RECENT  POSTS:  » Joseph Farah still clueless about nondiscrimination law » Hobby Lobby president to join extremely anti-gay activists at 'Star Spangled' event » FRC's Sprigg admits his side put up 'weak defense' in 7th Circuit » Photo: The latest totally convincing, in no way silly attempt at a meme from anti-gay Ruth Institute » AFA's Fischer: Time for Christians to 'get up in somebody's grill' like Jesus would » GLAAD: The World Congress of Families sparks protests in Australia. Let's examine why. » GLAAD: NOM cofounder: 'Hard to see... the logical stopping place' between gay-affirming, murder-affirming Christians » 'Nonpartisan' NOM's entrenched Republicanism again showing » GLAAD: His other tactics failing, NOM president turns to anti-trans fear-mongering » AFA's Bryan Fischer: Diversity is 'most sinister and dangerous lie'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/12/2011

'Women for America' raise 'Concerns' in Wash. state; raise bigger concerns about church/state separation

by Jeremy Hooper

The ever-besotted Concerned Women For America have a plan for stopping *CIVIL* marriage equality in Washington State. That plan: To not at all focus on the civil licensing conversation that should be at debate and instead focus on their personally-held religious "definitions":

Let’s focus specifically on family and its definition. What do you believe about marriage? Do you believe that real marriage is and should be defined as only Screen Shot 2011-10-12 At 8.43.19 Ambetween one man and one woman? This is the traditional Biblical definition. Genesis 1 tells us that God created man (“male and female He created them”), and the second chapter tells us that the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him”. Verses 24-25 describe God’s institution of marriage, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Jesus confirms this marital relationship in Mark 10. While marriage has been seen somewhat differently in other cultures and religions, marriage has always been defined as between male and female. However, State Senator Ed Murray has announced (http://www.q13fox.com/news/kcpq-cr-douglas-will-washington-say-i-do-to-gay-marriage-20110901,0,6367072.story) that he intends to introduce a bill in the 2012 Legislature to legalize same-sex marriage in Washington State as “marriage equality”. After the successful drive for same-sex marriage in New York, the homosexual lobby in our state is very confident that they can pass such a bill here.

I suspect this will be the primary cultural battle in the 2012 legislative session. If you support the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and want to help defend marriage in Washington State, please contact the state office, and we will help to equip you in this most vital of battles. If we do not defend God’s definition of marriage, we will have lost the battle to defend, restore and strengthen the entire traditional family structure of a father, a mother and their natural or adopted children. This was God’s original family and still proves to be the best structure for raising the next generation in a balanced and productive manner (http://www.familydynamics.net/benefitsofhealthymarriages.htm). In addition, the American public overwhelmingly supports traditional marriage (http://www.cwfa.org/content.asp?id=20385).

If you agree with the Biblical definition of marriage and with the majority of Americans, please join CWA of Washington in prayer about this issue. Then give us a call or e-mail the state office to learn how you can help in this most vital battle. We will equip you to be a culture warrior and stand up for Biblical values in a culture that increasingly rejects God’s Word and wisdom in favor of man’s fickle opinions and social experiments. Help us shape the discussions that will determine the future of our families and our nation.

10-10-11 CWA E-Alert: Marriage [CWA]

If the committed social conservatives who traffic in these kinds of claims would agree to give up their own civil marriage licenses and instead limit their bonds to only the religious ceremony (ceremonies they'll be allowed to deny to gays even after civil marriage equality), then I'd actually have respect for the above-stated position. But that will never happen. Our opposition movement wants the aforementioned right to deny the always-optional religious ceremony to gay couples while also denying the civil component that's demanded of any couple who wants state/federal recognition. In short: They want special rights.

That's the overplayed hand that makes the "protect marriage" fight so egregious and so fundamentally different from our own. There's is not an equal pushback to our push: It is an entitlement that flies in the face of our civil marriage culture's reality, buoyed by nothing greater than the belief that the marriage of heterosexism and personal faith bestows special denial powers upon its participants.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails