Posted on 06/23/2004 6:23:17 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Things just don’t add up. The polls tell us that a significant majority of American voters oppose same-sex “marriage.” Yet congressmen and senators tell us that their phones aren’t exactly ringing off the hook over this issue. In fact, they’re hardly getting any calls on the subject at all—not even from Christians. What’s going on?
One explanation might be that, for many secularists who oppose same-sex “marriage,” it’s just not that big a deal. The general public often shies away from controversial social issues, especially during election years, and no one wants to seem judgmental, after all, in today’s “tolerant” environment.
But what about Christians? What’s our excuse for staying silent?
I think some don’t really believe this is such a critical battle. To them I can only say—wake up and pay attention. This issue has the potential to redefine and, ultimately, to destroy the institution of marriage in this country—and with marriage goes the family. You can’t ignore this.
But there are other Christians who recognize the importance of the battle over same-sex “marriage” but are still not speaking up. For many of them, I think the problem is a lack of faith.
Now, that may sound harsh, but I can’t think of a better way to put it. A lot of Christians—even some of our most prominent leaders—seem to have succumbed to a “What’s the use?” attitude. They believe that the cultural climate has turned so much against us that we’ll never be able to stop the advance of same-sex “marriage.” And they have heard that we don’t have the votes to pass a constitutional amendment in this session of Congress—so they don’t even want to urge the House and Senate to vote. Some Christian commentators have sounded a defeatist note.
I understand the need to be realistic about the odds we are facing—yes, it’s a tough fight. But it’s quite another thing to believe that because we don’t have the votes today, there’s no reason to fight.
I worked in the U.S. Senate between 1956 and 1960. We fought hard for civil rights bills—against entrenched segregation. Every year the bills were blocked by filibusters. But we kept fighting year after year. So did leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr., and others. By 1964 the voting rights act was passed.
And what about Ronald Reagan, whom we honored just weeks ago—the man who led us to victory in the Cold War? He dared to demand that the Berlin Wall be torn down when almost no one else thought it possible. It took years, but it happened.
Remember, too, Wilberforce and his campaigns against slavery. He had only a handful of votes when he started, but he trusted in God. He battled year after year in the Parliament, and twenty years later, an overwhelming majority voted to end that horrible villainy.
The Senate has, I’m happy to say, scheduled debate to begin the week of July 12. Maybe there aren’t the votes there this year to pass a constitutional amendment, but that’s no excuse not to start the fight. We need a great national debate so we can make our case. And maybe we’ll lose this year—maybe next year we’ll lose again. But we’ll come back year after year—until we win. Like the cause of abolition, our cause is just. And if we trust in God, I believe that during the coming public debates, the public will see this as a great defining issue. And when they do, the pressure will be on recalcitrant congressmen to come our way.
I say let the debate begin. Let us engage the battle.
If anyone wants on or off my BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
This could explain some of the homo-loving we've seen on our Michigan board.
I said a while back that the ultimate demise of marriage from a legal perspective will not be brought about by same-sex unions; it will happen when normal, decent people tell the state to "f#%& off" and refuse to obtain any legal recognition for their marriages.
A Roman Catholic does not get a state certificate when he is Baptized, does not get a state certificate when he receives Holy Communion for the first time, and doesn't get a state certificate on his Confirmation day. By that logic, he sure as hell doesn't need a state certificate to validate his marriage vows.
Putting government in charge of marriage continues to pay dividends. As with most things government controlled, this destruction has been predictable.
We stay silent because we see these people as beyond redemption anyway. We're not supposed to behave that way but there comes a time when Christians simply have to face reality.
Much as I'm opposed to gay "marriage," I've never seen this claim adequately defended (and it's usually not defended at all, but simply asserted).
I think the difficulty in fighting this is like fighting 'green snow'.
IOW, same-sex marriage isn't really marriage, just like green snow isn't snow.
How do you fight something that doesn't really exist?
Ping.
He missed the third possibility, that marriage is an institution that was co-opted by the state as a form of taxation in about 1500 in England. It then lost it’s meaning between God and Man. Today marriage in some states like Florida is treated as one of the most voidable contracts there is. No business man in Florida would sign a contract with as little enforceability as the current Marriage contract.
It's simple. Get the state out of the marriage business, and problem solved.
talking out against gay marriages automatically makes someone a homophobe which makes them worse than hitler. this is what the Gaystapo wants normal citizens to believe anyway.
Agreed! That's why I can't get too upset about the same-sex marriages, as marriage isn't any of the state's business anyway, IMO.
Carolyn
Gay marriage is a perversion of God's law. It creates nothing and destroys nothing.
Calling a donkey a horse doesn't hurt the horses. It just hurts those too stupid to see the difference.
Why bother? Only about 1% of the population is homosexual, less than 10% will get married. Very few homosexual marriages will stay together. So it is likely we will never see a homosexual married couple, except on TV.
I believe that Satan has lulled the church to sleep. We are very confortable in the knowledge of our salvation and feel no responsibility whatsoever do act on our faith.
Please see www.preparetoleave.com and click on Pearls. Because of His excruciating death for us, the fact that our salvation was bought at an extremely high price, should send us trembling. Our lack of action is SIN.
We must defend His honor. We must stand for Him. It is His heart that we must be concerned with. Pray to feel His burdens and then go forth fearlessly in His name and take the land back! Remember, the population of gays are also lulled into deception. Let them be drawn to Christ by our love.
We must work now while we can.
Marriage is not just a religious ceremony. It is a cultural imperitave. Christians don't care about state sponsored marriage for the sake of the faithful, but for the sake of the culture.
Without a proper definition of marriage, and a proper attitude toward sexuality, the entire nation will go the way of the family. If you want just one example of what way that is, look at the black community.
Shalom.
I can see it both ways. I think it would be better for the sanctity of marriage if it was, in fact, purely a religious commitment and sacrament, and if the state stayed out of the equation altogether. But, on the other hand, I have two teenage daughters, and I very much hope that someday they'll marry and have children. If there are NO laws around marriage, what sort of protections will society provide for my daughters and grandchildren? Will my daughters even be able to find good young men to marry? Or, will marriage be one of those things that the young men consider "gay"-- i.e., not something that a real guy does?
Whatever happens, I hope it happens fast, because my daughters will be ready for marriage within the next ten years, and if they don't marry and have children during those years, they're unlikely to do so at all. And, more than anything, I want them to have the joys of a loving family life.
Amen! I second that! The real battle is not whether the secular State sanctions an agreement between two consenting adults which is perfectly within their rights of free association. The battle is within the churches that sanction an unholy matrimony. Marriage is a covenant before God, not the State.
Perhaps what we can do as Christians is be careful to use proper language when differentiating between holy matrimony and civil unions even when speaking with hetrosexual secularists. Take for example a case in which a secularist couple announces to you that they will be celebrating an anniversary. In that case you could respond, "How long has your civil union been in force?" My guess is that you will receive a response of "shock and awe" and perhaps to get the couple to think about the nature of their union.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.