The Right of Churches to Marry Same-Sex Couples

A blogger: Of course, some churches have same-sex matrimony, as well, and I’m sure, deep down certain in fact, that you would respect their religious right to have it, no?

I am more tolerant of the RIGHT of liberal churches to marry people to their same-sex friends, their pets or their motorcycles –if that’s their goofy man-made religion –more tolerant of that than I am of same-sex civil unions being sanctified by the state.

Marriage has ALWAYS, in nearly EVERY culture, every generation, been the union of a man and wife (or even wives in some cases.) It is by DEFINITION the union of opposite sex persons who then give us children (or role model the procreative units who give us children.) That definition shouldn’t change just because some people have been mentally damaged in their orientation and gender identity and don’t want to be with persons of the opposite sex.

Homosexual couples do not conceive and procreate together –they try to simulate marriage –and in doing so confuse any children exposed to them. The school and the popular media contribute to the confusion, telling children and teens that it’s ok to “marry” and do sexual things with their same-sex best friends. That’s what redefinition of marriage becomes: a teaching of youth that any 2 persons can enter into sex and also redefine marriage.

But marriage is the right of every person–to marry one of the opposite sex. That’s it. There is no other definition of “marriage” for which we are bio-designed. Our bodies aren’t made solely for orgasmic pleasures –but also for procreation and role-modeling the romantic/procreative/male-female unions –who become PARENTS and grandparents and role models of 2 genders to their offspring.

Each parent brings different qualities to the home –both of which are advantageous to children. And two moms and two dads can’t replace the opposite sex parent missing from the home.

All we do by the great marriage debate of the 21st Century is cause more kids to experiment and mis-identify their sexuality and get addicted to swinging both ways –sexploration and sexperimentation.

Sorry if this is too repetitive for you all — but I keep hoping someone will eventually GET IT!!!! Barb(Quote)

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Is Gay Marriage about Equality? Progress in Civil Rights? And What about Polygamy?

A blogger; Marriage is not just about procreation, both for individuals and the state, and it never was. Marriage is even more so not about “the” [sic?] these days. The varied state interests apply no matter the sexual alignment of the couple. Inequality is unjustified.

So you say. I disagree. And so do most all the states. See Map. There is no inequality in marriage being limited to heterosexual couples with the potential for procreation, who role-model the pro-creative unit to future generations, even if they are childless for any reason. Every man and woman has freedom and EQUAL RIGHT to become a hetero couple –if they can find a willing partner. But marriage, by definition, has ALWAYS, historically, everywhere –been the union of man with wife (or wives (plural) in some unequal, unenlightened instances.)

The creation model is Adam and Eve, The Jewish model is Abraham and Sarah (and what a mess they started by letting the wife give the maid to him, bearing Ishmael, claimed by Muslims as their ancestor.) Also Noah and sons and their wives. The OT also says a man should “stay with the wife of his youth.” Then there was John and Elizabeth, parents of John the Baptist, and Mary and Joseph, parents of JEsus –and finally Christ’s words saying a man should leave parents and cleave to his wife and never divorce–cleave to EVE, not STeve. And the NT also says the exemplary leaders of the Church should have only one wife.

As for polygamy, the two religions that permit polygamy happen to have both been started by “angel” communications to one founder each –Mormonism and Islam. Lucifer appears as an angel of light.

II Corinthians 11:13 For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. [Some Mullahs and Imams, fomenting terrorism –all of them propagating untruth of Islam.] Their end will be what their actions deserve.

There is no biological justification for recognizing gay unions same as hetero. Any benefits in the law are for procreative couples and those who model procreative units before the children. Children don’t need the confusion about sex and sexuality which is generated by homosexuals.

Homosexuals (as well as promiscuous straights) lure people into non-procreative sex addiction. The more we affirm homosexuality, and the more we are dysfunctional as hetero couples with divorce, etc. –the more homosexuals we will produce. We already see where non-gay men “on the downlow” –i.e. men who have sex with men –see homosexual acts as legitimate, non-relational, impersonal sexual recreation –like prisoners and congressmen in airport bathrooms.

Homosexual orientation is something to study and prevent and attempt to fix — it is not to be accommodated as “the same as –or equal to” heterosexuality. Homosexuality is simply counter to our bodily design and purpose. You can’t dignify it with “marriage.” It will always seem both unfortunate and bizarre to those who have the blessing of good heterosexual role modeling in their families and culture.

Good ploy to try to say homosexuality is genetic, inborn, a race, or a disability –and thus we should help homosexuals find one another for happiness together. We should be kind without creating new definitions and examples of “marriage” and “family” which will only be hard on their children and confusing to all children about the issues of sex and sexuality, gender identity and orientation. Gay marriage gives license to something that we should teach and help our children to avoid. Because however orgasms are first experienced with others, they are addictive and affecting the self-image as male or female, gay or straight.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Andrew Solomon's Modern Family

An example of extreme moral relativism is written about in Newsweek, Feb.7 –by Andrew Solomon. He says he partied and had adventurous sex (and bisex) for years –and then married a man who had been a sperm donor to two lesbians and thus was a father of 2 –and then he himself fathered a child with a beloved lady friend (he is bisexual) –through IVF –in order to be faithful to his husband I guess–and the lady friend has a male partner. So, he and his partner were the fathers to 3 children being raised by 3 women –and then he decided he and his partner should raise a child –so one of the lesbian moms for his partner’s 2 children was a surrogate mother for him with a donated egg. So now he has 4 children from 4 mothers counting the bio mother who donated the egg –the surrogate is mom to two of the four. See the family tree.
He admits, “I would not obscure the frictions sparked by conflicting priorities and boundaries, disparate resources, myriad parenting styles....”
The Bible tells us not to mess with the family order established by the Creator from the beginning –when God created Eve for Adam in the image of God –and when Jesus tells man to leave parents and cleave to a wife –and to not divorce. This Newsweek family didn’t consider that this TRUTH, an absolute for family life, applied to any of them and they have created a mess. Lovers of self, and pursuers of happiness outside the rules, may all be educated and well-off enough to afford it –as most people are not –and thus most people following their example would have to have Uncle Sam’s subsidies when they violate the absolute standard of one wife for one husband (until death do us part.)
The article makes a case that love is all that matters –and that he loves the children. But these kids are going to see that not all things are equal –with one daddy being close to his 2 kids and the other daddy being comparatively indifferent to the 2 he made with the lesbians. (I read that between the lines.)
I want the people involved in this mess to make the best of it –but it will be interesting to see what stability in home life these 4 children will find when they grow up. They had better be rich enough to afford what most of the world cannot –a choice to live any way the mind can dream up –and to praise their own dysfunction, thus recommending it to their offspring and their friends.


"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Some Ways I Would be Disappointed by Gay Marriage

A Question on Another Blog --and My Answer

Have you, now or at any time in the past, been harmed by the marriage of two persons of the same sex?

Obviously not, since gay marriage is not legal around here.

If it were my kid, I would be harmed by his/her opinion that he/she were homosexual–and I would be harmed by such a “marriage.” Or even a civil union. Why?

1. I would feel that my husband and I had failed as parents to pass along God’s family values in a positive way. We had failed to teach or role model hetero marriage effectively. We had failed to help our kids be happy in their given sexuality, with normal family goals.

2. I would feel that I made mistakes in not chaperoning them better in youth, not grounding them in Christian faith and worldview before college, not shaping their character so they would resist sexual temptations.

3. I would be disappointed that they would not have a normal union and bring children into the world, at least not by any normal means, passing on their fine musical genes and raising chaste and heterosexual children. (Granted, single children don't do this either, but celibate singleness is pleasing in God's eyes, when it's part of a godly lifestyle.)

4. I would be harmed in them deliberately choosing to avoid normal marriage, bringing us no grandchildren for us to love and to love us. There would be fewer family members to help us out and cheer us in our elder years. (My family enriches their grandmothers’ lives, looks out for them.)

5. By not having their own children, homosexuals do impose duties to look out for them on their siblings’ children–who already have their own family responsibilities. Otherwise, the burden falls to themselves or the state entirely. (Again, chaste hetero singles do this, also, but they also haven't made any unholy alliances, given us grief or made children out of wedlock for gov't or us to subsidize.)

6. My kids ARE harmed when they can’t find chaste, hetero mates if more and more of their peers are going off with their own sex.

7. My kids are harmed if their teachers or neighbors or cousins or friends lead them into gay experimentation: “Try it; you’ll like it!”

8. My kids are harmed and I’m broken-hearted if they get a highly promiscuous sex addiction or an incurable STD or other physical ailment because of homo-sexperimentation --or any extra-marital sex for that matter.

9. Families/spouses and children are harmed when the spouse or one of their parents decides to transgender or leave for another person of either sex. I would be devastated if my daughter or son-in-law decided she or he had to be with someone else of either sex, and caused divorce for it.

10. We feel we are harmed if we can’t disapprove of this lifestyle and teach our children to reject it for themselves. We are harmed when our Bible-based values are considered Hate speech –and when we can be prosecuted for teaching or preaching the morality of the Bible. We are harmed if we are denied our constitutional right to free speech, freedom in media, and freedom of religion on this topic –as in England and Canada.

11. We are all harmed in economy if we have to give the same economic benefits to partners of homosexuals who don’t bear the children, educate them for over 18 years per child, spend thousands on them. The perks are for the child-maker-bearers –to offset the costs of bringing children into the world, having one parent stay at home to civilize them, or hiring daycare to do it. This is just best done with a hetero couple –as they are the only ones who can make babies and role-model the functional nuclear family with both a mother and father for their children. Yes, homosexuals may already have children from hetero marriages, and they should have the father’s financial support for those children–unless the mother caused the break-up by coming out gay. In that case, the father should get the custody and child support from the mother because of her infidelity. Marriage law should be just.

Granted, many of the same things I list are true about heterosexual immorality, also –except for the greater likelihood that children will be involved.

Homosexual involvement is just one more rung higher, on the already dangerous and depressing ladder of nuclear family breakdown with promiscuity.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Maryland Will Likely Recognize Gay Marriage from Other States

From www.Religion Clause.blogspot.com:

Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler has issued a 55-page Attorney General's Opinion concluding that same-sex marriages validly entered in other states may be recognized in Maryland. The opinion (94 Op. Att'y. Gen. 3, Feb. 23, 2010) says in part:
While the matter is not free from all doubt, in our view, the Court is likely to respect the law of other states and recognize a same-sex marriage contracted validly in another jurisdiction. In light of Maryland's developing public policy concerning intimate same sex relationships, the Court would not readily invoke the public policy exception to the usual rule of recognition.Three Catholic Archbishops of Maryland issued a joint statement (full text) criticizing the ruling. Today's Baltimore Sun reports on developments.

DistributeWealth said...
Good for Maryland. The march toward equality for gay people takes another step forward.Conservatives, in the form of the three archbishops, are again fighting a rearguard action. (Fellas, the train has already left the station; you're too late.) In the future, the history of the immorality of the conservative Christian churches on this issue should be required reading for all high school students. People should know who was right and who was wrong, so there can be an accounting.
Thu Feb 25, 04:43:00 PM EST

Barb said...
Come on, People! There is no reason to override other states' constitutions on the definition of marriage. There is no reason to make "legal" intimate relations between same sex people. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR IT??? It is perversion and ought to be discouraged, not made equal to normal, traditional, natural, potentially procreative relationships.We need to help children avoid this lifestyle and quit pushing it as a wonderful civil right!
Thu Feb 25, 04:50:00 PM EST

mud_rake said...
Salem Witch Trials.
Fri Feb 26, 08:58:00 AM EST

Notice the substantive response of commenter no. 3. Who is suggesting witch hunts or burning anyone at the stake??






"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

Blade Writer Thinks Gay Issue is Minor for Lutheran Church

A Letter to the Blade:

In regard to the dispute at St. Paul’s Church over gay clergy: Though he had many major theological differences with the medieval church, Luther did not withdraw from it, but was forced out by the hierarchy.

It therefore seems strange that a Lutheran congregation would divorce itself from its parent body over one rather minor social issue.

Fred Shuman

Whitehouse

Fred and his wife both taught my children at AW Schools. Fred is a retired minister in the Evangelical Lutheran church--same as St. Paul's Lutheran in Maumee which recently voted to secede from the parent denomination.

Fred should remember that Luther was kicked out of the Catholic Church after disagreeing with it on a list of 99 issues. So what would happen if the St. Paul's congregation would refuse to receive a gay minister or perform gay marriages? The split is inevitable. And the issue is BIBLICAL, not socially minor. It is the church divider of our day.

Luther hoped to reform Catholicism instead of being excommunicated. St. Paul's Church probably knows that their denomination has been left-leaning on theological and social issues for decades. Better to secede than put up with their unbiblical stand on marriage --no small social issue.

Any church that wants to be truly Biblical cannot condone gay marriage or ordination for practicing homosexuals --same as for unrepentant, sexually active adulterers, rapists, pedophiles, incestors, fornicators, porn users.

The Bible blesses one proper arrangement for sexual intimacy--marriage between a man and wife --and warns against the rest as sins.

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible