Telling the Truth: Jul/Aug 04 (column by Publisher Tim Ewing)
So Much Is At Stake
By Tim Ewing
What a raw nerve our culture has struck: this notion of homosexual "marriage." Passion on both sides of the issue is high, and for good reason, because much is at stake--much more than most people realize.
Homosexual-union proponents downplay the importance of marriage as simply a matter of privacy and convenience, and that government should not be involved in such personal matters.
Defenders of traditional marriage contend that it is not a small issue of privacy but rather an issue of huge importance to our culture, and it is something our government should not actively deconstruct. The U.S. Constitution states that a primary reason our government was established is to "promote the general Welfare" and our government is required to be wise about what behaviors it endorses and discourages. In this issue of Rare Jewel Magazine are many facts about the destructive consequences of the breakdown of traditional marriage.
So who is right? What is the best course for our nation? Which side represents the truth? We will answer these questions, but stick with me.
The Bible begins with God creating everything out of nothing, culminating in the creation of male and female on Day Six (Genesis 1:27). God officially establishes the institution of One-Man, One-Woman union in Genesis 2:24 as the basic building block of humanity, which the Bible later calls marriage.
Throughout the Bible the institution of marriage continually is used to describe the relationship between God and mankind.
In the Old Testament, God speaks to His people as a heartbroken husband yearning for a loving wife who, instead, frequently is unfaithful to her husband. The prophets vividly describe God's passion that His people be single-hearted in their relationship with Him, and the allegory always is described in terms of a husband and a wife. God even instructs the prophet Hosea to marry a prostitute in a real-life drama describing God's heart for His people and their (lack of) heart for Him.
In the New Testament, Jesus spoke in parable form about the kingdom of Heaven being like a wedding banquet and bridesmaids waiting for the Groom, pointing to our eternal relationship with Christ. In Ephesians Paul notes that the institution of marriage (husband and wife) is based on the model of Christ as the Husband and His church as the bride. Revelation 19 describes the culmination of human history when some are "invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb" (verse 9) when the "wedding of the Lamb has come and the bride has made herself ready." (verse 7)
Why does God choose marriage between husband and wife as an analogy that best describes how He relates to mankind? Why does the Bible continually reinforce the fact that culture is based on marriage between man and woman, husband and wife, and that this relationship represents the ultimate in terms of intimacy and reverence with our Lord? What is it about marriage between one man and one woman, that it is the ordained institution God uses to reveal His wisdom and knowledge about the meaning of life to mankind?
Not all the Bible scholars in the world could fully answer these questions. Such wisdom only God can fathom, and our finite brains will never completely grasp the all the truth about marriage. The Apostle Paul exclaims, "Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!" (Rom 11:33) Nonetheless, one doesn't need a Bible degree to see the obvious: God holds out special favor and consideration for the institution of marriage. He wants us to realize how vitally important is His design for marriage and the role it plays in a prospering society. He also knows the role that abuse and neglect of His design for marriage will have in the destruction of society.
So who is right? What is the best course for our nation? Which side represents the truth?
If you are a Christian, if you agree with our Founding Fathers that God established our nation for His specific purpose, if you desire to restore our nation's heritage, then you would be wise to honor God's word and place utmost respect and honor in His institution of marriage as one man and one woman. Our government and our citizenry would be wise to promote public policies that provide care and feeding of marriage as One Man and One Woman, rather than enabling--or even mandating--its destruction.
So much is at stake, more than we can possibly realize.
Tim Ewing is the founder and publisher of Rare Jewel Magazine. Tim lives in Power, MT with his wife and four children. Tim can be reached at Tim@rarejewelmag.com
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
The Upper Room: Jul/Aug 04 (column by Managing Editor Rick Marschall)
Two Worlds
By Rick Marschall
That America was a society characterized by extremes--two worlds--once was starkly obvious. Rich and poor; native-born or immigrant; Republican or Democrat; slave or free for awhile; Protestant or Catholic for the most part; college-educated or not; white-collar or blue-collar; classes; lifestyles; economic station; etc--was a way of life. And typical of many societies.
But, in the US, the fact that there were many "two worlds" added up to more than 2 + 2 + 2. It was a gestalt equation, and one label usually implied nothing at all about a person's other choice of labels. It was one of the remarkable aspects of this nation; the vaunted Melting Pot was not just ethnic.
Today we are a nation of two distinct worlds--at each others' throats, seldom seeking and hardly granting any sympathy for opponents.
Americans' social associations are mostly with their "own kind"--and that phrase used to mean racial, but now it means ideological, partisan, religious. "Ideology"? How often is it any more that couples on opposite sides of the abortion question--or death penalty, or gun control, or homosexual "marriage," or home schooling, or the war in Iraq--how often do they fraternize? About what percentage of your friends can you truly say that you don't know their opinions, or don't care? "Partisanship"? It's no longer Republican or Democrat, but it's Right or Left; flag or peace symbol; AM talk radio or NPR.
"Religion"? Here I don't mean denominations, necessarily; although the mainline churches largely are liberal; and Evangelical, Pentecostal, independent churches generally run the gamut from conservative to extremely conservative.
Walls are being built around segments of the church, walls that are higher and more impenetrable than at any time in American history. Warning: I am about to overstate the case, but as I visit various churches I sometimes wonder how close this is to the case: "Seeker" churches belittle the Evangelicals; Evangelicals think the Pentecostals are nuts; Pentecostals see the Post-Moderns as heretics; PoMos would rather hang with atheists than Fundamentalists; and Fundamentalists won't go near mainstream churches. To what extent these antipathies are actually valid is for another column, but suffice it so say that these new adherents seldom worship together--except, maybe, when they don't know it, at a conference or at a Billy Graham Crusade.
It is not just friendship circles or church groups--it is getting to be neighborhoods and subdivisions, gated communities and apartment complexes, even larger units: Remember the "red" states vs the "blue" states on news maps? America has become a place of Two Worlds.
We might regret the state of affairs, but too many Christians are ready to cry like Rodney King, "Can't we just get along?"
"Getting along" is what got us into this cesspool. Christians must never "get along" with error, with vice, with sin, with delusion, with lies, with self-destructive habits. Faithful believers cannot compromise God's authority, His will, His commands..
Yet, Christians have done those very things. If we hadn't, we wouldn't be facing the crises that threaten us in America. Generations of Christian martyrs endured unbelievable torture and death for their faith... and American Christians hide behind the Constitution even as it is being perverted, afraid to hurt the feelings of handfuls of litigious sociopaths or phony minorities whose chief goal is to spit on our beloved Cross. Have countless brave American soldiers sacrificed their lives and fortunes, so that we can live in a land of pornographers, homosexuals, and would-be totalitarians who banish Bibles from schools and town squares, and who pollute our discourse, control our media, and pervert innocent children? God forbid!
If America is a land of Two Worlds, let Christians and patriots avoid the temptation to withdraw or to feel grateful that we don't have to dirty our hands with the heathen. Society is organic! There is no way to insulate our children--even if home-schooled--from the filth that rises like a floodwater every day, not if they own radios or watch TV or shop in malls or receive clothing catalogs.
It's not enough to avoid the forces of the enemy in the culture. We must instead contend... we must be armed... we must do battle, be prepared to sacrifice, and fight to the death.
"Render unto Caesar," the world-system is quick to remind us, twisting Jesus' meaning. The government paves streets; we should render it the taxes they squeeze. But remember, too, Acts 5:29--"We ought to obey God rather than men."
All the saints and sages who discussed
of the two worlds so learnedly are thrust
like foolish prophets forth; theirs words to scorn
are scattered, their mouths are stopped with dust.
This quatrain from the Rub??of Omar Khayy?/I>, a secular poem of ancient Persian origin, can be a warning to us: Discussion is not enough! Roll up your sleeves! The battle is the Lord's!
That "other world" is out to kill you, steal your nation, and destroy your family. I commend this issue of Rare Jewel Magazine to you for a recitation of the crises that have come as a result of Christians surrendering their spiritual spines. In this issue, too, you will find encouragements--battle plans--for our last chance to redeem this beloved land.
We must "be doers of the word, and not hearers only." (James 1:22)
Attacking marriage and family institutions? What's next? You'll find the answers to that in the history of Christian martyrdom, and in the pages of Revelation.
Rick Marschall is the Managing Editor of Rare Jewel Magazine. He is the author of 59 books and many magazine articles, most recently in the areas of popular culture, devotionals, and youth ministry. He can be reached at rick@rarejewelmag.com
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
Marriage, Family, and the Homosexual Agenda (Talking Points)
Why Should the Country Care About Individuals' Decisions?
"Surely, there is nothing so vitally essential to the welfare of the nation, nothing around which the nation should so bend itself to throw every safeguard, as the home life of the average citizen. When home ties are loosened; when men and women cease to regard a worthy family life, with all its duties fully performed,
and all its responsibilities lived up to, as the life best worth living; then evil days for the commonwealth are at hand."
-- Pres Theodore Roosevelt, 1906 State of the Union address
The Definition of Marriage
Marriage: the "legal union of one man and one woman as husband and wife."
-- Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition
Marriage: "Only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."
Spouse: "The word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
-- Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
U.S. Supreme Court Precedents
"Certainly, no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony."
-- Murphy v. Ramsey, 1885
"Marriage, as creating the most important relation in life [and] having more to do with the morals and civilization of the people than any other institution, has always been subject to the control of the legislature."
-- Maynard v. Hill, 1888
"On this point there can be no serious discussion... Bigamy and polygamy are
crimes by the laws of all civilized and Christian countries. They are crimes by the
laws of the United States, and they are crimes by the laws of Idaho. They tend to
destroy the purity of the marriage relation, to disturb the peace of families, to degrade woman, and to debase man."
-- Davis v. Beason, 1890
"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the
teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian."
-- Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S., 1892
Their Goals in Their Own Words
"Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit."
-- National Coalition of Gay Organizations, 1972 platform demands
"... recognition and legal protection of the whole range of family structures."
-- National Coalition of Gay Organizations, 1993 platform demands
Can Other Countries' Policies Point to Changes in America?
"[In Denmark] marriage is no longer a precondition for settling a family--neither legally nor normatively. What defines and makes the foundation of the Danish family can be said to have moved from marriage to parenthood."
-- Cecilie Wehner, Mia Kambskard, Peter Abrahamson, Demography of the Family: The Case of Denmark, The University of York, 2003
Haven't heterosexuals already ruined marriage?
The institution of marriage has certainly been abused by heterosexual couples. But, legalizing gay marriage would be like tossing an anchor to a drowning man. In a nation with soaring divorce rates, over 12-million single moms, and more than half of a million children living in foster care, our laws should be geared toward strengthening the family unit--not destroying it.
-- The Center for Reclaiming Marriage
Shouldn't this issue remain between consenting adults?
"Lesbian women are more than three times as likely to abuse alcohol; and rates of domestic violence are greater in lesbian relationships."
-- Dr. Timothy Dailey, Family Research Council, January 19, 2004
"Fatherless children are at dramatically greater risk of suicide."
-- Department of Health and Human Services, 1993
"72% of adolescent murderers grew up with no father in the home."
-- Cornell, Dewey, et al. "Characteristics of Adolescents Charged
with Homicide", Behavioral Sciences and the Law 5, 1987
"Girls raised in fatherless homes are more than three times as likely to become unwed teen mothers [as girls from traditional-parent homes]."
-- Annie E. Casey Foundation, 1995
I'm opposed to same-sex "marriage." I favor "civil unions."
Civil unions are simply marriages by another name. If Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore had agreed to remove the Ten Commandments only to replace it with an identical replica, but calling it the "Mt. Sinai Decalogue," the anti-faith establishment would have opposed it just as forcefully.
-- The Center for Reclaiming Marriage
What Does Our Ultimate Source Say On the Subject?
"Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral."
-- Hebrews 13:4 (New King James Version)
"Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh."
-- Genesis 2:24 (New King James Version)
Sources: The Center For Reclaiming America, an outreach of Coral Ridge Ministries, Dr. D. James Kennedy, Founder. www.reclaimamerica.org; wire reports; Theodore Roosevelt Cyclopedia, New York, Roosevelt Memorial Association, 1941.
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
The Sanctity of Marriage (by President George W Bush)
by President George W Bush
George W Bush is President of the United States. His article is edited from remarks in Kutztown, PA, and his weekly radio address, July 9 and 10, 2004.
A great deal is at stake in this matter. The union of a man and woman in marriage is the most enduring and important human institution, and the law can teach respect or disrespect for that institution. If our laws teach that marriage is the sacred commitment of a man and a woman, the basis of an orderly society, and the defining promise of a life, that strengthens the institution of marriage. If courts create their own arbitrary definition of marriage as a mere legal contract, and cut marriage off from its cultural, religious and natural roots, then the meaning of marriage is lost, and the institution is weakened. The Massachusetts court, for example, has called marriage "an evolving paradigm." That sends a message to the next generation that marriage has no enduring meaning, and that ages of moral teaching and human experience have nothing to teach us about this institution.
For ages, in every culture, human beings have understood that traditional marriage is critical to the well-being of families. And because families pass along values and shape character, traditional marriage is also critical to the health of society. Our policies should aim to strengthen families, not undermine them. And changing the definition of traditional marriage will undermine the family structure. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
We Could Literally Lose Our Country (interview with Tony Perkins)
Fighting the Destruction of our Institution of Marriage
Tony Perkins is President of the Family Research Council. This interview was conducted by Tim Ewing, and transcribed by Whitney Ewing
RJM: Why is protecting traditional marriage - one man and one woman - important for our nation?
Perkins: First, you have to understand the power of public policy.... it shapes our culture. If you go back and you look to the late 1960s early '70s, with no-fault divorce spreading across the country - that was a public-policy initiative. Well, we now have 30 years of social-science research that tells us very clearly what that policy did: it moved our culture away from the traditional view of marriage as being a life-long relationship; and as a result there have been some really drastic consequences for marriage and family. We have seen divorces increase, only declining recently because [the number of] marriages have declined; and we have seen sky-rocketing rates of cohabitation - a tenfold increase - resulting in a 141 percent increase since the 1970s in single-parent homes, leaving more children in poverty today than there were in 1972. So it has significant implications upon on how we view marriage and how we value it.
Now if we take the next step, and say, "OK, marriage is not really a special relationship between a man and a woman; it can be a relationship between two people," it just simply devalues the institution even further. Devaluing marriage as a choice - what happened in other places like Scandinavia - will see an increase in cohabitation, an increase in out-of-wedlock births, an increase ultimately in singe-parent homes, and all of the social consequences that result from that.
RJM: Is there a larger homosexual agenda that citizens should be aware of? Is this more than just a marriage issue?
Perkins: If you talk about homosexual rights, it is not about benefits, and I can say that in confidence: If you look in Vermont where, I think it was in 1999, they created civil-unions, which are treated exactly the same was heterosexual marriage, they get all the benefits - everything from the state's perspective - yet only 40 per cent of the identifiable homosexual couples have actually availed themselves of civil-union [status].
What this is about, I think, is more about removing and destroying the institution of marriage. The Word of God says that "the Law of God is inscribed on the hearts of men" [Rom. 2:15] and I know that homosexuals deny it, but those who come out of the lifestyle admit that it's anything but a "gay" lifestyle. And I think that every time they see a heterosexual couple with children, it serves as an indictment against their lifestyle, whether they were drawn in because of abuse or whatever the case may be. It's a reminder, and I think ultimately they want to destroy the institution of marriage.
RJM: What action items do you recommend for concerned citizens who wish to protect marriages? What can we do?
Perkins: Well there are a couple of things. Number one, pray. This is first and foremost a spiritual battle. The one illustration, the analogy, which God gives to describe the relationship between Christ and the church, was marriage. It's fundamental to not only our country, but to our civilization. And so there's a lot riding on this issue.
There's no society in the history of man that we know of - because if they embraced homosexual marriage they're no longer here! - but no society that we know of has gone as far to elevate homosexuality to the same level as the life-giving, nurturing relationships between man and wife, in a lifelong relationship of marriage. None.
So there's a lot at stake here. We need to pray, we need to talk to our elected officials. It's very simply this: you're either for marriage or against it. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
Marriage, Family... and God's Priorities (by Stephen Bennett)
The Homosexual Strategy In The Culture Wars
by Stephen Bennett
Stephen Bennett is Executive Director of Stephen Bennett Ministries, a national pro-family advocacy group located in Huntington CT. He can be heard weekdays as host of the daily commentary Straight Talk Radio.
We live in a society that promotes "tolerance" of everything, whether good or bad. No one likes to be told that his or her behavior is wrong. Rebuke of any kind is considered "intolerant."
It is in this context that homosexuals attempt to justify their behavior by claiming that those who speak against it are judgmental. However, this argument should not hinder Christians from speaking the truth, and condemning sin itself.
Is speaking the truth, and condemning sin, scriptural? Absolutely. II Timothy 3:16-17 says that "all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness..." Hebrews 4:12 refers to the word of God as "living and active. Sharper than any two-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." Thus, it is proper for Christians to use Scripture as a standard for judging behavior.
What Christians must guard against is a judgmental or hypocritical attitude toward the individual in sin. "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him." (John 3:17) And in Christ's own words: "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way that you judge others, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." (Matthew 7:1-2)
DOES GOD MAKE HOMOSEXUALS?
While it is true that the New Testament does not document any statements of Jesus specifically condemning or condoning homosexuality... He didn't need to. It was very clear. However, John 21:25 states that "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down... even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." Further, it should be considered that there is no record of Jesus' statements on other sexual practices like rape, incest, bestiality, etc.; yet it is unlikely that Jesus sanctioned these behaviors.
THE CULTURAL CRISIS IN AMERICA
No one is born "gay," and in most cases no one chooses to be "gay." Homosexuality is abnormal, unnatural, unhealthy, mentally and emotionally destructive - and in many cases deadly. I know: I've buried countless friends who've died from AIDS.
Granting homosexuals the right to marry or adopt children is deliberately creating dysfunctional families. This only enables them to remain trapped in a falsehood - a deception and a counterfeit of the real. It's about time we put down the politics and the spin, and address the real issue at hand.
If pro-family organizations want to protect marriage, they need to boldly confront the issue of homosexuality - now - before it's too late. This needs to be done in the spirit of love, with the ultimate goal of helping homosexual men and women - individuals who are precious in God's eyes - to see the truth.
As the culture has turned further and further from God it has become increasingly rare to find those in our nation who will hold up God's standards. What has increased to epidemic proportions is the denigration of faith in the American culture, and specifically an increasing tolerance for anti-Christian bigotry coming from homosexual activists and the media. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
"Gay," "Rainbow," "Family" ... and other Hijackings (by Alan Chambers)
By Alan Chambers
Alan Chambers is President of Exodus International (www.exodus.to), headquartered in Orlando FL. Exodus, founded in 1976, is comprised of more than 150 member and applicant agencies in North America, and based on the Biblical truth that freedom from homosexuality is possible when Jesus is Lord of one's life.
Hijacking has become commonplace for members of the "Gay" Elite. For instance, in the 1950s, "gay" was a term commonly used to describe happiness and joy. In the late 1960s, homosexual activists stole the word from the American language, and today "gay" is synonymous with the word "homosexual." It might seem insignificant to some, but I assure you, the perversion of a word meaning "happiness" was a careful calculation, no coincidence, and helped begin the weakening of our society's views toward homosexuality and those calling themselves homosexual.
The incredibly organized, politically powerful, and well-funded Gay Elite has won this battle that will redefine the foundation of what every society since the beginning of time has held dear: marriage. The opposition to the homosexual assault has been very weak, and I believe we have only ourselves to blame. The majority of conservative Americans, politicians, and even Christians have seemingly sat idle and done little. Many Americans were content to watch these battles on the news - the Massachusetts fight; the Defense of Marriage debate; the vote on the Constitutional Marriage Amendment - and chose not to stand up for what they believe. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
The Homosexual Assault: The Real "Gay History" (by Rob Tong)
A Battle Plan That Succeeded
by Rob Tong
Rob Tong is the Moody Church liaison to CareFirst Pregnancy Centers.
In 1987, two activists, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen wrote The Overhauling of Straight America, a manifesto that preceded their book After the Ball, outlining how the homosexual movement could swing public perception. Kirk and Madsen outlined six steps.
In 15 short years the homosexual movement essentially has achieved everything it wanted. Indeed, public perception has swung from considering homosexuality to be loathsome, to the shoulder-shrug attitude.
How radically has the public's attitude changed? Dr. Robert L Spitzer (who spearheaded the AMA's decision to declassify homosexuality as a mental-health disorder) changed his tune, and said in 2001 that his recent studies "show some people can change from gay to straight, and we ought to acknowledge that." But by that time, public perception had changed so much that Dr. Spitzer's research was largely ignored.
By changing the public's attitudes, the homosexual agenda advances more aggressively, allowing such historic events like the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling Lawrence v. Texas invalidating sodomy laws; and the Massachusetts Supreme Court's 2004 ruling legalizing homosexual "marriages," Goodridge & Others v. Department of Public Health & Another; both rulings citing public attitudes more than Constitutional law.
Now that you know the past, you can help shape the future. (read the complete article)
The Courts v. Marriage (by Virginia C. Armstrong, Ph.D.)
Sodomy, Survival, and the Supremes
by Virginia C. Armstrong, Ph.D.
Dr. Armstrong is the president of the Blackstone Institute and National Chairman of Eagle Forum's Court Watch. She writes and speaks widely on the Constitution, jurisprudence, and Christian apologetics.
In practical effect, the judicial attack on the traditional protective wall around public health, safety, morality, and welfare accelerates the destructive resemblance to Sodom and Gomorrah. Laws against bestiality, incest, sibling intermarriage, polygamy, prostitution, spousal abuse, drug use, etc., are likely to be buried in the Supremes' hurry to legitimize homosexual conduct. We should brace ourselves for an explosion of new laws granting to homosexuals rights such as marriage, adoption, employment benefits, employment opportunities, changed military discharge policies, etc.
In such perilous times as these, we need to remember, and live by, the wisdom of two of history's noble statesmen:
Sir William Blackstone, whose influence on the American constitutional system is immeasurable, described sodomy as "the infamous crime against nature," as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is as disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named."
The impact of legalizing - even celebrating - such conduct is implicit in the observation of Alexis de Tocqueville, who wrote: "In the United States the sovereign authority is religious..... there is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that this influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
A Prescription to Rescue the Healthy Marriage (by Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D.)
Perceptions and Attitudes
by Janice Shaw Crouse, PhD.
Dr. Janice Shaw Crouse has written and spoken extensively on marriage and family issues over the past decade. She is a former Presdiential speechwriter and is Executive Director of the Beverly LaHaye Institute.
Over the last century, the autonomous individual has come dangerously close to replacing the family as the culturally accepted and affirmed basic unit of society.
The origin of this trend clearly traces back through decades of modern and post-modern philosophy, but it has only been in recent times that the society-at-large has revolted against tradition to implement these dangerous concepts. The sexual revolution of the 1960s encouraged "self-fulfillment" as a social goal, and this standard paralleled skyrocketing divorce rates, burgeoning pregnancies, and the proliferation of sexually transmitted diseases. Social-indicator warnings have largely been ignored by those who subscribe to family and traditional values -- casting themselves as Chicken Littles.
But many of today's young people freely admit that their sky IS falling. They have been the painful pawns of ugly divorce suits; they've experienced emptiness at the end of meaningless one-night-stands; their self-esteem has plummeted. Their cries for "meaning: in life have produced a web of social institutions that try to fill the void of family connections and try to reproduce the security and contentment the family produces. But a growing league of social workers and therapists will never match going home to the kitchen table where loving parents offer cookies along with wise counsel.
Since the Welfare Reform movement of 1996, there has been a growing realization that public policy has a significant effect on the public's marital choices. As we encourage more positive attitudes toward marriage, we should also provide a political climate that encourages marriage; that creates strong incentives for marriage; that discourages sexual promiscuity, single parenthood, cohabitation, and other lifestyles that threaten traditional marriage.
As with recent efforts that focused on the marriage-tax penalty and funding for abstinence programs, we must appreciate the roles of tax relief for families; support of legislative pro-marriage initiatives; and promotion of healthy-marriage curricula and government-sponsored abstinence programs, with the goal to educate teenagers about why to wait for sex, and that the wait should be until marriage. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
What's Wrong With Two People Loving Each Other? (by Rev. Rob Schenck)
License, Love, and Law
by Rev. Rob Schenck
Rev Rob Schenck, the "Missionary to Capitol Hill, is co-founder of Faith and Action (www.faithandaction.org)
When Massachusetts began issuing same-sex "marriage licenses" last year, I had a conversation with two teenage girls outside Boston City Hall. As they watched the parade of same-sex couples march out triumphantly, waving their newly minted "license" certificates, the girls told me they were there to write an article for their high-school newspaper.
"Why would you be against this [same-sex "marriage"]?" asked one of them, quizzically. I could tell by the look on her face that she was genuinely puzzled.
The other girl scrunched up her nose, cocked her head to the side and asked in an even more strained tone, "Yeah, why would you be against anyone loving another person?"
It was a significant question -- Why would we be against anyone loving another person? I asked a question in return.
"Should I be allowed to marry anyone that I love?"
"Well, yeah, of course," came their stereophonic reply.
"Then I think I'll marry my father, since I love him," I said with half a smile. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
News to Inform and Infuriate
Pertinent and Impertinent
Presbyterians Favor Unrestricted Abortion, Contraception
RICHMOND VA -- Mainline Presbyterians at their General Assembly (126th General Assembly, PCUSA, 26 June - 3 July, 2004) rejected a call to restrict late-term abortions. In a separate vote, a measure merely urging women to reject late-term abortions was defeated by a 100-vote margin.
The Rev Don Stribling of Texas called for "morning-after" abortion pills to be sold to women without prescriptions. He said that would be a way of extending "grace" to women who regret their misconduct so they can "become all that Christ has intended them to be."
No word yet on a resolution in favor of letting fetuses
"become all that Christ has intended them to be."
Mile-High Homosexuals Exchange Vows To Celebrate Defeat of Marriage Amendment
COLORADO SPRINGS -- In the shadow of Pike's Peak, 50 "gay" and lesbian couples exchanged wedding vows to celebrate the US Senate's defeat of the Federal Marriage Amendment in July 2004.
The "weddings," performed by ministers of the Metropolitan Community Church, are legally invalid since Colorado doesn't recognize same-sex unions or "marriages."
But Colorado Springs Vice Mayor Richard Skorman--the only high-level city official present--said the gathering shows that "gays" won't be stifled by Christian groups like Focus on the Family that are based in the area.
Many companies set up tents at the park to show support for homosexuals, and volunteers for John Kerry's presidential campaign handed out bumper stickers and buttons.
The Vice Mayor was present?
How appropriate is that?
(read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
An Update On a Still-Burning Issue (by Nathan Paul Mehrens, Esq.)
Roe v. Wade: Past v. Present v. Future
by Nathan Paul Mehrens, Esq.
Nathan P Mehrens practices law, and is General Council to conservative watchdog organization, in the Washington DC area.
At our nation's founding the right to life was considered obvious - self-evident: requiring no further proof of its existence, but today this right takes a back seat to personal convenience.
Abortion wasn't always deemed Constitutional. Advocates cite a deeply seated Constitutional right, but the opposite is true: the Constitution says nothing about abortion. Abortion "rights" flowed not from Constitutional text but from judicial decisions, fashioned from misapplication of rights to privacy emanating from several Constitutional provisions and Amendments.
The ultimate unintended consequence - the logical conclusion - of our Fast-Food society in America is a belief that personal convenience overrides another's right to live. The mother is vested with the legal right to decide whether personal privacy interests are more important than the life of the child she carries. The real issue is not a lack of judicial recognition that a life exists when a woman becomes pregnant, but rather that this life isn't entitled to full Constitutional protections to which "persons" are entitled.
Respect and legal protection for innocent life - especially the most vulnerable, those who cannot protect themselves - should be our highest priority as citizens and as a country. The purpose of law is to command what is right and prohibit what is wrong. Abortion is an evil that affects not just one but many persons, and should be prohibited. Until the law is changed to protect life, it fails its intended purpose. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
Truth on Trial: Jul/Aug 04 (by Virginia C. Armstrong, Ph.D.)
War of the Worldviews
by Virginia C. Armstrong, Ph.D.
Dr. Armstrong is the president of the Blackstone Institute and National Chairman of Eagle Forum's Court Watch. She writes and speaks widely on the Constitution, jurisprudence, and Christian apologetics.
The French Revolution of 1789.
The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.
Both of these civil wars were radical revolutions characterized by wanton bloodshed and attacks upon the decadent, brutal, repressive regimes in power. They were true "social revolutions" -- or "Culture Wars" -- no-holds-barred attacks by the Humanist worldview on the entire fabric of their cultures: the religious institutions, political systems, social structures, economy, etc.1
Both of those revolutions differed drastically from the American Revolution of 1776, which, in sharp contrast, was a limited political revolt against the political regime in London. There was no attack, for instance, by the colonial revolutionaries upon the Judeo-Christian worldview, or the cultural traditions, of that society. Both sides in the American Revolution based their actions on English Common Law, which is system that flowed from Anglo-American traditions and a clear Judeo-Christian worldview, as opposed to the Civil Law system rooted in pagan Roman Law, and to non-Western systems of law.
America today is engulfed in the flames of a Culture War -- another "American Revolution," perhaps, but one that more resembles the 1789 and 1917 foreign conflicts than our own 1776 revolution. Today our Christian foundations are being battered by a vicious foe -- the Humanistic worldview. (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
Required Reading: Marriage, Family, and the Homosexual Assault (Book Review by Publisher Tim Ewing)
"Weeping Before God; Fighting Before Men"
Tim Ewing is Publisher and Editorial Director of Rare Jewel Magazine
Getting It Straight: What the Research Shows About Homosexuality
Peter Sprigg and Timothy Dailey, editors. Washington, DC: Family Research Council, 2004. 143 pages. $5.00
Website: www.frc.org
Marriage Under Fire: Why We Must Win This War
Dr James C. Dobson. Sisters, OR: Multnomah, 2004. 123 pages. $6.59
Website: www.marriageunderfire.com
The Truth About Same-Sex Marriage: 6 Things You Need to Know About What's Really at Stake
Erwin W. Lutzer. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2004. 118 pages. $5.99
Website: www.marriageofsamesex.com
If we are to defend marriage--one man and one woman for life, as God ordained and intended for our well-being--it is necessary that we know what the Bible says about marriage and homosexuality; that we equip ourselves with medical and scientific facts about heterosexuality and homosexuality; that we gain wisdom to identify lies and cultural manipulation; and that we speak the truth.
Three recent books complement each other, offering many resources to those who would engage this battle being waged against marriage and the family.
Author Erwin W Lutzer sums up the challenge in these three excellent books when he observes that this is a war fought on our knees in humble prayer before our Lord--"No nation has turned away from so much light in order to choose darkness. No nation has squandered as many opportunities as we have. We can only call on God for mercy.... If we humble ourselves, weeping for this nation, God may yet intervene and restore decency to this crazed world. Most of all, we should pray that millions would be converted and belong to God forever.... If we cannot weep before God, we are probably not fit to fight before men. Only He can save us now." (read the complete article)
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
Go to top of page. | Go to top of article.
