lesbian couples, some research shows that the lifetime prevalence of physical assault among women living with female partners was 35.4 percent. Given that same-sex “marriage” would exist in name only without its essential defining elements, its application to homosexual couples would, most likely, not serve to arrest the high rates of domestic abuse among gays.

[In] regards to homosexual couples, the concept of fidelity is a popular myth. In the book The Male Couple, the author reports that in a study of 156 males in homosexual relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven years, “Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships” (McWhirter, The Male Couple [Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall] 252, 253).

[In]short, marriage and the natural family function as the cornerstone of civilization; even the slightest deviation from this absolute definition destabilizes this vital institution and begins to produce a series of deleterious effects. Do we really believe that redefining marriage in even more radical terms will somehow improve the situation?

HT: Center for Christ and Culture: The teaching ministry of S. Michael Craven

A Fool's Wager

2008-08-04T12:28:00.000-07:00

A must read!

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

by Gary DeMar

HT: The American Vision

Black Leaders Reject Same-sex "Marriage Rights"

2008-08-04T07:54:00.000-07:00

Update @ 7:46 a.m. PT

Just received the following email:

Black Leaders Reject Gay "Marriage Rights" on Air in San Francisco

Activist groups determined to destroy marriage have always hidden their anti-democratic agenda behind false analogies to civil rights. By invoking the great legacy of America's civil rights movement, radical activists hope to convince America to let them force their view of marriage and their family upon our children and grandchildren.

California is the latest state to be saturated with claims that marriage is a form of bigotry and legal segregation - in anticipation of the California marriage amendment vote in the fall. This false "civil rights" logic was the basis for the California courts recent decision to strike down marriage in our nation's most populous state.

There is absolutely no legal, social or historical logic behind the claim that marriage is an expression of bigotry on a par with racism. But that has not stopped many in the national media from heralding California-style "gay marriage" as part of the historic progression of civil rights in America. Given this media bias, pro-family groups are often outmaneuvered because they are not able to mobilize communities that can effectively challenge the core argument of marriage opponents.

But the authentic civil rights leaders who are part of the Alliance for Marriage are able to challenge the "civil rights" deception - and to do so in places where support for this deception are strongest.

In a radio advertisement to begin airing in the San Francisco area on Catholic Radio - and soon on Catholic Radio nationally -- Niger Innis of the Congress of Racial Equality, one of the nation's "Big Four" historic civil rights groups, takes head-on the false civil rights analogies foisted by the radical activists.

Here is an excerpt from the ad which should encourage you:

"In the 1960s, CORE organized the Freedom Rides, co-sponsored the historic March on Washington with Martin Luther King, Jr., and participated in the Freedom Summer project in Mississippi, where three CORE civil rights workers were murdered.

But today in California, an elite, well-funded group of activists have hijacked the proud, historic legacy of America's civil rights movement to advance their own radical social cause - "same-sex" marriage.

Same-sex marriage is NOT a civil right.

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. 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.

Gays and lesbians are free to live as they choose, but they don't have a civil right to redefine marriage for our entire society."

The Alliance for Marriage is proud that our national coalition has - from its very founding - been lead by civil rights leaders with the courage and conviction of Niger Innis. 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 - in San Francisco and 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.

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

HT: Matt Daniels of Alliance For Marriage

The Cash Infusion Battle

2008-08-04T05:27:00.000-07:00

The following two "cash infusion" articles clearly demonstrates the huge battle that we are in and what those of us who want to follow God's mandate in protecting the sanctity of Biblical marriage are up against.

The fact is, one homosexual activist (from another state!) has the power and funds to donate one million dollars to help defeat Proposition 8 on the California ballot; whereas, a traditional family advocacy group has sacrificially donated half a million dollars (money from donations that have been saved up over the course of several years) in the effort to get the message out there for Christians to come out to the polls in droves and vote for Proposition 8.

Utah millionaire donates money to fight California's anti-gay marriage amendment

Don't you love the spin in that title? It's not an "anti-gay" marriage amendment. It is an amendment to CORRECT the ideologically driven OPINIONS of four rogue judges who took it upon themselves to re-define the term "marriage" while creating a "right" to same sex "marriage" out of thin air.

The same thing is always done on the topic of abortion. Pro-life advocates are called "anti-choice." That is NOT factually correct either! I'm pro-life and I'm all for choice - specifically, the choice for the BABY TO BE ABLE TO BE BORN AND LIVE!

Choose life! Your mother did!

The verbal propaganda of the homosexual activists is already out there. Unfortunately, they will have the press and MSM on their side. Such propaganda is only going to be ratcheted up the closer we get to Election Day.

I would urge all Christians to become totally familiar with the proper talking points in order to turn away the spin that our opponents will undoubtedly place on this issue. We need to point out and emphasize, every chance we get, to proclaim the REAL AND GENUINE point of this issue:

The fact that 61% of Californias VOTED for Proposition 22 back in the year 2000 which stated that, "only marriage between a man and a woman is legal and recognized in California." And, four rogue judges seem to think that their 4 measly ideologically driven opinions and votes should trump the over 4 million votes that were cast when Proposition 22 passed in 2000. THAT'S the TRUTH of the matter.

Cash Infusion for 'Protect Marriage' Group

Excerpt:

"The battle for marriage in California is very important," the American Family Association said in its email message.

"If California defeats Proposition 8, it will open the floodgates for same-sex marriage in all the other states. The battle in California isn’t simply about California. It will affect every state, yours included. The homosexual groups have already raised millions, and are expected to spend nearly $20 million to destroy marriage as it has existed for thousands of years."

The American Family Association said the group fighting to defend marriage in California needs financial support. "Your gifts over the years allowed us to provide some help. We thank you," the message concluded.

This is how important and crucial Proposition 8 will be to our society, our state, and our nation.

We need to bathe this situation in prayer every day - from this moment until the close of the polls on November 4, 2008.

Will you choose to join me in being a Christian Culture Warrior on this extremely important issue?

I noticed that the homosexual activist/supporter who gave one million dollars to groups active in trying to defeat this ballot measure said the following:

"Bastion said, "I'm just not going to sit quietly by and let them do it. I just don't believe it's right. I don't believe it's fair. I don't believe it's what Jesus would do."

He doesn't believe "it's what Jesus would do??"

Don't you just love it when non-Christian people use the name of Jesus while trying to make a political point that CLEARLY goes against what the Bible teaches?

This man may make millions at his job, but he certainly does not know the REAL Jesus. He doesn't have a clue about what Paul describes and teaches in the epistles that we are to have "the mind of Christ." Yet, this guy is arrogant enough to tell millions of Christian believers what he thinks Jesus would not do?

People, the onslaught is only just beginning.

PLEASE do not give in to the homosexual activists.

PLEASE do not give up on this issue.

PLEASE do all that you can - prayerfully, action-oriented, and financially in the effort to get Christian voters to the polls and VOTE FOR PROPOSITION 8 on November 4th!

Sincerely & In Christ's service,
Christine

2Ti 1:7 For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.

2Ti 1:8 Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God,

2Ti 1:9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,

2Ti 1:10 but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

2Ti 1:11 to which I was appointed a preacher, an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.[fn2]

2Ti 1:12 For this reason I also suffer these things; nevertheless I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day.

2Ti 1:13 Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 1:14 That good thing which was committed to you, keep by the Holy Spirit who dwells in us.

HT: ABC4.com

Alliance Defense Fund

CNS News