Thursday, July 05, 2012

Now There's A Bill To Redefine Parenthood

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
The rush to redefine the culture continues.

First redefine marriage, then redefine the family.

While Sen. Ed Murray and others have said it wasn't about marriage, each time he pushed through incremental legislation, he has been celebrated recently by the Governor, the press, progressives and the religious left for his courage in passing the law that redefines marriage in Washington state.

But is the" marriage" campaign only about marriage?

Apparently not.

Now there's a bill to redefine parenthood.

Multiple legal parents.

California State Senator Mark Leno is pushing legislation in his state to allow a child to have multiple parents.

The multiple parent scheme is being put forward under the guise of helping children and displaced parents and saving the government money.

And Leno's bill is being taken seriously. It has passed the Senate and is now before the Assembly.

Those pushing the legislation are ticking off a number of problems that "multiple parents" will solve.

They say it will enhance the child's prospects for financial support, health insurance and Social Security benefits and "will help the state" by limiting the state's financial responsibility.

They also say it will give a judge more "flexibility" and help children be kept out of foster home situations.

But what's really behind this move to redefine parenthood?

State Senator Mark Leno, the bill's sponsor, is Chairman of the State Budget Committee. He is also a homosexual activist.

Sound familiar?

Leno says, "The bill brings California into the 21st Century, recognizing that there are more than Ozzie and Harriet families today."

There is a campaign that many homosexual advocates embrace, although many deny they do so, because the public "is not ready for all of it yet". "Beyond Marriage" is a document that clearly outlines that so-called "marriage equality" is really about completely redefining not only marriage, but the family structure and the culture, as well.

Here's what energized this specific bill. Read the following very carefully. Is this the kind of behavior that is driving our culture and our laws?

The Sacramento Bee reports, "SB 1476 stemmed from an appellate Court case last year involving a child's biological mother, her same sex partner, and a man who had an affair with the biological mother and impregnated her while she was separated temporarily from her female lover."

Six volumes of "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire" are on the fourth shelf in my personal library. I'm looking at the volumes as I write this. I'm also looking at the Bible on my desk. I know what both say about this kind of behavior, and the destiny of a country that affirms it.

This plays out on different stages, but the script is always the same. Laws affirming and celebrating immoral behavior are enacted. Then more laws are enacted to solve the problems created by the former laws. And a downward spiral begins that ends in the dust bin of history.

If Washington State votes to uphold Senator Ed Murray's bill that redefines marriage, I promise you it will only be months before more and different laws will be introduced to further undermine the proven traditional, biblical model of family, parenthood and God only knows what else. And they will be passed to help the children, support the "parents" and reduce the costs to the state. And it will be discussed in the legislature with a straight face as though they bear no blame for the problems they are "solving."

Much has been written about what is beyond marriage in the homosexual agenda.

This is one of a number of action items of the "Beyond Marriage" agenda and it is an entree to multiple partner marriages, group marriages, etc.

Seattle's own Dan Savage has a great deal of influence. Look at me and tell me he would not support this kind of legislation. Tell me Sen. Ed Murray and Rep. Jamie Pederson would not sponsor this kind of legislation "for the children." And for the state budget. And the Cheryl Pflugs of the legislature would carry their water.

The Bee quotes a lesbian who supports the bill. "I just think that people should be able to create their own lives," she says.

But at what cost to the culture? Creating one's own life is very different than reordering a society. I suspect she wants parenthood redefined at any cost, with a mere disclaimer of "how will this affect your role in your personal family."

The battle to redefine morality, marriage, parenthood, family and everything else that has been the glue of every successful society for more than 5000 years is raging.

The temptation of our time is to not care, or at least to pretend to not care. To be tolerant. To be inclusive. To be fair. To suspend judgement, to rationalize and reconstruct truth to fit the relativism of our day. To redefine biblical truth and marginalize biblical teaching that we disagree with. And call ourselves a Christian.

This is a flight from reality. And a flight from God and His Truth.

In our hearts we know this is all wrong.

Gov. Gregoire knew it was wrong, admitted she was conflicted about it, then turned away from the teachings of her church and the dictates of her conscience, and supported redefining marriage.

Once in a while in the course of human events, we know something is so wrong, we simply have to take a stand. Regardless of the cost.

This is that time.

May God give you strength to do what you know is right, and stand in defense of marriage.

A time of personal testing is just ahead. We have not yet seen the full force of those who seek to not only redefine marriage, but an entire culture. Stand strong.

God help us.


  1. We read God's word, we pray, we seek to know His will and we vote. As you have said, in these matters of marriage and family, God's will is clear.

    If marriage is redefined, if parenthood is redefined, the door is not only open, but off its hinges for all sorts of other government approved "relationships" that heretofore could not be imagined as moral, not to mention legal.

  2. Prophetic, Gary, prophetic. May God bless you .

  3. I hope everyone reads the beyond marriage agenda. It's a real eye opener. Thanks.

  4. This is rebellion against the Creator in it's worst form.

  5. It's time every American think about what it is that people are saying about God whenever they go against his order, his righteousness, his ways, and they will try to justify them.

    And these people have heard about Jesus.

    Once we have received the truth, we can't help but be a witness about him one way or another. What we say and do tells a story and he is writing his book. One way or another, we all are in it.

  6. God made it real clear that He will not abide this kind of behavior when He destroyed wicked communities in the region of the Dead Sea. Total destruction. How blind some of us are. I pray that we will follow God's guidance and defeat the intentions of the noisy wicked few. Ted R.

  7. The scariest, most frightening thing you'll ever see, is Christian Watchmen packing up their tents, because our grace period of warning has ended. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, as a nation, as our immoral behaviour continues to get even worse.

  8. This is some weird stuff , I wonder if this nut case has any support in the California legislature ?


  9. Gary, I have great respect for you and your ministry. However, I have to say that it is very surprising for you to say nothing about the death of I-1192. You supported this effort by Christian attorney Steven Pidgeon to define marriage in Washington law the way that God intended it to be defined.

    I find it hard to believe that, as a bold Christian, you would let the death of this important initiative to go without any comment. Are the R74 people muzzling you from speaking out on this?

  10. We are on a downward slide morally. People like Gary are keeping us aware of what is happening. Talk to your friends, your family, people at church and tell them to wake up. I cannot believe the silence in the churches about what is happening in our culture.

  11. There's been treason on board. If you are given to prayer then let's pray. May God strengthen the Constitution of the United States in Christ Jesus so that it pound it's enemies to a wreck and sink them in the deepest sea, in Jesus' name.

  12. Still not a peep from Pastor Randall about the death of I-1192. Pastor Randall supported the initiative and spent FFNF funds - some of which was my family's money - on it. So why not say something? Have the R74 folks put the pressure on you to keep silent about this betrayal?

  13. As usual the actual story is a bit less exciting. This bill is so step parents can have some legal standing with the state government in regards to the child. Even here in Washington state the legal status of stepparents is fuzzy, they are obligated to care for the children yet have no clear right to make decisions for them as would another parent. Most problems are avoided by treating the resident step parent as having full parental rights, but it doesn't take much imagination to realize that problems can obviously arise if if a non-resident parent and a step parent dig in their heels over some issue.

    So rather than getting all 'excited' about it how about a discussion - what would be the best way to give a resident step parent some definable authority regarding a step child tp gp with their legal obligations without taking this step of giving the child more than 2 legal parents? This is obviously a real issue here - what would be the best way to handle it?

    1. As your post makes obvious, this site is not about finding reasonable solutions to real problems, it's about creating hysteria that results in fund raising.

      "LOOK, LOOK OVER THERE. It's a homosexual and he wants to make your children queer. Send me some money!"

    2. Is there no intellectual capacity on your part to look at any liberal political act and feel forced to defend it . A bill that actually gives rights reserved to moms and dads to anyone else does indeed lessen the importance of a mom and dad .

      A bill that would make two dads have less authority in raising their children would obviously be needed for you to see the possible consequences . Just think of the consequences of this law giving religiou fundamentalist equal parenting power to a same sex marriage with custody . The ability of outside 'parents" playing I am the nice one , interfering with religious up bringings , interfering with the ability to discipline or not to discipline . Unintended consequences of the state telling parents who is in charge outside of the basic nuclear home is such a serious issue , you failed to consider only because a right wing site brought it to your attention .Obviously we see that happening now with children coming from divorced families, add a little legalinput to the division and just watch the bullying begin .
      You really thibnk parentibng is better left to government making the rules .

      The kids loose .

      The bill will loose because its stupid and insulting to parents . Remember you defended it .

  14. Remember you defended it
    And that erroneous statement shows why rational discussion is so difficult. I specifically did NOT defend it but asked for any thoughts on how step parents could have some legal authority in leu of this solution.

    Of course your statements ARE problems that could arise, but the otherside is that many step parents have no defined authority over their kids they are raising, but are financially responsible for. When the kids say 'I don't have to do what you say' they are completely right. How can that be good for the kids when one of the people raising them has no authority over them and they know it? Don't "the kids loose' in that situation too?

    Rather than whine about how you don't like THIS solution do you have any ideas of how a step parent could get some legal authority without causing your concerns?

    1. Yes, it's called adoption

      Craig in Lacey

    2. So either you are suggesting that the child ends up with 3 parents once again or you are ignoring that this is about situations where both parents are alive but the child is only living with one of them and a step parent.

      Which is it?


Faith and Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.