“...believes political leaders who support gay marriage are shirking a sworn duty to uphold “God’s moral and natural law.””
We may want to just hope political leaders uphold the US and state constitutions and by doing so there would be no advocacy amongst political leaders for gay marriage.
Obamanation Counterculture File.
Obamanation Counterculture File.
Then their law is bigotry.
An inclusive God would embrace ‘marriage equality’.
Try : “God created Adam amd Steve. Then they adopted children.
Then Noah loaded the Ark with two males of every Kind.”
Come on pastors, you are teaching bigotry. Get with the under 30s crowd.
Ping for your lists.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to assemble, and to petition the Government of a redress of grievances.
They weren't thinking of any one religion predominating in the United States.
Pastors being forced to comply with same-sex marriage laws, and being sued for non-compliance.
Gay scoutmasters and gay tent mates and "friendly" visitors showing up at night.
"The Gay Bachelor" featuring all gays.
It is still yucky, and it will always be yucky.
I wish they would rail against divorce and premarital sex wit just half the fervor they reserve for the gays. The decline in the sanctity of marriage didn’t start with the gays, they are just finishing it.
I would be satisfied if the Court were, for a change, to uphold American law. Regarding the “re” definition of marriage, I am reminded of a remark by Lincoln on the definition of things: “How many legs does a dog have? Four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it one.,”
(Note: Natural Law doesn't mean "what feels natural to me," or "what comes naturally to the goats and the bonobos," but rather "what can be defended by a reasonable appeal to human nature --- with respect the flourishing of the person, the family, and society.")
It's not that the Bible should be ruled "out of bounds" --- after all, Biblical argument enlightens and motivates lots of people. But a good case can be made that the same Wisdom who wrote Biblical Law, wrote Natural Law: the author of our Scripture is also the author of our Nature.
If this is so--- and in my judgment, it is -- -then a focus on Natural Law does not imply any detriment to God. It just means you're framing your approach to appeal to those who do not share our Holy Writ, but who do indeed share our human nature.
An adequate --- no, a compelling --- argument can be made against the deconstruction of sex, gender, and marriage which is both the cause and the outcome of "gay marriage." Centrally, it is important to human flourishing that children have a "tie that binds" to their natural mother and father. Every child needs this for a full sense of identity and nurture; when any child does not have it, society recognizes that as a sad state of affairs, a shortfall, an injustice and quite possibly a tragedy.
Marriage and family are ultimately based on children's needs and rights, not adults' feelings and desires.
Natural Law should carry this argument --- if anyone takes the time to think it through.
Gay sodomy also violates the laws of science in that it takes a male and a female reproductive system to reproduce. It is a fraud. The two can’t become one.