Category Archives: Marriage
Sunday is National Pray for Marriage Day
The institution of Marriage is under severe attack in our culture today. Will you join in a nationwide day of unified, focused prayer for Marriage in America?
The National Pray for Marriage Day is this Sunday, February 26. Please tell your pastor and your friends and refer them here for more information.
Praise God for the impact of Marriage:
• Thank Him for how marriage refines our character, creates stable community for the birth and nurture of children, and unites men & women in an enduring whole-life union.
• Thank Him for giving the distinct, irreplaceable gifts a mom and a dad each uniquely bring to children, through marriage.
Pray for the marriages in your community:
• For healing, restoration, and divine protection over the relationships between husbands and wives in your church, neighborhood, and among your friends and family.
• That Christians will hold fast to the Biblical truth about marriage and boldly stand up for children, who are most protected and impacted by marriage.
Pray for the future of Marriage
• For the nation to uphold the truth that marriage between one man and one woman is the foundation of society and the best environment for raising children.
• For Americans to remember the damage already done to marriage in our society, and how that has hurt children.
Pray for God’s design for sex and sexuality in Marriage:
• Pray for sexual purity; that sex will be reserved for marriage, and celebrated in marriage.
• Pray for those hurting and suffering from going outside of God’s plan for sexuality.
• Pray for sexual fidelity and faithfulness between husbands and wives.
• Pray for children’s innocence to be protected from false sexual indoctrination in schools.
Pray for victory in the lawsuits and legislation that threatens to undermine Marriage:
• Perry v. Brown – a lawsuit to redefine marriage by creating same-sex “marriage.”
• Bishop v. United States – a lawsuit to overturn our nation’s highest law about marriage.
• Brown v. Utah – a lawsuit to legally recognize polygamy.
Religious Leaders Call for Religious Freedom
An Open Letter from Religious Leaders in the United States to All Americans
Released January 12, 2012
Dear Friends:
The promotion and protection of marriage—the union of one man and one woman as husband and wife—is a matter of the common good and serves the wellbeing of the couple, of children, of civil society and all people. The meaning and value of marriage precedes and transcends any particular society, government, or religious community. It is a universal good and the foundational institution of all societies. It is bound up with the nature of the human person as male and female, and with the essential task of bearing and nurturing children.
As religious leaders across a wide variety of faith communities, we join together to affirm that marriage in its true definition must be protected for its own sake and for the good of society. We also recognize the grave consequences of altering this definition. One of these consequences—the interference with the religious freedom of those who continue to affirm the true definition of “marriage”—warrants special attention within our faith communities and throughout society as a whole. For this reason, we come together with one voice in this letter.
Some posit that the principal threat to religious freedom posed by same-sex “marriage” is the possibility of government’s forcing religious ministers to preside over such “weddings,” on pain of civil or criminal liability. While we cannot rule out this possibility entirely, we believe that the First Amendment creates a very high bar to such attempts.
Instead, we believe the most urgent peril is this: forcing or pressuring both individuals and religious organizations—throughout their operations, well beyond religious ceremonies—to treat same-sex sexual conduct as the moral equivalent of marital sexual conduct. There is no doubt that the many people and groups whose moral and religious convictions forbid same-sex sexual conduct will resist the compulsion of the law, and church-state conflicts will result.
These conflicts bear serious consequences. They will arise in a broad range of legal contexts, because altering the civil definition of “marriage” does not change one law, but hundreds, even thousands, at once. By a single stroke, every law where rights depend on marital status—such as employment discrimination, employment benefits, adoption, education, healthcare, elder care, housing, property, and taxation—will change so that same-sex sexual relationships must be treated as if they were marriage. That requirement, in turn, will apply to religious people and groups in the ordinary course of their many private or public
occupations and ministries—including running schools, hospitals, nursing homes and other housing facilities, providing adoption and counseling services, and many others.
So, for example, religious adoption services that place children exclusively with married couples would be required by law to place children with persons of the same sex who are civilly “married.” Religious marriage counselors would be denied their professional accreditation for refusing to provide counseling in support of same-sex “married” relationships. Religious employers who provide special health benefits to married employees would be required by law to extend those benefits to same-sex “spouses.” Religious employers would also face lawsuits for taking any adverse employment action—no matter how modest—against an employee for the public act of obtaining a civil “marriage” with a member of the same sex. This is not idle speculation, as these sorts of situations have already come to pass.
Even where religious people and groups succeed in avoiding civil liability in cases like these, they would face other government sanctions—the targeted withdrawal of government co-operation, grants, or other benefits.
For example, in New Jersey, the state cancelled the tax-exempt status of a Methodist-run boardwalk pavilion used for religious services because the religious organization would not host a same-sex “wedding” there. San Francisco dropped its $3.5 million in social service contracts with the Salvation Army because it refused to recognize same-sex “domestic partnerships” in its employee benefits policies. Similarly, Portland, Maine, required Catholic Charities to extend spousal employee benefits to same-sex “domestic partners” as a condition of receiving city housing and community development funds.
In short, the refusal of these religious organizations to treat a same-sex sexual relationship as if it were a marriage marked them and their members as bigots, subjecting them to the full arsenal of government punishments and pressures reserved for racists. These punishments will only grow more frequent and more severe if civil “marriage” is redefined in additional jurisdictions. For then, government will compel special recognition of relationships that we the undersigned religious leaders and the communities of faith that we represent cannot, in conscience, affirm. Because law and government not only coerce and incentivize but also teach, these sanctions would lend greater moral legitimacy to private efforts to punish those who defend marriage.
Therefore, we encourage all people of good will to protect marriage as the union between one man and one woman, and to consider carefully the far-reaching consequences for the religious freedom of all Americans if marriage is redefined. We especially urge those entrusted with the public good to support laws that uphold the time-honored definition of marriage, and so avoid threatening the religious freedom of countless institutions and citizens in this country. Marriage and religious freedom are both deeply woven into the fabric of this nation.
May we all work together to strengthen and preserve the unique meaning of marriage and the precious gift of religious freedom.
Sincerely Yours:
Rev. Leith Anderson, President
National Association of Evangelicals
Johann Christoph Arnold, Senior Pastor
Bruderhof Communities
Randall A. Bach, President
Open Bible Churches
Dr. Gary M. Benedict, President
The Christian and Missionary Alliance
The Rev. John F. Bradosky, Bishop
North American Lutheran Church
Glenn Burris, Jr., President
The Foursquare Church
Bishop H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Dr. Ronald W. Carpenter, Sr., Presiding Bishop
International Pentecostal Holiness Church
Rabbi Abba Cohen, Vice President for Federal Affairs
Washington Director Agudath Israel of America
Most Rev. Salvatore J. Cordileone, Bishop of Oakland
Chairman USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage
Nathan J. Diament, Executive Director for Public Policy
Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America
Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan, Archbishop of New York
President United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Dr. Barrett Duke, Vice President for Public Policy and Research
Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
The Most Rev. Robert Duncan, Archbishop, Anglican Church in North America
Bishop, Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh
Rev. Jim Eschenbrenner, Executive Pastor
General Council of Christian Union Churches
Dr. William J. Hamel, President
Evangelical Free Church of America
Rev. Dr. Ron Hamilton, Conference Minister
Conservative Congregational Christian Conference
Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison ,President
Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod
John Hopler, Director
Great Commission Churches
Dr. Bill Hossler, President
Missionary Church, Inc.
Clyde M. Hughes, General Overseer
International Pentecostal Church of Christ
Rev. Kenneth D. Hunn, Executive Director
The Brethren Church
David W. Kendall, Bishop
Free Methodist Church USA
Dr. Richard Land, President
Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
Most Rev. William E. Lori, Bishop of Bridgeport
Chairman USCCB Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty
Dr. Jo Anne Lyon, Chair Board of General Superintendents
The Wesleyan Church
James W. Murray, Executive Director
General Association of General Baptists
Most Rev. Kevin C. Rhoades, Bishop of Ft. Wayne – South Bend
Chairman USCCB Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth
Commissioner William A. Roberts, National Commander
The Salvation Army
Rocky Rocholl, President
Fellowship of Evangelical Churches
Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, President
National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
David T. Roller, Bishop
Free Methodist Church USA
Matthew A. Thomas, Bishop
Free Methodist Church USA
Dr. Joseph Tkach, President & Pastor General
Grace Communion International
Berten A. Waggoner, National Director
Vineyard USA
W. Phillip Whipple, Bishop
United Brethren in Christ Church, USA
Dr. John P. Williams, Jr., Regional Director
Evangelical Friends Church, North America
David P. Wilson, General Secretary
Church of the Nazarene
Dr. George O. Wood, General Superintendent
Assemblies of God
The Value of Marriage to Society
Promiscuity and Infidelity
A — No. It’s based on wanting what is truly best for society and for homosexuals. It is also a matter of opposing pressure groups pushing for radical overhaul of the social order, including the very re-definition of marriage into something it is not intended to be.
Q — Are homosexual couples just like other people?
A — No, and preferring a life of libertine sex and open relationships, many do not want to be viewed as such. This is clearly evident from the outrageous behavior and indecent public exposure evident in homosexual pride parades. There is no way that two persons of the same gender can provide the full range of developmental needs to boys and girls. Nor can they provide the stability and longevity in their relationships that are conducive to child raising, or suitable for adoption.
Q — Can people switch from homosexuality to heterosexuality?
A — Yes. It’s happening with thousands of people in virtually every state. To suggest otherwise is to defy reality … or accepting the spin of the pressure groups.
Q — What percentage of the population is homosexual?
A — Approximately 1-3 percent. However, the sexual behavior of some of these people is not fluid, but rather inconsistent. A large percentage of people who claim to be homosexual have had heterosexual relationships during their lifetimes. Without a shred of statistical data to back it up, some organizations and leftist media outlets falsely claim that 10 percent of the population is homosexual. It’s never been close to that figure.
Q — Is homosexuality genetic?
A — No. The Human Genome Project proved it is not. No research has determined any genetic cause.
Q — Does the state have a compelling interest in marriage as the union of one man and one woman?
Judicial Activism Rears its Ugly Head: California’s Prop 8 Called ‘Unconstitutional’
Brian Brown, director of the National Organization for Marriage, said the pro-marriage movement is not surprised by today’s outrageous judicial activism in California declaring Prop 8 “unconstitutional.”
“…[E]stablished gay-marriage leaders — Equality California, Freedom to Marry — are pushing a lie they know to be false: that NOM has tacitly condoned threats against gay people,” Brown said in an interview with National Review Online. “They are willing to lie and terrify their own supporters in order to raise money. It’s a shame. Even more shameful, the official Democratic party in New Hampshire has joined in the lie, issuing a press release containing this ‘murder slur’ against NOM and folks in New Hampshire who oppose gay marriage. It’s an amazing thing to see one of the two parties co-opted by its radical base in such a blatant way.”
Read the rest of the remarkable interview.
The decision was indeed not surprising. Judge Vaughn Walker is a homosexual, the kangaroo court trial took place in San Francisco, and there was no way he was going to subject himself to the hostilities of the angry homosexuals there. To rule otherwise, he would have actually had to uphold the democratic process, respect the Constitution … and move to a remote Pacific island to avoid the incredible wrath of homosexuals.
The battle ain’t over. The Alliance Defense Fund plans to appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (another daunting gauntlet to run in Frisco) and then on to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. Pray that they win and defeat this truly detestable movement.
ASU Student Pundit Fails to Make the Case for Same-Sex ‘Marriage’
ASU’s State Press is still churning out leftist newspaper columnists faster than President Michael Crow can say “new American university.” One of the recent vintage, Andrew Hedlund, complains that religious beliefs are the main reason behind the denial of “equality of rights to homosexuals.
Further, he asks: Must we continue to deny rights to minority groups? Will social policy continue to be the tyranny of the majority?“
And says …
“The Declaration of Independence states‘s ‘that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.‘
“If all men are created equal, then homosexuals should not be denied the right of marriage. If our Creator endows men with these rights, religious beliefs should not be a reason to oppose same sex marriage.“For someone acknowledging a creator, which isn’t commonly done on America’s cookie-cutter leftist campuses, Hedlund sure has a grudge against religion.
Now let’s get real. Jefferson and the men who wrote the Declaration of Indpendence knew that throughout modern history marriage constituted a man and a woman. Their words cannot be twisted and contorted to shoe-horn same-sex “marriage“ into unalienable Rights, no matter how leftists spin it.
The talking parrots in favor of same-sex “marriage“ keep saying that religion is the major force blocking approval of counterfeit marriage. If students like Hedlund would dig deeper into the subject, they would find court precedents – unguided by church congregations – demonstrating the compelling interests of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the high court of Maryland, among others, have both stated that homosexuals do not constitute a suspected classification. Nor are they powerless or politically disenfranchised.
The Maryland Court of Appeals also said: “The right to same-sex marriage is not so deeply rooted in the history and tradition of this state or the nation as a whole such that it should be deemed fundamental.”
Homosexual activists vastly out-spend state marriage amendment committees – it was 30 to 1 in Missouri – but haven’t yet convinced a majority of Americans to throw in the towel on the future of marriage or the well-being of children.
Communities and states have a vested interest in marriage because married people stabilize society. Taken as a whole, homosexuals and cohabiting people have deplorable records of domestic violence and instability, running up high social costs. That’s why cities like Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tucson and others are foolish to reward domestic partners with taxpayer benefits.
