Tag Archives: marriage

Biology, not bigotry, and removing barriers to evangelism

I’ll support unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortions as soon as you convince me that the unborn aren’t human beings and I’ll support government recognition of “same-sex marriage” as soon as you prove that these couples can provide a mother and a father to a child.

In both cases it is biology, not bigotry, so don’t let people silence you on these crucial topics.

You don’t have to convert people to your point of view on marriage or abortion before sharing the Gospel or pointing them to the Bible.  But for many people these are barriers to even considering Christianity.  Just having a few replies — literally just a minute or so — is often all it takes.  You can simply say, “Yes, the Bible does say it is a sin but even if it didn’t we are still separated from God by our many other sins . . .” and then point them to the cross and to God’s word (same thing for the abortion issue).  Here’s a real-life example of how to do that.

If people are hostile to it, then hold your pearls.  But don’t give up before you try.

Facebook memes follow-up

I thought I’d post this comment and my response that resulted from the Facebook memes post.  Looks like I have another fan.

Your “logic” is irrevocobly flawed. I’m just curious, when was it that you “proved” your civil right to marry a woman? When was it that African Americans “proved” their civil right to freedom? When did they “prove” their civil right to equal treatment? And what did they do to prove it? As was the case with slavery, just because something is done a certain way for a long time, doesn’t make it the “correct” or “only” way. If YOUR religion prohibits YOU from accepting gay marriage, I completely respect that. I obviously do not agree with you, but I aknowledge your desire to adhere to your religious beliefs. With that said, YOUR religion has absolutely NOTHING to do with the running of our government; nor does it have any part in determining what is, and what isn’t a person’s civil rights. Our forefathers made a point to both protect our citizens rights to worship their chosen religion, AND protect our government from undue religious influence. Nowhere in our Constitution, is there found a definition for marriage. I am well aware what the “traditional” meaning is, as I am aware that gay couples can’t produce children, so please don’t feel the need to “inform” me on those two facts. “Traditional” doesn’t equate “the only way”, it simply means the most popular way. And obviously, many unions between a man and a woman do not produce children. So what truth outside the Bible do you believe you stand on? If the Bible doesn’t influence our judicial system, what do you propose as an argument in the Supreme Court, against it? Will you argue that gay people haven’t sucessfully proven their civil right to marry? Establishing a burden of proof does not apply to civil rights.

I would love to read your rebuttle, because I am honestly trying to understand your thought process. Sadly, I’m sure you will not allow this comment to be posted, because it rationally and coherently refutes your reasoning. I have found that Conservative bloggers tend to deny the comments that are based on facts, when the facts aren’t in their favor. I truly hope you aren’t as cowardly as the rest.

Regarding conservative blogs moderating you, please hold off on martyr status until you do some self-reflection. Your comment here was an extended straw-man argument about religious views. Ironically, your anti-religion bigotry and prejudices fit much better with the pictured meme than our view about real marriage. It is self-serving on your part to go to conservative blogs with your fallacious rants and then pre-emptively call them cowards for not wanting to discuss things with you. If I try to avoid an irrational crank at work I’m being wise, not cowardly.

If you want to gain some credibility here, please provide links to where you have made comments like this to theological liberals (read: fake Christians) who advocate for oxymoronic “same-sex marriage.” You may also want to consider how I didn’t make religious arguments, I made secular ones.

If YOUR religion prohibits YOU from accepting opposing gay marriage, I completely respect that. I obviously do not agree with you, but I aknowledge your desire to adhere to your religious beliefs. With that said, YOUR religion has absolutely NOTHING to do with the running of our government; nor does it have any part in determining what is, and what isn’t a person’s civil rights. Our forefathers made a point to both protect our citizens rights to worship their chosen religion, AND protect our government from undue religious influence. Nowhere in our Constitution, is there found a definition for marriage. . . .

You’ll note that I only had to change one word to turn your diatribe into one against the anti-biblical “Christians” who push for “same-sex marriage.” So unless you are a hypocrite, you’ll have plenty of examples to show me where you fight their un-Constitutional intrusion into the marriage debate. Or do you just play the religious-suppression card on those you disagree with?

You might also want to consider how the 1st Amendment protects religious speech and does not prohibit it. As with the Obama administration, you have it backwards. My religion teaches me that it is wrong to beat up atheists and steal their property. Using your logic I’d have to be silent on that in the public square or even vote the opposite, lest I “force” my religious views on atheists.

Now to a couple of your arguments:

I am well aware what the “traditional” meaning is, as I am aware that gay couples can’t produce children, so please don’t feel the need to “inform” me on those two facts. “Traditional” doesn’t equate “the only way”, it simply means the most popular way. And obviously, many unions between a man and a woman do not produce children. So what truth outside the Bible do you believe you stand on?

That’s a clever rhetorical trick you play there, and sadly enough, it works on many people. You concede my key point that by nature and design gay couples can’t produce children, but you simultaneously pretend that I haven’t made any secular arguments. Not so fast. Since we both agree on that fact, you should ask why government is involved in any personal relationships. The government does not regulate my love for my wife, nor does it need to. It is only involved because the obvious ideal, supported by countless studies and common sense, is that a child be raised by his mother and father, as well as the scientific fact that children are produced by unions of one man and one woman. Even Darwinists should see the merits of that.

And I didn’t use the term “traditional,” you inserted that. Words mean things, and throughout history the term marriage has meant the union of a man and a woman. Only recently have some dictionaries bowed to pressure and modified it. And your overly broad argument also justifies polygamy and incest and is already being used by pedophiles. After all, if you are changing the definition of marriage why do you get to pull up the drawbridge after you’ve made your preferred change? Why won’t you let others change the laws to suit their desires?

And obviously, many unions between a man and a woman do not produce children.

Agreed, but this doesn’t change the premise that by nature and design children are produced by a union of a male and a female and that only those unions can provide a mother and a father to a child.

Since you brought up the religion topic I thought I’d share a summary of what the one true God says about marriage and parenting:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

Also see this secular case against “same-sex marriage” as well as these:

Problems with pro-gay theology  

Responding to Pro-Gay Theology     

Responding to same-sex marriage arguments

Whoa — Pat Robertson gets one right!

wedding-rings2.jpgI do not care for Pat Robertson and his many false claims, but he is right on this one: Pat Robertson Tells Christian Viewer to Dump Muslim Girlfriend.

Even a non-religious person should see that couples should agree on the foundations of how they view the world. Do people think they can disagree on who God is, what happens when you die, how to be reconciled to God, etc., and that it won’t have a radical impact on them and their children? They plan to find agreement on where to live, how many kids to have, where to vacation, etc., but not on the key questions of life?

The message to their children will come through loud and clear: The concept of God is so unimportant to us and irrelevant to life that we didn’t find it necessary to agree on it before committing to spend our lives together.

More importantly, for Christians to marry non-Christians is forbidden in scripture.  2 Corinthians 6:14 is often cited (Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?) but you can also see all of 1 Corinthians 7.

And while God might ultimately bless the union in his radical grace, what makes anyone think He is obliged to bless a union entered into via disobedience?

Christians should not date non-Christians.  Satan has used this countless times to draw people away from God.  Heck, Muslims should not date non-Muslims, for that matter.  And so on.

Here’s an example offered by Dan:

I was speaking with a co-worker who was having problems in his marriage, and their future as a couple was not looking good at all.  It seems that him (a “Christian”) and his wife (a Jew) saw their religious “diversity” as a great positive going into marriage.  Why not?  It’s the craze of the age… right?   But then a child came into the picture and all of a sudden their diversity was an insurmountable mountain.  The religions that they had both subjected to the wisdom of a bunch of pointy-headed Utopians had suddenly risen from its bottom self status to supreme importance when it came to raising their son.  This fellow could see the writing on the wall.  He knew his choice was to raise their child a Jew, or be reduced to a weekend Dad by the courts.  A loving person could have told him this if he’d been curious or humble enough to seek council about it before hand.  Why does man insists on being so short sighted?

Roundup

—–

Sadly, pro-choicers think it is a good thing that we’ve reduced the cases of Down Syndrome outside the womb by killing 90% of those who have it when they are inside the womb.  And yet they think pro-lifers are the extremists.

—–

For you Reformed folks, please consider switching from TULIP to BACON.  Tulips are beautiful but bacon is tastier and more manly-sounding.

—–

Good, simple flowchart in responding to same-sex marriage arguments (click the link to embiggen and get the jpeg):

Marriage-Flow-Final-2.png (1024×563)

—–

Mainstreaming Bisexuality: ‘Captain Bisexual’ Marches in Chicago Pride Parade as Young Children Watch — the title says it all.

—–

Aussie Communists: ‘Strike blows’ against the Church and capitalism with same-sex ‘marriage’ — Hey, kudos to them for being honest about their agenda.  At least they didn’t peddle the lies about it being for “love,” which countless unthinking people reflexively repeat (as if not changing the definition of a timeless word would prevent people from loving each other).

Roundup

In case you missed it — a great video on marriage — the story of Ian and Larissa.

—–

Courtesy of Duane from Facebook, the two tenets of the Tolerance and Diversity movement:

  1. We Support Free Speech.
  2. Shut Up.

—–

I thought this was a gag at first — Coming Next: ADA Lawsuits Over Shy Bladder Syndrome.  Sadly, it isn’t.  This is government out of control.

—–

Self-professed pro-choice ‘terrorist’ pleads guilty to issuing death threats: cyanide found in home — Did this make the mainstream news?  I assume not.  Rhetorical question: Would it have had more publicity if it had been a pro-lifer?

—–

Lifting the Lid on Censorship of Black on White Violence — just a little balance would be nice.

The establishment media serves one purpose in this country: to advance the liberal agenda. Neither public safety nor the duty to keep the public informed is allowed to get in the way.

—–

Will the media bother to tell Ohioans that Obama’s ad there is pure fiction?

All of which means that the actual message of the ad is “I had a job in the auto industry until about six years ago… and then I got a new job. Which is apparently one with a bad environmental and fiscal record, but that doesn’t matter! That’s because Barack Obama really, really needs me to get on the screen and tell you how great it is for me as a spectator to see the auto industry get bailed out. So I figure that I’m golden… oh, crud, Facebook. But… they promised me that Republicans couldn’t read!”

Which, admittedly, doesn’t really sing as a campaign message.

—–

The viciousness of the Darwin Lobby:

Evolution News writes about an eminent scientist who is under by professors and students at Emory University because of his disagreement with Darwinian orthodoxy and his assertion that morality isn’t possible on a materialistic worldview.

Here’s the first article from Evolution News, which explains what got Dr. Carson in trouble with the Darwoids.

Excerpt:

You can be a brilliant, innovative pediatric neurosurgeon at a sky-scraping top medical school, in addition to being a generous philanthropist with an inspirational up-from-dire-poverty personal story, plus a Presidential Medal of Freedom winner, and a best-selling writer whose memoir was turned into a TV movie starring Cuba Gooding Jr.

All that, but if you once shared your critical thoughts on evolutionary science and its moral implications — everything else about you suddenly dwindles to very little.

Dr. Ben Carson of Johns Hopkins University is that man.

—–

This explains a lot about healthy eating and a proper diet:

400 Calories, by Volume

—–

Obama’s SSM stance looks to be hurting him with Independents.  I’d ignore the Republican less likely / Democrat more likely figures, as those would probably be the same regardless.  But the Independent gap is telling.

Yea for North Carolina!

Once again, every state that has let the voters decide has stood up for real marriage.  See North Carolina voters ban gay marriage, civil unions.  This will help protect religious freedoms, among other things.  The only states that have recognized these unions did so through judges or elected officials.

North Carolinians voted to change the state constitution Tuesday to say that the only valid “domestic legal partnership” in the state is marriage between a man and a woman, according to the AP’s projection. The amendment passed 61 to 39 percent with most counties reporting, making North Carolina the 29th state with a gay marriage ban in its constitution.The state already outlawed gay marriage, but the constitutional amendment makes it more difficult for politicians to ever change the law.

Note the mistake in the title of the link: This didn’t “ban” “gay marriage,” it noted what the state recognizes as valid.  Gays can still go to all sorts of apostate churches and get “married,” set up house together, etc.  In other words, no one is stopping them from associating with those they love.

They won by a huge margin despite being wildly outspent by their opponents out-of-state funding.

Bonus link: A secular case against “same-sex marriage.”

This should make for an interesting location for the Democratic convention:

Whoever decided to put the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina should be given a lollipop by the GOP for the intense level of comedic schadenfreude we can all now watch. The Democrats will convene in a proudly right to work state whose state Democratic Party is imploding due to a gay sexual harassment scandal, the state itself just voted for marriage by a margin few statewide candidates in North Carolina get, and twenty percent of Democrats voted against Barack Obama in the North Carolina Democratic Primary.

On the bright side, North Carolina is not West Virginia where a felon in federal prison in Texas locked up 40% of the vote in the Democratic Primary against Barack Obama.

Courtesy of John, here is a list of all the results from other states.

Satan is evil, not stupid

And he doesn’t mind being a hypocrite.

Here’s an example that gets repeated hundreds, if not thousands of times per day: Via his useful idiots in media, education and apostate churches, Satan tempts women to get abortions by filling their minds with all sorts of lies about how killing their unwanted children will solve their problems.

Then right after the abortion he’ll be glad to tell them how awful and unforgivable they are for killing their own kids.  He’ll remind them of that as often as he can for the rest of their lives.  Hypocrisy?  Sure, but what does he care?  He has helped kill another human being made in the image of God and distanced another person from God.

He’ll even entice women to have a 2nd abortion even though they feel guilty about the first one.  Why?  Because they believe the lie that anyone who had an abortion doesn’t deserve to be a mother.  Illogical?  Yes, but again, he doesn’t care about consistency.

I heard of one couple who knew they had done wrong in having an abortion, but thought that meant they couldn’t go to church.  Whose idea was that?  By definition, churches should welcome lost sinners who want to repent and be healed.

But there is good news and hope: Even people who have been involved in abortions can get forgiveness and healing through Jesus.  One of the best things that Pregnancy Resource Centers do — besides savings lives today and for eternity — is offering post-abortion trauma counseling to women who desperately need it.  And they all need it, whether they know it or not.

If you were part of the abortion process, don’t let Satan win and keep you from God.  Help is out there from people who truly care.