Homosexual "Marriage" Not Acceptable to God

During a wonderful walk on a beautiful day at the beach yesterday, my good friend and I got in a discussion about "gay" marriage, civil unions, and traditional one man and one woman marriage.  We both shared the fact that we know Christians - some who even appear to be very devout - who have fallen for the lie that homosexual marriage is acceptable.  Apparently, they choose to no longer acknowledge that homosexual marriage (and behavior) is unacceptable to God and goes against His laws.  God created marriage.  The definition has always been the union of one man and one woman.  Period! 

In fact, the reprobate idea of homosexual "marriage" is not new.  It is ancient!  Recall that Solomon tells us, "there is nothing new under the sun."

When Jesus was asked what the signs would be of his return, he stated:

Mat 24:37 “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.

Luk 17:26 “And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man:

Luk 17:28 “Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built;
 
Luk 17:29 “but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.

Luk 17:30 “Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.


What did "the Days of Noah" and "the Days of Lot" have in common?  Besides unbelief, moral depravity, murder, evil, and general sinful behavior, they both had the sin of homosexuality in common.


My friend had not heard of the ancient Jewish writings that shared the fact that contracts of  "men marrying men" and "women marrying women" happened back before Noah and the flood.  It was one big reason why the flood occurred.  Therefore, I sent her an email with links to blog posts that shared this information.

 I wrote:

As always, I enjoyed our walk, talk and lunch together today!

I told you about the evidence given by Jewish Rabbis in the Babylonian Talmud, but there were also other writings that shared information about "men marrying men," and "women marrying women" in Noah's time.


The following  is a link to one of  the best Talk Wisdom blog posts about this topic  that I wrote back in 2011.  It includes additional information from The Midrash Rabbah Genesis - which  is a specific form of rabbinic literature of
ancient Judaism commentaries of the Hebrew Scriptures.

http://talkwisdom.blogspot.com/2011/06/as-in-days-of-noah-revisited.html

The following is a "search" at my blog with several posts about this topic all in a row:

http://talkwisdom.blogspot.com/search?q=As+In+The+Days+of+Noah

There are many additional links within the posts from other writers who have done extensive research on this topic.  Just thought I would share this with you since we were talking about it today!

~  Chris

*******

In addition to this, I revisited a post over at GCMWatch (Gay Christian Movement Watch) that displays the utter depravity of some gay behavior affirming churches.

GCMWatch: MCC Clerics Demonize Jesus

Note - There is a warning regarding the content included at the links within the post:

WARNING: Read this post only if you want irrefutable proof of the depth of depravity currently saturating the gay christian movement.

I have often mentioned that the term "gay" always precedes the term "Christian" in the movement as a whole;  as well as when it is written in the description of the churches and even the individuals who self-identify as such.  Why is that?

Jesus told us that "no one can serve two masters."

Mat 6:24 “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

Luk 16:13 “No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”

The second sentence in these verses directly discusses the inability of servants of Christ serving both God and mammon (money).  However, it is not only money that people can choose to serve ahead of Christ - it can be ANY master.  And in the "gay Christian movement," the behavior of the individuals trumps Christ, God's Holy Word, God's Laws, and Christ's admonition to "leave your life of sin" (which he said to the woman caught in adultery).

Jhn 8:11 She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you; go and[fn] sin no more.”
NU-Text and M-Text add from now on.


Notice that Christ did not condemn her (because those who were about to stone her had to drop their stones when Christ said, "if any of you are without sin, cast the first stone.")

Now, I have been accused at this blog of figuratively "throwing stones" at people who self-identify as gay.  Nothing could be further from the truth!  God wants ALL to come to salvation through Jesus Christ's sacrificial death at the cross for the forgiveness and remission of sins.  However, those who celebrate a sinful lifestyle right along with people who haven't repented of such sin, are allowing them to miss being reconciled back unto God.  Which is more egregious?

Let's take a physical example.  What if you knew of someone who was about to jump off the top of a tall building because someone convinced them "you will surely not die?"  What if your excuse was that you didn't want to offend their sensibilities on the subject?  Therefore,  you supported their decision to go ahead with the act.  Who in their right mind would call such a warning offensive?  It's the same when it comes to spiritual matters. 

The book of Jude tells us how difficult it can be to help pull someone "out of the fire" of sinful behavior, but it is the most compassionate thing to do despite the fact that many will curse you for attempting to do so!  Being uncomfortable in this world is the life of a true Christian.  Jesus told us, "in this life you [we] will have trouble.  But take heart!  For I [He] has overcome the world!"  He also told us that "He is not of this world."  So therefore, because we have made the commitment to belong to Him, we are not of this world either!  He told us that the unsaved will hate us, because they hated Him first!

All that we can do is share the TRUTH with the unsaved.  The Holy Spirit of God (through each human act of confession and repentance of sin and the request of each individual for forgiveness through Christ's sacrificial act of saving grace at the cross) will indwell the heart of a new believer and lead him/her to a new life in Christ!  The old sin-filled self gradually goes away (called sanctification) and the new life within the believer WANTS to sin no more and please God!

Well, once again I have said my peace on this issue.  There will inevitably be people who will vehemently disagree and call me a bigot, hateful, homophobic...you name it...because they do not know the Living Word of God - Jesus Christ, or the written Word of God - the Bible.  Plus, it is likely that they have not accepted God's gift of salvation so that they can spend eternity with God in heaven.

One more link to share.  It was a post I did as a reaction to GCMWatch: MCC Clerics Demonize Jesus.

Talk Wisdom: The Spiritual Oblivion of the Reprobate Mind.

Excerpt:

The term "oblivion" is certainly a fascinating word. At the end of this post, I have included several of Dictionary.com's definitions of the word.

It is interesting to note the following fact, which is mentioned in the third source below:

It [the term, oblivion] has lost its original sense of "no longer aware or mindful," however, and now means simply "unaware" (1862). Properly should be used with to, not of.
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper

Sin and reprobation of the mind can lead to a state of spiritual oblivion that knows no bounds. This was my thought after reading about the absolute depravity of a person named Robert Goss who masquerades as a reverend. The idolatry, brokenness and demonic strongholds in this man's life are most evident in Pastor DL Foster's post called, MCC Clerics Demonize Jesus.
[...]

Look at the NLT version of verse Jeremiah 25:7

"But you would not listen to me," says the Lord. "You made me furious by worshiping your idols, bringing on yourselves all the disasters you now suffer.

We know what this man's idol is. This man's thought life is so far from God it's astounding.

The Proverb verses tell us how important it is to keep God's commandments. The two brilliant statements from our Lord (in bold and italics here) can be attributed towards identifying Mr. Goss as a false convert. At the same time, the words absolutely destroy his reprobate-thinking theology:

Pro 3:1 My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments:


Pro 4:4 He taught me also, and said unto me, Let thine heart retain my words: keep my commandments, and live.


Pro 7:2 Keep my commandments, and live; and my law as the apple of thine eye.


Jhn 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.


Jhn 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.


What does God's Word tell us about our thought life?

Phl 4:4   Rejoice in the Lord always. Again I will say, rejoice!

Phl 4:5   Let your gentleness be known to all men. The Lord is at hand.

Phl 4:6   Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God;

Phl 4:7   and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

Phl 4:8   Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy--meditate on these things.

Philippians 4:4-8 NKJV

In conclusion, this illustrates just one reason why Jesus told us that he did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. If Jesus came to abolish the law, then we could live in any morally relativistic (or morally reprehensible way as the corruption of Mr. Goss shows us) way we so choose.

But we steadfastly know that Jesus came to fulfill the law, not abolish it. Therefore, His statement, "If you love me, keep my commandments" flies in the face of the gay Christian reprobate theologians who choose to be "no longer aware or mindful" of what God's Word teaches. Scripture will always condemn and expose false prophets, teachers, and theologians like Mr. Goss. And the depravity of their minds will continue to expose the spiritual oblivion that they choose to reside in.

Hat tip:

GCMWatch: MCC Clerics Demonize Jesus

Understanding the Viciousness of the Homosexual Left.

The IRS targeting (and profiling) of conservative groups, including possible felonious violation of fellow citizens' civil rights, has prompted a writer over at American Thinker to explain how to Understand the Viciousness of the Gay Left.  In the past, I have often labeled such a description of "the viciousness of the homosexual left" as "the radical homosexual agenda."

I agree with one commentator (at the link above) who states that we should not call the movement "gay," which had it's original meaning of "happy, cheerful, glad, joyous, joyful  etc." stolen from the vernacular.  We should use the term "homosexual" or "sodomite."  Thus, I have tweaked the title of my post to reflect that.

The entire article is quite enlightening.  However, I will include just a few segments that involve the targeting by the IRS through a homosexual organization called "The Human Rights Campaign;" which is actually a front for destroying anyone or anything that disagrees with their totalitarian homosexual indoctrination beliefs and tactics.

When you read the article, you will be blessed.  It will show conservative Christian readers here who believe in God, The Bible, and Jesus Christ and His Gospel that we are NOT the intolerant ones.  THEY ARE!!!  It also demonstrates that such activists are NOT the same as all homosexual individuals.  It is kind of like the Muslims vs. Muslim terrorists.  I would go so far as to describe this particular mean-spirited group as sodomite terrorists!

Excerpt:

During hearings on Capitol Hill, Chapman University professor John Eastman of the National Organization for Marriage unveiled new evidence that the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay advocacy organization, may have feloniously obtained confidential tax documents from the IRS and then published them with the intent of humiliating political opponents.

This accusation, as has been noted by several commentators including Dennis Prager and Ann Coulter, brings the current IRS scandals to a whole new level. Below is the exchange that took place between Rep. Paul Ryan and Prof. Eastman:

RYAN: So your donors are confidential, that's protected by law. You have proof that the IRS leaked your confidential donor information to a group that opposes your point of view. And your donors were harassed as a result of that. Is that correct?
EASTMAN: Yes.

As Dennis Prager pointed out in his show, this is the most serious chapter of the IRS scandal. A brief transcript:

PRAGER: People will more openly talk about marital problems, and certainly child problems, than they will disclose their financial data [...] And so to publish people's tax returns is to in some ways strip them naked in public [...]

EASTMAN: [...] what was leaked to the Human Rights Campaign was Schedule B of our tax returns, which is our list of major donors and their addresses. And that is as private of a tax return as your own individual 1040 tax returns. And it's a felony for anybody to disclose that information without your permission. The Human Rights Campaign posted this on their website and we immediately called for them to take it down [...]and this is a felony. It is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison, to disclose somebody's tax returns without authorization [...]The Human Rights Campaign had been trying for a long time to get our donor list so that they could do just that to our donors [harass and intimidate them]. The president of the Human Rights Campaign, Joe Salmonese, had just recently become a national co-chair for the Obama re-election campaign.

While bad enough, this is only the tip of the iceberg -- the gay lobby is also gleefully co-opting military and police forces to hound its enemies too.

What is sadly (and terribly!!) ironic, is that since the military allowed openly homosexuals to serve and be "out" in the military,  the sexual assault rate rises by 35% (mostly homosexual rapes).

The following points within the article should be welcomed by those of us who agree with the stance that marriage is the union of one man and one woman and that homosexual behavior is sin, an abomination in the face of God, undesirable, unhealthy, disease-filled, and as the Bible tells us something to be avoided.  Those who engage in it should do as any other sinner - confess and repent before Holy God, ask for forgiveness, turn away from such aberrant behavior, and ask Jesus Christ to indwell their hearts in order to help them live according to God's laws and His better plan for their lives.

Excerpt:

The deflection of blame onto imaginary enemies required tremendous mental work, and this work became the overarching labor of the Human Rights Campaign and its many sister organizations. Gay activists retreated from physical reality and rejected the notion of truth, since both reality and truth had betrayed them. They took comfort in the notion that if others saw them as good and normal, their problems would be solved. And so hiding problems -- which sometimes bordered on lying -- took precedence over self-improvement.

Whenever caught in a misrepresentation -- as they already have been regarding suicide and sexual assault in the military, and as they will soon be regarding same-sex parenting -- they have learned to become aggressive.

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, [fn] for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.

Rom 1:17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "The just shall live by faith." [fn]

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,

Rom 1:19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown [it] to them.

Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible [attributes] are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Rom 1:21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify [Him] as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,

Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man--and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

Rom 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,

Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.

Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;

Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, [fn] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; [they are] whisperers,

Rom 1:30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

Rom 1:31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, [fn] unmerciful;

Rom 1:32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

NKJV Footnotes:
(1:16) NU-Text omits of Christ.
(1:17) Habakkuk 2:4
(1:29) NU-Text omits sexual immorality.
(1:31) NU-Text omits unforgiving.

"Gay" Marriage is a Lie: Destruction of Marriage is the goal

Heard about this on Glenn Beck's radio program yesterday.  The Blaze has an article up about it.

For years conservative Christians have been warning that the gay agenda (especially the unrelentless push for "gay" marriage) has been more about the purposed destruction of the traditional family rather than about the so-called "right" for a man to marry a man or a woman to marry a woman.

The Blaze.com: Lesbian Activist’s Surprisingly Candid Speech: Gay Marriage Fight Is a ‘Lie’ to Destroy Marriage

Copy of post:

A 2012 speech by Masha Gessen, an author and outspoken activist for the LGBT community, is just now going viral and it includes a theory that many supporters of traditional marriage have speculated about for years: The push for gay marriage has less to do with the right to marry – it is about diminishing and eventually destroying the institution of marriage and redefining the “traditional family.”

The subject of gay marriage stirs powerful reactions on both sides of the argument. There are those who argue that legalizing it would diminish traditional marriage. And those advocating for gay marriage have long stated that the issue will not harm traditional marriage. Ms. Gessen’s comments on the subject seem to contradict the pro-gay-marriage party lines.

Gessen shared her views on the subject and very specifically stated;

• “Gay marriage is a lie.”
• “Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there.”
• “It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.” (This statement is met with very loud applause.)

As mentioned above, Gessen also talked about redefining the traditional family. This may have something to do with the fact that she has “three children with five parents”:

“I don’t see why they (her children) shouldn’t have five parents legally. I don’t see why we should choose two of those parents and make them a sanctioned couple.”

The entire presentation is here, but the most curious portion starts about six minutes into the audio:

 

 

Commentator "Leopold" sheds more light upon the evil of the gay agenda:

Leopold Posted on April 29, 2013 at 1:02pm

I am coming to realize this is not about equality or marriage.

Next they go after the church in a big campaign. God is all about love, and who are you to deny us his blessing. blah blah blah.

After that they will go after the Bible, because of “hate speech”.

But what they really WANT is to destroy the innocence of children.

Remember, the homosexual community is only a tool.

If I mention the name of who yields this tool my comment might be censored.

Hat tip:  The Blaze 

God's Plan For The Gay Agenda

This morning, I turned on Fox News and heard Peter Johnson Jr. discussing that Washington state (which recently approved homosexual "marriage") has taken further steps to stomp on traditional marriage by changing all marriage certificates from listing the married couple as "bride and groom" to "spouse A and B."

This is another example of the rabid and reprobate continuation of unrepentant man towards the destruction of God's idea for true, traditional marriage; which is reserved for heterosexual couples. 

We have already seen the attempts to erase the terms "mother and father."  Why?  Because lesbians want Mother's Day cards to say, "my two moms?"  Sometimes the idiocy is so ridiculous we can only shake our heads in disbelief!

Our culture today is rapidly reaching the point where "gay" agenda approval has expanded to the point where it is just commonly accepted - even by some who would call themselves Christian.

We would expect this of non-religious individuals, but Christians?  In their attempt to appear "non-judgmental," and avoid the labels of being "bigoted," "hateful," or worse, Christians just shrug their shoulders and say, "let it be."  Well, that is an attitude straight from hell!

I recently received an email from someone who objects to the new California law that rejects change therapy for men and women who have undesired same-sex attractions.  Here is what was written about it:

Under this outrageous new law, a young boy sexually molested by the likes of a Jerry Sandusky who develops an identity crisis, suffers emotional distress, and begins to experience unwanted same-sex attractions, will be further hurt by a law that deprives him and his family of sound counsel.

What is wrong with this picture, people?  If every sexual desire is OK in the scheme of things on this earth, and former heterosexuals are "celebrated" when they come out "gay," then why can't someone who once had same-sex attraction THAT IS UNWANTED be celebrated when they get counseled and born-again of Jesus Christ to get out of such attraction and become heterosexually attracted to the opposite sex?  See the glaring hypocrisy?

The reason is this:  the homosexual agenda is a one-way street and all of the LBGTQ (Lesbian, Bi-sexual, Gay, Transgender, Questioning) groups rabidly oppose such a "change" that would bring someone back to what God intended for their lives.  After all, He "made them male and female."

This fierce opposition has moral evil behind it.  Plain, simple and unquestionable!

In previous posts, I have gone into detail regarding how Scripture reveals the sin of homosexual behavior, and how the rise of its acceptance points to the end times.

Please see:

Talk Wisdom: The Days of Noah Are Here

As In The Days of Noah Revisited

The Homosexual Agenda Is A Spiritual Problem

John MacArthur has written an essay that explains even further why God opposes such behavior and what God's Plan For the Gay Agenda:

Articles By Grace to You

God's Plan for the Gay Agenda

John MacArthur

 

If you've been watching the headlines over the last couple years, you may have noticed the incredible surge of interest in affirming homosexuality. Whether it's at the heart of a religious scandal, political corruption, radical legislation, or the redefinition of marriage, homosexual interests have come to characterize America. That's an indication of the success of the gay agenda. And some Christians, including some national church leaders, have wavered on the issue even recently. But sadly, when people refuse to acknowledge the sinfulness of homosexuality — calling evil good and good evil (Isaiah 5:20) — they do so at the expense of many souls.

How should you respond to the success of the gay agenda? Should you accept the recent trend toward tolerance? Or should you side with those who exclude homosexuals with hostility and disdain?
In reality, the Bible calls for a balance between what some people think are two opposing reactions — condemnation and compassion. Really, the two together are essential elements of biblical love, and that's something the homosexual sinner desperately needs.

Homosexual advocates have been remarkably effective in selling their warped interpretations of passages in Scripture that address homosexuality. When you ask a homosexual what the Bible says about homosexuality — and many of them know — they have digested an interpretation that is not only warped, but also completely irrational. Pro-homosexual arguments from the Bible are nothing but smokescreens — as you come close, you see right through them.

God's condemnation of homosexuality is abundantly clear — He opposes it in every age.
- In the patriarchs (Genesis 19:1-28)
- In the Law of Moses (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13)
- In the Prophets (Ezekiel 16:46-50)
- In the New Testament (Romans 1:18-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Jude 7-8)

Why does God condemn homosexuality? Because it overturns God's fundamental design for human relationships — a design that pictures the complementary relationship between a man and a woman (Genesis 2:18-25; Matthew 19:4-6; Ephesians 5:22-33).

Why, then, have homosexual interpretations of Scripture been so successful at persuading so many? Simple: people want to be convinced. Since the Bible is so clear about the issue, sinners have had to defy reason and embrace error to quiet their accusing consciences (Romans 2:14-16). As Jesus said, "Men loved the darkness rather than the Light, [because] their deeds were evil" (John 3:19-20).

As a Christian, you must not compromise what the Bible says about homosexuality — ever. No matter how much you desire to be compassionate to the homosexual, your first sympathies belong to the Lord and to the exaltation of His righteousness. Homosexuals stand in defiant rebellion against the will of their Creator who from the beginning "made them male and female" (Matthew 19:4).
Don't allow yourself to be intimidated by homosexual advocates and their futile reasoning — their arguments are without substance. Homosexuals, and those who advocate that sin, are fundamentally committed to overturning the lordship of Christ in this world. But their rebellion is useless, for the Holy Spirit says, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; cf. Galatians 5:19-21).

So, what is God's response to the homosexual agenda?

Certain and final judgment. To claim anything else is to compromise the truth of God and deceive those who are perishing.

As you interact with homosexuals and their sympathizers, you must affirm the Bible's condemnation. You are not trying to bring damnation on the head of homosexuals, you are trying to bring conviction so that they can turn from that sin and embrace the only hope of salvation for all of us sinners — and that's through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Homosexuals need salvation. They don't need healing — homosexuality is not a disease. They don't need therapy — homosexuality is not a psychological condition. Homosexuals need forgiveness, because homosexuality is a sin.

I don't know how it happened, but a few decades ago someone branded homosexuals with the worst misnomer — "gay." Gay used to mean happy, but I can assure you, homosexuals are not happy people. They habitually seek happiness by following after destructive pleasures. There is a reason Romans 1:26 calls homosexual desire a "degrading passion." It is a lust that destroys the physical body, ruins relationships, and brings perpetual suffering to the soul — and its ultimate end is death (Romans 7:5). Homosexuals are experiencing the judgment of God (Romans 1:24, 26, 28), and thus they are very, very sad.

1 Corinthians 6 is very clear about the eternal consequence for those who practice homosexuality — but there's good news. No matter what the sin is, whether homosexuality or anything else, God has provided forgiveness, salvation, and the hope of eternal life to those who repent and embrace the gospel. Right after identifying homosexuals as those who "will not inherit the kingdom of God," Paul said, "Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:11).

God's plan for many homosexuals is that they come to salvation. There were former homosexuals in the Corinthian church back in Paul's day, just as there are many former homosexuals today in my church and in faithful churches around the country. With regenerated hearts, they sit in biblical churches throughout the country praising their Savior, along with former fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, thieves, coveters, drunkards, revilers, and swindlers. Remember, such were some of you too.

What should be your response to the homosexual agenda? Make it a biblical response — confront it with the truth of Scripture that condemns homosexuality and promises eternal damnation for all who practice it. What should be your response to the homosexual? Make it a gospel response — confront him with the truth of Scripture that condemns him as a sinner, and point him to the hope of salvation through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. Stay faithful to the Lord as you respond to homosexuality by honoring His Word, and leave the results to Him.

© Copyright 2004 by Grace to You. All rights reserved.

This article originally appeared here at Grace to You.

Obama Directly Undermines Traditional Marriage

Obama and the Truth about Marriage

Ryan T. Anderson and Thomas Messner

May 10, 2012 at 8:36 am

Yesterday, President Obama announced that he supports same-sex marriage. This was not exactly a surprise.

Sure, when running for Senate in 2004, Obama said that “marriage is between a man and a woman.” And when campaigning for the presidency in 2008, he restated that view and also claimed he did “not support gay marriage.”

The truth, however, is that President Obama has repeatedly done and said things that directly undermine marriage as one man and one woman.

President Obama has openly opposed state marriage amendments, such as Proposition 8 in California and the hugely successful amendment adopted by voters in North Carolina earlier this week. These amendments would protect marriage from judicial activism in state courts and let voters decide the question through democratic processes. But Obama views such measures as “divisive” and “discriminatory.”

President Obama also supports repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for purposes of federal law. And President Obama’s Justice Department has taken extraordinary steps to undermine DOMA in the courts, first by offering a soft defense and then by offering no defense at all.

These seeming inconsistencies led many to conclude that the President wasn’t really against gay marriage but was saying so for political reasons. Now, the President has finally owned up to what many people already suspected: that he supports same-sex marriage.

It is good that President Obama has decided to be more straightforward about what he really believes about marriage. The American public deserves at least that much.

But the President’s so-called “evolution” on the timeless institution of marriage marks an unfortunate turn. Society has a civilizational interest in promoting marital childbearing and the faithfulness of husbands and wives to each other and their children. Marriage is a vital social institution that promotes that interest.

The reason the state is in the marriage business in the first place is because sex makes babies and babies need mothers and fathers. As one source has put it, “but for children, there would be no need of any institution concerned with sex.” That “institution” is marriage, and it brings together men and women as husbands and wives to become fathers and mothers to any children their unions bring forth.

This binding together doesn’t happen by accident. Binding fathers to mothers and their children requires strong cultural and legal norms to channel adult sexual desire and behavior into an institution where childbearing leads to responsible childrearing.

Furthermore, undoubtedly one reason voters in 32 states have voted to protect marriage is the belief that, for children, the ideal situation is to have both a mother and a father. This belief is supported by social science, which demonstrates that children do best when reared by their married biological mothers and fathers. Mothering and fathering are not interchangeable phenomena. The ideal for children is love and attention from both a father and mother, as well as the role modeling that each can provide of masculinity and femininity.

By embracing same-sex marriage, President Obama has invited everyone in the nation to consider this basic issue: What is marriage? The President has sided with those who would redefine marriage by declaring that mothers and fathers are expendable and sexual complementarity does not matter. Under this view, marriage is whatever two consenting adults want it to be.

But once the President accepts these ideas, can he explain why marriage should involve only two people? Can he explain why, under his conception, childrearing would continue to have any meaningful relationship to marriage? Can he explain why commitments of permanence and sexual exclusivity should be the norm for marriage? Throw away the core meaning of marriage and these cherished norms logically go with it.

There is a truth about marriage, and most people intuitively grasp that it has something to with mothers and fathers, the offspring they bear through sexual union, and the mutual cooperation required to effectively rear offspring throughout many years of dependency. The marriage debate is about whether our laws will recognize and promote this truth or, rather, label it a falsehood and force society to fall in line.

President Obama has made clear where he stands on this issue. In the coming months, voting members of the American public will have the opportunity to do the same.

Posted in Family and Religion, Featured

Ryan T. Anderson

Thomas Messner

Hat tip to all links.
Hat tip:  Penny H. for sending me this link.

Good News For Biblical Marriage!

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.

Paganism Of The Gay-ness Cult

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'

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

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?

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

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

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