Why does it matter? (Gay marriage)

[ahs]

SSM is not a civil rights issue. What civil rights are being denied. Just because some people don’t like the choice that they have doesn’t mean we have the redefine a whole institution because “it’s not fair” to them that they don’t like their choice.

Exactly! This entire arguement about same-sex “marriage” “equality” is not about equal rights. It’s about the definition of marriage and why the state should promote it. Same sex “couples” already have every legal protection to live exactly how they want to…except for the state/gov benefits. What this boils down to is those in favor of changing the definition of marriage want state benefits for their lfestyle choice. What they DON’T realize, is why the state promotes marriage in the first place…and they can’t see that is “marriage” is redefined to be an emotional union as opposed to a conjugal one, there is not reason for the state to promote it, and their entire argument becomes a moot point.

 

[fix]

If that’s what Aquinas said, I think he’s wrong, though I can understand why it might be considered less immoral.

I think a lot of people shy away from supporting polygamy or even giving tolerance to it because it is not socially acceptable and/or they don’t know any polygamists and aren’t emotionally involved.

It’s funny how times change. One hundred years ago, legalisation of polygamy was probably ten times more likely than legalisation of same-sex marriage.

I would not place yourself above Aquinas in this matter.

This is from the Old Catholic Encyclopedia:

Neither polygamy nor divorce can be said to be contrary to the primary precepts of nature. The primary end of marriage is compatible with both. But at least they are against the secondary precepts of the natural law: contrary, that is, to what is required for the well-ordering of human life. In these secondary precepts, however, God can dispense for good reason if He sees fit to do so. In so doing He uses His sovereign authority to diminish the right of absolute equality which naturally exists between man and woman with reference to marriage. In this way, without suffering any stain on His holiness, God could permit and sanction polygamy and divorce in the Old Law.

Now compare that to homosexual “unions” which are not compatible with any of the moral law. Today people view these items simply through emotionalism and sentimentalism. They do not reason morally, just with emotion.

 

[JamesCaruso]

T… but what WILL happen is that the Church will no longer be able to “discriminate” by preaching against homosexual activity…

I don’t know what you mean by same sex activity, but THE CHURCH WILL ALWAYS PREACH AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL SEX. Please excuse my raising my voice, but the Church has no choice about whether to preach against sin, no matter what penalty the state may levy against it. And if we as Christians have any sense, we, too, will continue to speak out against same sex sex, just as we do now against abortion and against government mandated inclusion of abortion and birth control services in health insurance policies, even for Christian organizations. This life is not worth living unless it is lived in conformance with God’s law.

 

[CopticChristian]

Exactly! This entire arguement about same-sex “marriage” “equality” is not about equal rights. It’s about the definition of marriage and why the state should promote it. Same sex “couples” already have every legal protection to live exactly how they want to…except for the state/gov benefits. What this boils down to is those in favor of changing the definition of marriage want state benefits for their lfestyle choice. What they DON’T realize, is why the state promotes marriage in the first place…and they can’t see that is “marriage” is redefined to be an emotional union as opposed to a conjugal one, there is not reason for the state to promote it, and their entire argument becomes a moot point .

What they DON’T realize, is why the state promotes marriage in the first place…and they can’t see that is “marriage” is redefined to be an emotional union as opposed to a conjugal one, there is not reason for the state to promote it, and their entire argument becomes a moot point

You are suggesting total ignorance, an incapacity to understand, something that is so difficult to see, something that the rational mind fails to grasp and I cannot agree. I take the opposite opinion in that those that argue so much in favor of Same Sex Marriage continually, on many different threads, having been presented points of view consistent with the Magesterium and what faithful Catholics understand is not invincible ignorance.

You have a point of view, I agree, this information has been presented and what is received is no attempt to accept that point of view, in fact simple dismissal and argument for an alternative point of view that is consistently lacking in foundation of reality and when I see that, I see agenda. When I see that I see no attempt to discuss or understand just a continuance of an agenda and then the question is why is anyone so vehemently in favor of arguing for something, people saying they have no children and are not married, that they cannot and do not have any stake in and it is purely hypothetical to their view.

This raises more questions as to motive than it answers.

 

[jonathan_hili]

I would not place yourself above Aquinas in this matter.

This is from the Old Catholic Encyclopedia:

Now compare that to homosexual “unions” which are not compatible with any of the moral law. Today people view these items simply through emotionalism and sentimentalism. They do not reason morally, just with emotion.

Both polygamy and same-sex marriage are destructive to true marriage. The one because it undermines the unitive aspect of one man and woman; the other because it undermines the procreative aspect. But I don’t want to waste time quibbling what’s worse: it’s like saying, would you rather shoot ten people or commit ten abortions.

 

[CopticChristian]

s

I try very hard to avoid accusing individuals of being uncharitable in and of themselves. .

What I do try hard to illustrate though is how their words and opinions could be perceived as uncharitable by others who have a different outlook to us.

Isn’t that part of what it means to be a Christian? I.e. to love others means to ensure that where we would wish to be loved in such a way they would also experience it lovingly as well?

It’s not good telling someone you’re being charitable when they experience something different. They just perceive a lie and it immediately undoes any good you’re trying to do

It is impossible to know what anyone else besides yourself perceives without asking them. We can never know the experience of another without asking them. To say you know 100 gay men, 100 LGBT people, 100 Swyer Syndrome people, 100 hermaphrodites does not equate to knowing what all people percieve and experience. The only person that anyone can expect to understand and explain anything is as it pertains to self. The only experience you can know for sure is your experience.

I would suggest that you sit back and take your own advice as you state here…

I would thank you not to pretend that you know what’s going on inside my head or what I know or do not know.

I have said that I don’t often get offended: this is one of the things that does offend me. You aren’t me, and I presume you aren’t psychic, so please don’t speak for me, and certainly not in such a way as to paint a deliberately bad picture of me. That is particularly dishonest.

I would ask that you accept all the gratitude that can be offered and understand that to pretend to know what is going on inside anyone’s head but your own and to believe that you know what is going on inside anyone’s head but your own is offensive. I would assume that you are not anyone but yourself, you are not psychic, you cannot speak for anyone but yourself and to paint a picture as if what you believe anyone else to think and believe is as you say dishonest.

I know how you think and believe based on reading many posts. I see within your mind many things that I cannot agree with. I know your thoughts on topics that have persistently drawn opposition and I know in your mind as you think you have weighed what others tell you as to how it differs. I see in your mind and I know in your mind what you have consistenly and persistently portrayed as what you believe to be consistent with Church teaching and within your mind I have access to former thoughts that you have consistently and persistently written.

I know that your mind and your eyes have seen this before…

**Abortion and Same Sex marriage are intrinsically evil. Both are sins that cry to heaven for justice. Both destroy souls. Both are examples of unjust laws. Both laws teach others to sin.

Children are central to the issue. To deny the obvious is to be oblivious to reality.

Anyone who obtains happiness from objective mortal sin is deceived. To claim any Catholic should support evil is beyond words.

There is no love in affirming sin. Your position is not Catholic.

What is true is that Catholics are bound to reject unjust laws. It does not have to be a matter of dogma to bind under pain of mortal sin. There is ample evidence in the CCC, encyclicals, Vatican directives, bishop’s statements, and basic moral theology that contradicts your words. In fact it is frank to state that this position insults intelligence.

We must all disagree with support of unjust laws. First, support for these unjust laws is morally wrong. To support the effort or the law is to support SSM. There is no logical way around that. It is like supporting pro abortion laws.

Secondly, religious arguments are fine. The Christian faith has and must influence the law.

You cannot be a Catholic in good standing and be ambivalent about others who commit mortal sins. You need to represent the Catholic faith and teachings in all venues

The RCC has taught the faithful on the moral evils of SSM. The Church has taught the Truth and asks you to defend it. You are choosing to ignore over 2000 years of inspired wisdom which is based in natural law. In all Christian charity, you are putting your knowledge above the Church’s. Simple stated, you are not being humble and are (gently-stated) worshipping at the altar of self opinion. Please consider the grave nature of your opinion.**

So, supporting Same Sex Marriage and Homosexuality is like supporting pro-abortion laws, evil is evil.
.

 

[ahs]

I don’t know what you mean by same sex activity, but THE CHURCH WILL ALWAYS PREACH AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL SEX. Please excuse my raising my voice, but the Church has no choice about whether to preach against sin, no matter what penalty the state may levy against it. And if we as Christians have any sense, we, too, will continue to speak out against same sex sex, just as we do now against abortion and against government mandated inclusion of abortion and birth control services in health insurance policies, even for Christian organizations. This life is not worth living unless it is lived in conformance with God’s law.

Yes, the Church will continue to speak out against those things. But the title of the thread is “why does it matter?” [if the state redefines Marriage to include same sex partners]. I am pointing out that it matters because, among other reasons I posted, the Church will be fighting legal battles that it should not have to fight. WE have already seen the case where the 2 homosexual students raised a stink about the Priest who was “alienat[ing]” them by teaching against same-sex activity. Their claim may have little merit today…but when the state legally recognizes their “union” as a “marriage”, then it becomes a legal issue. That is why it matters (among other reasons).

 

[ahs]

You are suggesting total ignorance, an incapacity to understand, something that is so difficult to see, something that the rational mind fails to grasp and I cannot agree. I take the opposite opinion in that those that argue so much in favor of Same Sex Marriage continually, on many different threads, having been presented points of view consistent with the Magesterium and what faithful Catholics understand is not invincible ignorance.

You have a point of view, I agree, this information has been presented and what is received is no attempt to accept that point of view, in fact simple dismissal and argument for an alternative point of view that is consistently lacking in foundation of reality and when I see that, I see agenda. When I see that I see no attempt to discuss or understand just a continuance of an agenda and then the question is why is anyone so vehemently in favor of arguing for something, people saying they have no children and are not married, that they cannot and do not have any stake in and it is purely hypothetical to their view.

This raises more questions as to motive than it answers.

Yes, I agree with you in regards to the forums. I am speaking more along the lines of society at large…the general mind-set of “ssm” supporters as a whole. In debating on facebook, for example, the general suporter has been non-religious, or only nominally so, and when presented with the facts, they have no answer and appear surprised that there is some logic to it all instead of just their emotional plea for what they brand as “equality”.

 

[fix]

Both polygamy and same-sex marriage are destructive to true marriage. The one because it undermines the unitive aspect of one man and woman; the other because it undermines the procreative aspect. But I don’t want to waste time quibbling what’s worse: it’s like saying, would you rather shoot ten people or commit ten abortions.

They are both bad. I point out the distinction for two reasons. First the gravity of same sex marriage is commonly rationalized and the graveness is overlooked. Secondly, What will flow the the acceptance of these illicit unions is not just polygamy much things even worse.

 

[jonathan_hili]

They are both bad. I point out the distinction for two reasons. First the gravity of same sex marriage is commonly rationalized and the graveness is overlooked. Secondly, What will flow the the acceptance of these illicit unions is not just polygamy much things even worse.

Fair enough.

However, I still think we shouldn’t be too clear-cut with these distinctions, after all, grave consequences follow from polygamy too (for example, viewing women as more like property than persons).

 

[JM3]

when the state legally recognizes their “union” as a “marriage”, then it becomes a legal issue.

^^^This.

Who was it, a Bishop or Cardinal, that said that his successor would die in prison and that the one after that would die a martyr? Can we really close our eyes to what is happenning here?

 

[JamesCaruso]

Yes, the Church will continue to speak out against those things. But the title of the thread is “why does it matter?” [if the state redefines Marriage to include same sex partners]. I am pointing out that it matters because, among other reasons I posted, the Church will be fighting legal battles that it should not have to fight. WE have already seen the case where the 2 homosexual students raised a stink about the Priest who was “alienat[ing]” them by teaching against same-sex activity. Their claim may have little merit today…but when the state legally recognizes their “union” as a “marriage”, then it becomes a legal issue. That is why it matters (among other reasons).

Irrespective of what the title of the thread is, I was simply answering a statement that you made, namely, “but what WILL happen is that the Church will no longer be able to “discriminate” by preaching against homosexual activity…” If I read it wrong, correct me as to its real meaning, but I took what you said to mean that the Church will not be able to preach against homosexual activity, and I believe that is an incorrect statement. The Church will always preach against homosexual activity. I can only take you at your words, not what you intended to say. I’m glad if that is not what you intended to say.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Fair enough.

However, I still think we shouldn’t be too clear-cut with these distinctions, after all, grave consequences follow from polygamy too (for example, viewing women as more like property than persons).

That is not a grave consequence of polygamy. Many a man views his one wife as property instead of as a person.

 

[livingwordunity]

Why does so-called “gay marriage” matter to us Catholics?

It matters because this is affecting everyone, and traditional marriage has been proven to be the most important building block for the stability of any society and for the raising of children in the most ideal of circumstances. If someone wants to avoid it they will eventually be confronted by it by those who are trying to push it on everyone with law suits, media propaganda, etc. It matters because God forbids things not to give us meaningless rules to follow but because he knows what is good and bad for us. And since non-Catholics are people, too, what has a bad affect on people also has a bad affect on them. We are called to love everyone and that means looking out for what’s best for everyone, not just what’s best for Catholics. It matters because children should not be subjected to doctrines of confusion. It matters because LGB people are at higher risk of mental disorder, suicidal ideation, substance misuse, and deliberate self harm than heterosexual people (source). It matters because Gay and bisexual men are more severely affected by HIV than any other group in the United States (source). And it matters because In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation (source).

 

[edwest2]

It matters for gay (LGBT) people for a few fundamental reasons.

1. It shouldn’t matter who’s gay and who’s not. With all due respect, it doesn’t concern me in the least if the person ringing up my order is gay or whatever, or of a different religion, or whatever.
2. If I’m in a mall, there is nothing to identify any person as LGBT.

The gay media and advocates of same-sex marriage have painted some gays into a corner. Gay marriage, they’ve decided, is the only way to move forward as a group. So, the strategy is, on gay media sites, to show photos of “out” celebrities, athletes and other important people. In fact, today I noticed a question asking if a certain person should be more vocal about his sexuality.

1. It matters because of the impact it is having on kids right now. I’m talking about, “Mom? What does transgender mean?” I’m talking about kids who are just a few years out of diapers being exposed to “normalizing” materials in public schools. If these were “religion is good” material, an army of ACLU members would be all over it. Instead, we get incidents of kids being told to step on the word Jesus. Why?

Let’s face it, my fellow Catholics, this is pure, 100% indoctrination. Parents can’t opt out.

And the thing driving all this is is actual harmful incidents against gay people, both physical and emotional. I guess the question that needs to be asked is, why are human beings harming others the same way for all the other reasons?

Why are so many people shooting, robbing, raping and the list goes on, every day? I am 100% for an end to bullying for all reasons. Kids shouldn’t get beaten up because some punk thinks they’re fat or for the color of their skin or because they won’t give up an expensive brand jacket. And there are some kids who think displays of violence and being a punk are cool. It feeds their egos.

Gay marriage is being marketed as 100% equivalent to heterosexual marriage. Biology tells us it’s not. But if you’re against it, you’ll see stories in the newspaper about a professional gay couple thinking about leaving for a gay friendly state and your state will suffer a brain drain it cannot afford. Is that reasonable? Only gay people are smart and capable? Or being gay confers greater intelligence?

Or why did gay people actually go door to door to convince voters that gay marriage was OK?

Perhaps it’s time we went door to door to tell people that the Church has the answers. It’s a fact that most media is giving gay marriage a lot of positive attention.

So, it matters that kids not be indoctrinated in schools.

amazon.com/Beyond-Diversity-Day-Curriculum-Sexualities/dp/074252034X

As an adult, I could care less if a gay couple lived down the street from me. They do all the things I do in terms of go to work, come home, eat, pay the bills, etc. The only difference is what they do in private. And in the past, it wasn’t an issue. Now, certain gay groups are pushing it in our faces. Don’t gay people want privacy? I guess not. Privacy no longer matters.

I’m not saying all gay people feel this way, but in the past, the gay and bisexual people I worked with caused no issues. Whatever they did was private and not on my mind, we did our jobs, and lived our own lives. Our supervisor held all of us to the same standards. Today, what are we seeing? Photos of politicians followed by “the first openly bisexual” to hold this office? For what?

The fact is, any mix and match group of other-sexuals you can think of are out there, lining up for their shot at something they will try to call “marriage.” That’s why this matters.

There is one and only one way to get the next generation of human beings, and there is a best environment to raise those children.

Peace,
Ed

 

[livingwordunity]

Q: What is the greatest threat posed by allowing gays and lesbians to marry?

A:The better question is: What is the great good in protecting the public understanding that to make a marriage you need a husband and a wife?

I can illustrate my point with a personal example. When I was Bishop of Oakland, I lived at a residence at the Cathedral, overlooking Lake Merritt. It’s very beautiful. But across the lake, as the streets go from 1st Avenue to the city limits at 100th Avenue, those 100 blocks consist entirely of inner city neighborhoods plagued by fatherlessness and all the suffering it produces: youth violence, poverty, drugs, crime, gangs, school dropouts, and incredibly high murder rates. Walk those blocks and you can see with your own eyes: A society that is careless about getting fathers and mothers together to raise their children in one loving family is causing enormous heartache.

To legalize marriage between two people of the same sex would enshrine in the law the principle that mothers and fathers are interchangeable or irrelevant, and that marriage is essentially an institution about adults, not children; marriage would mean nothing more than giving adults recognition and benefits in their most significant relationship.

How can we do this to our children?
…
Q: How would the allegation that opponents are bigoted lead to their rights being abridged?

A: Notice the first right being taken away: the right of 7 million Californians who devoted time and treasure to the democratic process, to vote for our shared vision of marriage. Taking away people’s right to vote on marriage is not in itself a small thing.

But the larger picture that’s becoming increasingly clear is that this is not just a debate about what two people do in their private life, it’s a debate about a new public norm: Either you support redefining marriage to include two people of the same sex or you stand accused by law and culture of bigotry and discrimination.

If you want to know what this new public legal and social norm stigmatizing traditional believers will mean for real people, ask David and Tanya Parker, who objected to their kindergarten son being taught about same sex marriage after the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized it in that state and wanted to pull him out of class for that lesson. He was arrested and handcuffed for trying to protect his son’s education, and they were told they had no right to do so.

Ask the good people of Ocean Grove Methodist camp in New Jersey that had part of its tax-exempt status rescinded because they don’t allow same-sex civil union ceremonies on their grounds. Ask Tammy Schulz of Illinois, who adopted four children (including a sibling group) through Evangelical Child Family Services — which was shut down because it refuses to place children with same-sex couples. (The same thing has happened in Illinois, Boston and Washington, D.C., to Catholic Charities adoption services). … Ask the doctor in San Diego County who did not want to personally create a fatherless child through artificial insemination, and was punished by the courts… Ask Amy Rudnicki who testified in the Colorado Legislature recently that if Catholic Charities is shut out of the adoption business by new legislation, her family will lose the child they expected to adopt this year. … Nobody is better off if religious adoption agencies are excluded from helping find good homes for abused and neglected children, but governments are doing this because the principle of “anti-discrimination” is trumping liberty and compassion. …

When people say that opposition to gay marriage is discriminatory, like opposition to interracial marriage, they cannot also say their views won’t hurt anybody else. They seek to create and enforce a new moral and legal norm that stigmatizes those who view marriage as the union of husband and wife. … It’s not kind, and it doesn’t seem to lead to a “live and let live” pluralism.

Source

 

[CopticChristian]

It matters for gay (LGBT) people for a few fundamental reasons.

1. It shouldn’t matter who’s gay and who’s not. With all due respect, it doesn’t concern me in the least if the person ringing up my order is gay or whatever, or of a different religion, or whatever.
2. If I’m in a mall, there is nothing to identify any person as LGBT.

The gay media and advocates of same-sex marriage have painted some gays into a corner. Gay marriage, they’ve decided, is the only way to move forward as a group. So, the strategy is, on gay media sites, to show photos of “out” celebrities, athletes and other important people. In fact, today I noticed a question asking if a certain person should be more vocal about his sexuality.

1. It matters because of the impact it is having on kids right now. I’m talking about, “Mom? What does transgender mean?” I’m talking about kids who are just a few years out of diapers being exposed to “normalizing” materials in public schools. If these were “religion is good” material, an army of ACLU members would be all over it. Instead, we get incidents of kids being told to step on the word Jesus. Why?

Let’s face it, my fellow Catholics, this is pure, 100% indoctrination. Parents can’t opt out.

And the thing driving all this is is actual harmful incidents against gay people, both physical and emotional. I guess the question that needs to be asked is, why are human beings harming others the same way for all the other reasons?

Why are so many people shooting, robbing, raping and the list goes on, every day? I am 100% for an end to bullying for all reasons. Kids shouldn’t get beaten up because some punk thinks they’re fat or for the color of their skin or because they won’t give up an expensive brand jacket. And there are some kids who think displays of violence and being a punk are cool. It feeds their egos.

Gay marriage is being marketed as 100% equivalent to heterosexual marriage. Biology tells us it’s not. But if you’re against it, you’ll see stories in the newspaper about a professional gay couple thinking about leaving for a gay friendly state and your state will suffer a brain drain it cannot afford. Is that reasonable? Only gay people are smart and capable? Or being gay confers greater intelligence?

Or why did gay people actually go door to door to convince voters that gay marriage was OK?

Perhaps it’s time we went door to door to tell people that the Church has the answers. It’s a fact that most media is giving gay marriage a lot of positive attention.

So, it matters that kids not be indoctrinated in schools.

amazon.com/Beyond-Diversity-Day-Curriculum-Sexualities/dp/074252034X

As an adult, I could care less if a gay couple lived down the street from me. They do all the things I do in terms of go to work, come home, eat, pay the bills, etc. The only difference is what they do in private. And in the past, it wasn’t an issue. Now, certain gay groups are pushing it in our faces. Don’t gay people want privacy? I guess not. Privacy no longer matters.

I’m not saying all gay people feel this way, but in the past, the gay and bisexual people I worked with caused no issues. Whatever they did was private and not on my mind, we did our jobs, and lived our own lives. Our supervisor held all of us to the same standards. Today, what are we seeing? Photos of politicians followed by “the first openly bisexual” to hold this office? For what?

The fact is, any mix and match group of other-sexuals you can think of are out there, lining up for their shot at something they will try to call “marriage.” That’s why this matters.

There is one and only one way to get the next generation of human beings, and there is a best environment to raise those children.

Peace,
Ed

Let’s face it, my fellow Catholics, this is pure, 100% indoctrination. Parents can’t opt out.

So then it stands to reason that those that promote this agenda on this thread or anywhere else, whether the monikor is Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, from USA, Canada, UK, Singapore or whatever that these people have been indoctrinated and are agents of indoctrination.:bigyikes:

 

[edwest2]

Knowingly and unknowingly. It’s far easier to go with the flow or just accept things without carefully analyzing them. I mean almost ‘everybody’s on the Pill.’ That is a product. It has to be marketed. And it has to promote the hyper-sexual way of living. Otherwise, sales are lost. So I watched the media turn up the volume on sex over the last 40 years to the point of welcome to today.

Peace,
Ed

 

[CopticChristian]

Knowingly and unknowingly. It’s far easier to go with the flow or just accept things without carefully analyzing them. I mean almost ‘everybody’s on the Pill.’ That is a product. It has to be marketed. And it has to promote the hyper-sexual way of living. Otherwise, sales are lost. So I watched the media turn up the volume on sex over the last 40 years to the point of welcome to today.

Peace,
Ed

I would cast my vote towards knowingly.:bigyikes::yup::sad_yes:

 

[JamesCaruso]

So then it stands to reason that those that promote this agenda on this thread or anywhere else, whether the monikor is Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, from USA, Canada, UK, Singapore or whatever that these people have been indoctrinated and are agents of indoctrination.:bigyikes:

Let’s be fair. Ed was talking about materials being used in schools to instruct impressionable children on gay issues without an opposing point of view.

3) It matters because of the impact it is having on kids right now. I’m talking about, “Mom? What does transgender mean?” I’m talking about kids who are just a few years out of diapers being exposed to “normalizing” materials in public schools.

The government says it’s just another life style, equal in all respects to marriage, and deserving of respect and equal treatment under the law. That is the “religion of secularism’s” point of view, but of course, the state will not allow the Christian religion’s point of view. Christianity, they tacitly, or maybe not so tacitly, imply is bigoted and discriminatory.

I do not want my child taught that homosexual sex is all right, that it’s normal, that it’s good, that it’s legitimate. To the extent that these “values” are being taught in the schools, the state is adopting a religious point of view that is contrary to the Christian point of view and many other religions’ points of view. The state is in violation of the no religious establishment clause of the first amendment by it’s favoring of Secular morality over Christian morality. Where is the fair and equal treatment in reality? What is the state doing siding with one side or the other? It has no right to push this “doctrine” of “homosexuality as normal” on our children, and that is why “indoctrination” is indeed the correct term to use.

This so much resembles how a communist country operates, only there the religion is communism. In both scenarios, the state ignores values and rights that come from God, and claim to be the originator of society’s values and rights. In both scenarios, the state adopts a godless religion, communism on the one hand, secularism on the other. This country is now coming full circle. It was founded in large part to protect it’s citizens from government interference in the practice of religion, and now government is beginning to dictate to religions what they can and cannot do, under the false mantle of equality.

If Christians do not stand up and save this country from itself, I dread to think of what it will become. There are huge billboard-sized signs everywhere warning us of the complete moral collapse that is in process. We have murdered over 50 million unborn babies since Roe v. Wade. We invaded a sovereign nation that posed no imminent threat to our own country or any ally of ours. Drug usage in this country is beyond epidemic. We are trying to be the last country on earth to ban the death penalty. Casinos are springing up faster than weeds on a badly neglected lawn. We have had a huge economic collapse and resulting bailout due to the greed of businessmen and government officials. We are spending money like there’s no tomorrow in not only unprecedented amounts, but in unimaginable amounts just a few short years ago, and in fact, at the pace we’re going, there will be no tomorrow for America. We play politics with people’s lives over immigration policy and job creation. And you ask, what does it matter, gay marriage?

It matters because we must start winning these battles of morality or the country is finished. You may think that an immoral secular society can continue to prosper and grow strong. I know it can’t. A good God will not allow it. If His patience will never run out, if justice will never prevail, if things will just be allowed to get worse and worse without consequences, then my faith has been in vain. I do not know how long-suffering God will be. I do not know how long His merciful arm will be extended. But I do know that if we don’t mend our ways, He must chastise us by the words right out of His mouth. A loving Father chastises His children. And if we become totally secularized, totally godless, are we then His children any longer? If we no longer honor Him, will He honor us? Worse than chastisement, is judgment. It is not corrective, it is destructive. No end could be worse. Yes, it does matter, gay marriage. It could be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back. We cannot afford to sit back and let this erosion of values continue without a fight.

Peace.

James