Tag Archives: Marriage

Same-Sex “Marriage,” An Illogical Counterfeit

“Destroy the family and you destroy a nation,” has been an oft-repeated aphorism of unverified origin, that rings true from a common sense perspective. The family unit, after all, is the building block of all cultures and societies. And just as the law of unintended consequences manifests itself often glaringly when dealing with issues of a political nature, so likewise the unintended consequences of redefining marriage will likewise prove to be pejorative.

family-the-foundation-of-the-society-1-638The proliferation of “same-sex marriage” is based, both judicially and from a political correctness standpoint, on two major fallacious premises. The first is that marrying whoever or whatever one wants to is somehow a “right,” and the second is that marriage can be whatever we choose it to be.

Marriage to whomever or whatever one chooses to be is not a codified “right.” Even if it could somehow be so extrapolated, nowhere is it based on whom one professes love for. To the contrary, it is, based in natural law, lex naturalis, which is the system of law that is determined by nature, and is thus universal. Embedded also in nature’s law is the use of reason to analyze social and personal human nature to deduce binding rules of behavior from it. As fundamentally significant as marriage is to our culture, our society, and our civilization, the institution cannot be simply redefined based on fad or political correctness without negative consequences.

images-1Dr. Patrick Fagan, a sociologist and psychologist has said, “The family is the fundamental building block of society and predates the state and even the societies it builds…At the heart of the family is the mother and father who bring their children into existence.” This is a self-evident truth, regardless of who said it, and anthropologists, biologists, sociologists, and politicians have reiterated that very sentiment. The family is the building block of society and civilization, and the cornerstone to that foundation, or the genesis of it, is a mother and a father.

Foundations must be strong, and built to withstand the elements, corrosion, and the test of time. Otherwise, the structure built thereon will inevitably crumble. If a foundation is made with unmixed cement or just water, as same-sex marriage tries to do, the foundation is weak, and the structure (our civilization) built thereon will crumble. When we tamper with, and attempt to socially-engineer the foundational elements and institutions to civilization and our society, the results will be destructive.

Redefining marriage based on who one purportedly loves, is a spurious dilution of our societal foundation. At no time in human history, has marriage been legally based on who one loves, but has always been about perpetuating the species, and forming familial units that construct the foundation to civilization. Sometimes it has included multiple spouses, but always it has been based on propagational properties, whether age or fertility exceptions apply or not. Any semantic change to the definition is only that, semantic, and does not change the biological or anthropological verities etymologically embedded in the term. Such a change to accommodate same-sex “marriage” is therefore nothing more than creating a verbal counterfeit to the real thing. Referring to a snake as a swan doesn’t change it into something that it is not.

Family ConceptNor is there a “right” to marry whomsoever or whatsoever we please, or profess love for. Such a right is as most other “rights” claimed by those in our society who feel somehow shortchanged, slighted, or disadvantaged. The “right” is not codified in any legal document, much less our founding documents, just like the “right” to health care, or the “right” to a good job. Heterosexual marriage, however, is codified in natural law, as attested by biological and anthropological fact. The test is simple: try building a civilization or a society from scratch with anything other than natural law, heterosexual marriage. As an attorney friend of mine said, “there is absolutely no logical interpretation of the Constitution that can stretch sufficiently to include the definition of marriage as a judicially definable term.”

Founder of Liberty Counsel, Mat Staver, has warned that the door to what can be legitimized as a legal relationship is now wide open. “This doesn’t just stop at heterosexual marriage or same-sex ‘marriage,’ but it also will extend to bigamy and incestuous marriage and all kinds of situations. If the government doesn’t have any interest in [marriage], then polygamy is permissible, polyamory is permissible.  We would have group marriages. Incestuous marriages are permissible. Marriages with … children as young as 8 or 7 or however low you want to go on the list — all of that becomes a free-for-all.”

francis-gay-marriageDr. Charles Krauthammer makes the same argument. “Traditional marriage is defined as the union of (1) two people of (2) opposite gender. If, as advocates of gay marriage insist, the gender requirement is nothing but prejudice, exclusion and an arbitrary denial of one’s autonomous choices, then on what grounds do they insist upon the traditional, arbitrary and exclusionary number of two?”

Other factors now become arbitrary and exclusionary as well. A Missouri man feels he was discriminated against when the state disallowed his marriage to his chosen “partner.” He says of her, “She’s gorgeous. She’s sweet. She’s loving. I’m very proud of her.” He can now employ the same charge of “discrimination” that is precluding him from “marrying” his favorite mare, Pixel.

Doug Mainwaring, an avowed homosexual, has made an astute observation regarding marriage. “Two men or two women together is, in truth, nothing like a man and a woman creating a life and a family together…Marriage is not an elastic term. It is immutable. It offers the very best for children and society. We should not adulterate nor mutilate its definition, thereby denying its riches to current and future generations.”

UnknownWords have meaning, and marriage, as the cornerstone to civilization, is copiously imbued with it. I have yet to hear a logical or cogent explanation as to why a binding homosexual relationship must be a marriage as opposed to a civil union or legal partnership. Rather than weakening and diluting the foundation to our society, we should be strengthening and encouraging it. After all, our future, and stability, as a society is dependent on it.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

Texas is the latest victim of a judicial free-for-all

Texas Ruling Striking Marriage Amendment is Attack on Rule of Law

WASHINGTON, Feb. 26, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Today, Federal Judge Orlando Garcia, a President Clinton appointee, struck down the Texas constitutional marriage amendment which had been approved by 76 percent of the state’s voters.

Family Research Council (FRC) President Tony Perkins released the following statement:

“The state of Texas is the latest victim of a judicial free-for-all in making a lawless mockery of the ideals that our Founding Fathers stood for.

“A court-imposed redefinition of marriage strips away the fundamental right to self-governance. This is not just an attack on marriage, but an attack on the rule of law. It is not the role of judges to redefine our most fundamental societal institution which has such far-reaching implications for society at every level.

“While these activist judges appear to be rolling out a rainbow colored aisle runner leading the way for a nation-wide redefinition of marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately have to decide on the redefinition of marriage. Hopefully, the Court will refrain from repeating the disaster of Roe v. Wade by imposing a radical minority view on the nation. Instead, we would expect the Supreme Court to restore order by returning to the people and their elected representatives the right to decide the future of marriage,” concluded Perkins.

Obamacare Penalizes Married Couples

marriageCHARLOTTE, N.C., Nov. 26, 2013 /Christian Newswire/ — The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, punishes married couples by making it more difficult than unmarried couples to receive subsidies. Under the ACA, the less income earned, the more money is available to individuals from the government to pay for health insurance. In many low-income communities around the nation, marriage is now the exception rather than the rule and not getting married is the major tax shelter for low- and moderate-income households with children.

Couples living together who are not married could save up to $10,000 more than a married couple under Obamacare because the health care law requires married couples to combine income and prohibits them from filing as two individuals. On the other hand, an unmarried couple living together can file as two individuals. The disadvantage is for couples who choose marriage.

Heritage Foundation reports that in order to receive a government subsidy, a married couple must earn less than $62,040. Therefore, a married couple with each spouse making $35,000 annually for a combined income of $70,000 dollars would not qualify for a healthcare subsidy. In contrast, an unmarried couple with each partner making $40,000 for a combined income of $80,000 could qualify for thousands of dollars in subsidies. Whether this disparity was intentional or not, it is extremely damaging to the social fabric of our nation.

Dr. Richard Land, president of the SES, stated, “The fact that Obamacare penalizes married couples financially is about as counterproductive to stable families and a stable society as any government policy can be. The oldest axiom in public policy is: ‘That which you tax you’ll get less of. That which you subsidize you’ll get more of.’

“By financially penalizing marriage formation and conversely subsidizing non-married family units, government is acting in a way that the New Testament calls perverse. Romans 13 says that the civil magistrate is ordained to reward those who do that which is right and penalize those who do that which is wrong! Isn’t Obamacare doing exactly the opposite?”

Land goes on to say that Christians must be active participants in the culture war — standing firm against society-damaging issues such as the breakdown of family (penalizing marriage) and abortion — both of which are components within Obamacare.

SES has been ranked No. 1 for its General Christian Apologetics Graduate Program by TheBestSchools.org’s “Top 10 Graduate Programs in Christian Apologetics.” For more information, visitwww.ses.edu.

Illinois Senate Passes Redefinition of Marriage Bill

SPRINGFIELD, Nov. 5, 2013 /Christian Newswire/ — The Thomas More Society, which has been at the forefront in defending traditional marriage in Illinois, issued the following statement on House passage of Senate Bill-10’s redefinition of marriage:

      “While we believe it regrettable that Illinois legislators have now purported to redefine marriage as something different from the union of one man and one woman, we are at least pleased and reassured to hear that legislators insisted during today’s floor debate in the House of Representatives that Illinois’ Religious Freedom Restoration Act and other constitutional and statutory guaranties of Illinois citizens’ religious liberties remain in full force and effect. We will do our part to insure that those fundamental religious liberties are given robust and unstinting protection. The free speech and free exercise clauses of our First Amendment remain at the core of our constitutional order, and no law nor any public official may lawfully coerce anyone to deny or disavow his or her religious beliefs, or refrain from professing those beliefs in the public square, or to go against those beliefs in practice. This is still a free country, and Thomas More Society stands ready to do its utmost to keep it free,” said Tom Brejcha, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Society.

Homophobic Contradictions: The Government, Darwin And Jesus



A T-shirt slogan that caught my attention last week, “Jesus is not a homophobe” so intrigued me I googled the word homophobe and according to internet lore it was coined in the sixties by George Weinberg, a Gay activist and psychologist who defined it as an irrational fear of homosexuals, a contagion of sorts. Boy, how things have changed. I don’t fear catching the lifestyle, but wrath from the LGBT agenda, now that’s another story.

The word Homophobe has since evolved from it’s clinical definition to the role of a de-humanizing slang-shooting weapon when referring to people of faith; particularly Christians by those in the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) community, and now recently the Obama administration has joined in on the assault. Is it not always the case that the folks most involved in helping those who are hurting often seem to get the brunt end of the stick ?

So exactly what should governments role be in the matter ? Let me borrow a phrase from Jay Warner Wallace at Please Convince me. Should the government permit Gay marriage ? Should they even go further and promote it ? Or simply prohibit it ? Those are all questions for all of us to figure out, but each one of those questions have consequences. I think we can figure them out right out of the gate.

I see a contradiction in our government supporting the LGBT community and Gay marriage while holding fast philosophically to Darwinian Evolution. A belief in Darwinism is a belief against same sex marriage, and the Gay community–no way around it. Remember The United States government made a philosophical commitment to Darwinian Evolution starting in 1962-(63) when they essentially threw out school prayer and the Bible, thus Creationism as a popular view of our origins began its steep decent. So no surprise we are discussing this.

Let’s think about science for a moment. The very definition of Darwinian Evolution concerning humanity essentially says; mankind evolved from a combination of genetic drift, mutation, and natural selection in such a way so that the survival of the fittest is afforded the right of reproduction. All those in the animal kingdom failing to reproduce the right genes will disappear into extinction. Not a pleasant thought.

So hear this clearly: according to Natural Selection, the major stanchion of Darwinian evolution; is also the damming component that makes support for same sex relationships as a continuing advancement to civil society,  biologically futile. Bottom-line is that same sex couples can not reproduce and thus have no future from a purely Darwinian evolutionary perspective. The Obama administrations support for same-sex relationships is purely political and nothing else.

If your in the LGBT community this is bad news— according to Darwin extinction is the Gay communities destiny; and in the interim they are being played like chess pieces by the Obama political machine. To say it another way–your’e being punk’d.  Yet, the very people you despise–Christians, have been telling you the truth–that Gay and Lesbian behavior is just that–behavior that can and should be changed not according to me, but according to the Creator of the Universe.

Jesus promoted a heterosexual lifestyle. The Bible is chock full of both warnings against this behavior and many others as well. However it is also filled with encouragement, and a way out of the same-sex bondage. Please hear me–there is a way out! Our current government, and Darwinism are not filled with anything but tyranny, strife, and extinction if you take them seriously—I don’t for most of it, but the inability to reproduce from same-sex couples is a fact as well as the Biblical immorality of it. Please think through your decision making and turn from the Gay life style.

Finally, as I think back to the slogan, “Jesus is not a homophobe” I do agree that he was not, and no one who follows Jesus should be either. I can’t say I have been perfect in this. I certainly have my list of sins I have wrestled with, but if I want to follow Jesus’ example then I need to tell the truth even if it is not popular. No, Jesus is not a homophobe  he is a straight talking savior.  Promoting marriage between a man and a women makes biological and ethical sense, don’t you agree ?








Catholic Video Unites Members Against Obama Agenda

Catholics Called to Witness released a video that seeks to unite the Church’s members where key issues are concerned. Pro-life, pro-jobs, pro-marriage and pro-freedom of religion statements are pressed in the video with the message that the 2012 election will be a historic one and Catholics must unite behind their beliefs. As Obama has lost significant ground with Catholics and religious Americans as a whole, the message may be hitting home.

While Obama Pushes Same-Sex Marriage, Pro-Family Movement Educates and Affirms the Natural Family as the Future of Society

MADRID, Spain, May 21, 2012 /Christian Newswire/ — In less than a week, World Congress of Families VI will open in Madrid’s Palacio de Congresos to affirm the natural family as the fundamental unit of society while President Barack Obama so-called same-sex marriage, including the endorsement by U.S. President Barack Obama.

The theme for WCF VI in Madrid, Spain (May 25-27) is “Marriage and Family, Future of Society.” This theme reflects that there is no greater social indicator for the future success of our civilization than the strength of natural marriage and natural families in society. For example, decades of research indicates that natural marriage can reduce rates of poverty by over 80%.

“We had no idea when we began planning our sixth Congress over a year ago that it would come on the heels of an announcement by a U.S. president that he supports homosexual ‘marriage,’ based on spurious claims of equality and ignoring the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights of children to be raised by their biological mothers and fathers.” said Larry Jacobs, World Congress of Families Managing Director.

In many ways, the timing is providential, Jacobs observed: “The Congress will open almost two weeks to the day after President Obama announced his repudiation of the Natural Family in Spain, a country, still recovering from 8 years of a socialist leader, Zapatero, who forced the legalization of same-sex marriage and abortion on the Spanish people who are overwhelmingly opposed. Just as our opponents have, advocates for the Natural Family must continue to organize internationally.”

Speakers at the three-day Congress will include Cardinal Ennio Antonelli (President of the Pontifical Council on the Family) on “The Natural Family and the Revolution Against the Family,” Rabbi Moshe Bendahan (Chief Rabbi of Spain) on “Family, the Future of Society,” Erich W. Kopischke (Elder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) on “The Value of the Natural Family,” Fr. Philaret Bulekov (delivering a message from Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev of the Russian Orthodox Church) and Dr. Paige Patterson (President of the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary).

Speeches by social scientists, authors, physicians and officeholders will touch on such varied topics as: the worldwide decline in fertility, how government policies impact on the family, the family and international law, contraception vs. natural family planning, the health effects of promiscuity and infidelity, family economics and social capital, rediscovering the role of homemaker, the culture of life versus the culture of death, fighting for freedom to educate, the social cost of pornography and sexual slavery, and family-friendly entertainment.

A plenary session on The Homosexual Lobby will include addresses on: “Solutions to Homosexual Behavior,” “Violation of Rights of Conscience Today,” “Effects of Social Experimentation and Same-Sex Adoption,” and “Hate Speech Laws and Anti-Discrimination Measures to Marginalize Believers.”

Jacobs noted that Christian Concern – a World Congress of Families Partner in the United Kingdom – has so far helped to collect over 516,000 signatures on its “Don’t Play Politics with Marriage” petition to stop Prime Minister David Cameron’s move to legalize homosexual “marriage” in Britain.

Christian Concern’s “One Man and One Woman: Making The Case for Marriage Conference” was scheduled to take place at the Law Society in London on May 23. The Law Society is attempting to ban the conference, claiming that a discussion of the need to preserve marriage violates its “diversity policy.”

“Just as the movement to de-construct marriage and the natural family are international in scope, so too must be our response,” Jacobs declared. “World Congress of Families is uniting individuals across diverse faiths and cultures in support of institutions which serve as the bedrock of civilization. Article 16 (3) of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR ratified by all nations in 1948) states that, “The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.”

Pro-family leaders, scholars and activists from over 60 nations are expected to attend the Madrid Congress. Previous World Congresses of Families have been held in Prague (1997), Geneva (1999), Mexico City (2004), Warsaw (2007) and Amsterdam (2009). World Congress of Families VII is scheduled for Sydney, Australia in 2013.

Those interested in attending World Congress of Families VI in Madrid (May 25-27) can register online at www.worldcongress.es.

President Obama’s Executive Order for Marriage Equality

(Associated Depressed) — President Obama issued an executive order entitled the Equality in Marriage Act, requiring by law that all marriages be, “Equal in all respects, whether in terms of gender, race, religion, sexual preference, appearance, or intelligence.”

The policy shift ushers in not only a new era of legal equality between homosexual and heterosexual couples, but equalized marriage outcomes for all human beings, regardless of race, gender, or sexual preference.

“The time has come for us to set aside our petty differences,” President Obama said before a White House podium overlooking the picturesque National Mall, “to take hope in the change of this transformational agenda, so that all people, no matter what background or what our individual differences, will not be overly blessed or overly cursed with a marriage to someone who is not right for them.”

Millions applauded the president for the progressive decree, which would put an end to marriage inequality once and for all. People who once thought they were doomed to a miserable marriage to someone in their same victim class have already looked forward to seeing the new policy put in practice.

But now that the applause has ended, controversy has set in regarding what exactly the president meant.

“Well, frankly, there is no precedent in American law for this kind of sweeping, although breathtaking vision,” said Mortimer L. Swathley of the politically neutral Brookings Institution. “We are in a new era of law when we just have to try to discern what Obama’s intentions are when he issues an executive order.  Such scholars have already dubbed themselves ‘Obama reconstructivists.’ ”

The decree has sent lawyers, judges, and pastors scrambling to accommodate a flurry of new matrimonial activity sure to provide a stimulus for the recovering economy.

“We still aren’t sure if Obama means that two people with high IQs now need to get divorced and remarry spouses with proportionately lower IQs,” said Judge Michael B. Fuddell. “Or if two good-looking people have to separate and pair with ugly partners, or if white people have to marry black people, or even so far that dark people have to marry pasty people. It’s kind of a legal nightmare…but an exciting one.”

The national divorce rate has already tripled, providing a boon to family legal practices across the country. Marriage rates also received a much-needed boost, although single people are already starting to grumble about discrimination.

“Couples who once found themselves chained to a much dumber or uglier spouse were initially happier that Obama approved the overall collective equality in their marriages,” said psychotherapist Jill Brubeck of a marriage counseling agency in California. “But as mandatory reporters, we are having trouble getting two intellectually-challenged partners to acknowledge that there is any inequality there. They just aren’t bright enough to make sense of the law, poor things.”

While heterosexuals struggle to set aside previous marriages and find their opposites in terms of race, looks, and IQ, homosexuals are elated that gay marriage has effectively been federally mandated.

“If heterosexuals can be trapped in pledged lifelong monogamy, why can’t gays?” said one legal expert. “The only question remaining is why married couples should hoard all the misery, when singles escape scot-free. I think it is time for the president to call upon singles to show a little self-sacrifice, and share the misery.”

While there are still many issues unsettled regarding Obama’s executive order, some citizens are already seeing a positive difference in their lives.

“I thought I was happy wedded to a smart, wonderful husband, having beautiful healthy children,” sobbed Sarah Milner joyfully, “but after listening to President Obama, I realized that I was being selfish, and I could never tolerate living such an unfair life.  So I quit and married a bum who was making catcalls to me everyday on the way to work. The guilt is gone, and I’ve felt better ever since.”

The policy is set to be fully implemented following Barack Obama’s last election.

Author’s note: The above is satire. It is a fictionalized account intended to elucidate certain ideas and principles by taking them to absurd lengths. It is not intended to be taken literally.

Kyle Becker blogs at RogueGovernment, and can be followed on Twitter as @RogueOperator1. He writes freelance for several publications, including American Thinker, Misfit Politics, and OwntheNarrative, and is a regular commentator on the late night talk shows at OTNN.

Touchdown and Homerun!

I would like to start off by stating that I am not a very big sports fan unless it deals with burning rubber and raw exhaust, or preying on delicious animals. I do occasionally take in a ball game, be it baseball, football or even soccer. Yes I do enjoy sitting in my recliner watching TV, so don’t try to yank my man card just yet.

I recently read an article on David Tyree, receiver for the New York Giants, on his stand on gay marriage.

“Nothing means more to me than that my God would be honored. Being the fact that I firmly believe that God created and ordained marriage between a man and a woman, I believe that that’s something that should be fought for at all costs.” – David Tyree

It was very refreshing to see a famous sports figure stand up against the liberals that seem to dominate the sports teams and media. Tyree does not stand alone in the sports arena when it comes to standing for what I also believe is created and ordained by God for a man and a woman. John Smoltz who played baseball for several different teams, and Todd Jones, pitcher for the Cincinnati Reds also stand proud in their beliefs and have not bowed to the political correctness that many stars seem to feel they must submit to. These players have taken a stand while at the same time their teammates are speaking out against them and their views. David Tyree stood proud even when teammate Michael Strahan and Giants co-owner Steve Tisch spoke out in favor of gay marriage.

I would like to applaud Tyree and the other players that have stood up for what is right. We need more role models in sports like David Tyree, John Smoltz and Todd Jones. It is men like these three that are to be admired. As parents, we do not have to worry about what liberal band wagon they may jump on and pass on to our children.


For those of you that own firearms, train hard and well and teach those that do not know how.
Be good stewards of the right to bear arms, for we are the last line of defense against tyranny.

-Benjamin Wallace