Posted on 07/05/2015 4:04:47 AM PDT by HomerBohn
Although they seem to think they do, five Ivy League-educated lawyers in league with the Prince of Darkness have not the authority to redefine marriage, which was not defined by man in the first place.
God established marriage in Genesis 2:23-24, “The man said, ‘This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.’ Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” (ESV)
The Supreme Court is not the first to try and change the institution’s definition. As Christ explained to the Pharisees in Matthew 19, Moses’ command to issue a certificate of divorce did not change God’s definition of marriage. “… Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” (Matt. 19:4-9, ESV)
As it was in the beginning, and as it was in the 1st century, so it is today.
While the Supreme Court can write a tortured and illogical ruling to attempt to redefine legal marriage, it has no authority over spiritual marriage as God established. Anything other than a God-sanctioned marriage is sexual immorality.
The five justices who wrote the majority opinion should know that. Two are Catholic. Three are Jews. They were certainly — if they were ever “practicing” Catholics and Jews — taught the truth about marriage. Sadly, they’ve sacrificed their souls on the altar of universalism (look for more on universalism in Monday’s column, “How have we fallen so far?”). They will answer for their apostasy.
Marriage has not changed as far as God is concerned; therefore, it has not changed as far as the Christian is concerned. Take heart in that, fellow Christian.
The SCOTUS do NOT have the authority to override God’s laws. Indeed, those who accept this travesty and abide by it are rejecting God. Do NOT obey!
SCOTUS is a Created Thing.
See Romans 1:25
If they ever actually followed the 10th Amendment, about 60% (I’m being conservative) of the federal government would have to go.
“Civil unions were not cutting it, even though virtually everybody was doing them by this point.”
For what it’s worth, the vast majority of states were not doing civil unions (and many of the state marriage amendments explicitly prohibited them), and civil unions were not legally equivalent to marriages.
Congressman Bob Livingston almost became Republican Speaker of the House after Newt Gingrich went down. But chances are high that this a different Bob.
Just get government completely out of marriage, and then each church or other institutions can record that a marriage has occurred. Get government tax and regulatory laws out of marriage - and use some other social structure (parents, head of household, etc) in its place.
Then each person in each community can decide for themselves who they want to recognize as being married. Sure, if a women who has a houseful of cats wants to marry one or all of them, she could probably find some Wiccan to perform that ceremony and record it in their records.
But no one would refer to any of these cats as her husband, nor would anyone be required to do so.
As long as ALL marriages are 100% out of the purview of government, then the SCOTUS really can’t do anything about it. Currently, however, since government is involved, they can.
The court thinks it can wrote law by saying something is not constitutional. That has never been their purpose.
“Paint white stripes down the freeways because not doing so is unconstitutional.”
“Save the purple squirrels because not doing so is unconstitutional.”
“Give two faggots a marriage license because not doing so is unconstitutional.”
States need to tell the court to go screw themselves because they don’t write law.
I don’t even believe in God, but I can see the immorality of sham sex marriages. If the court says that everybody should be treated equal, then it should shut down Affirmative Action also
All who divorce have committed adultery?
Very possibly.
Especially if that's what led to the divorce.
So, divorce is okay sometimes, but not others?
Nobody is requesting atheists to come on board
Please explain the applicability of the point you purport to make to the discussion.
Sounds like a bid to try to get me into a rut of despair like you.
What in the hell are you talking about, or what are you after here?
Go haunt another thread.
God owns every square inch of the earth and we have to occupy until he comes. It is war and I like that war terminology, it forces us to see what we are up against which is evil.
Heh heh heh.
Please clarify on “we have to occupy.” If that means Christians are commanded to be physically policing it from pole to pole I would disagree. If it means this location is where our fate is to be, I would agree. Both on biblical principles.
I mean the location where we live. That is our fortress.
I would respond if I understood your comment. Do you understand your comment?
Don't know about "okay" - but not all divorces are created equal. There are issues with risk of physical harm, constant emotional abuse, serial adultery on the part of husband or wife, etc - and then there's the whole topic of whether a marriage between two non-believers even falls into the same category, Biblically speaking.
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.