Thursday, February 21, 2013

President Obama: Defying Moral Law

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
Who decides what is and what is not moral?

Is the President of the United States given that kind of moral authority?

The Pope?

Public opinion of the majority in a democracy?

When Obama was a state senator in Illinois, he opposed a bill that would have simply defined born babies as "persons."

More recently, he has been waging war with Catholics and other conservative, pro-life Christians, requiring them to act against their faith by buying or providing health care plans that cover sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.

Now, by decree, he is standing against natural moral law in regard to military policy. And he is mocking "equality." Something he has vowed to support.

Outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has executed a directive from the President that requires the military to treat co-habitating homosexuals as if they are "married" couples.

Is this "equality?" Are co-habitating heterosexuals given the same rights? I'm not advocating for it, I'm merely asking.

But that's not the point. The point is that the President is, by decree, deciding what is and is not moral.

Panetta's memo says:
"At the direction of the president, the department has conducted a careful and deliberative review of the benefits currently provided to the families of service members. We have now identified additional family member and dependent benefits that we can lawfully provide to same-sex domestic partners of Military Service members and their children through changes in Department of Defense policies and regulations."

"These benefits shall be extended to the same-sex domestic partners and, where applicable, children of same-sex domestic partners, once the service member and their same-sex domestic partner have signed a declaration attesting to the existence of their committed relationship."

So, how is the relationship verified? What if this co-habitating twosome split? Is a similar arrangement offered to heterosexuals who are sleeping together?

And more importantly, is the President the moral arbiter of this country and its citizens? Have we so embraced relativism, that we accept there are no absolutes?

The decree defines the requirements. It says, "Neither of us is married (legally or by common law), joined in civil union with or domestic partners with anyone else."

The President is asking them to attest that they are sleeping together and that they are of the same sex.

Then they get "nearly" all the benefits available to "natural marriage" couples. The only thing left standing in the way is the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law which the President has decreed to be unconstitutional. And has refused to defend. And has promised to abolish.

There is a long list of benefits, one of which is to participate in surveys as a "military family."

Terrance Jeffery is asking a number of questions this week including, "What if these two co-habitators decide to split up?"

Panetta says implementation of all this will require "substantial policy revision and training."

Indeed. But then these folks are highly skilled in revisionism.

Jeffery points out that military personnel will then be required to treat co-habitating homosexuals as if they were married heads of families.

The President has once again put himself in direct conflict with moral natural law. How far will this go?

Jeffery, a Catholic, makes reference to a 1937, Pope Pius XI, encyclical letter condemning the German Reich for standing in direct conflict with natural moral law.

It is worthy of review by all.

"To hand over the moral law to man's subjective opinion, which changes with the times, instead of anchoring it in the holy will of the eternal God and His commandments, is to open wide every door to the forces of destruction. The resulting dereliction of the eternal principles of an objective morality, which educates conscience and ennobles every department and organization of life, is a sin against the destiny of a nation, a sin whose bitter fruit will poison future generations."

"We are especially referring to what is called the natural law, written by the Creator's hand on the tablet of the heart and which reason, not blinded by sin or passion, can easily read. It is in the light of the commands of this natural law, that all positive law, whoever be the lawgiver, can be gauged in its moral content, and hence, in the authority it wields over conscience. Human laws in flagrant contradiction with the natural law are vitiated with a taint which no force, no power can mend."

Abraham Lincoln said, "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."

Lincoln also said, "Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant to step over the ocean and crush us at a blow? Never!...All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years...If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide."

Our nation has lost its way. We have forgotten God. We have opened every door to the forces of destruction. We are sinning against God and the destiny of our nation. And future generations.

And some say pastors, churches and Christians should not be engaged in the culture.

God help us.

Be Vigilant. Be faithful. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.


  1. All these questions but you have not shown how any of this is not moral. Biblically a fetus became a person with 'the breath' just like the legend of Adam, before that harm against a fetus was categorized as a property crime against the husband. Fetuses are not yet people, biblically, so how is affirming this biblical fact not 'moral'?

    As to allowing military members to have some of the benefits that others have with their dependents is also moral. And if you are concerned about their dependents legal status then just allow the federal government to recognize this simple fact of legal status.

    The immorality is telling the government to ignore reality, that there are military members with completely legally registered spouses of the same sex. Pretending they aren't is no more moral than denying the legal status of spouses of different races. The perfect moral solution is to acknowledge all of these legal relationships, the work around is just trying to end as much of the injustice as is legally possible now.

    American morality is based on a number of fundamentals one of the primary being equal treatment under the law for all citizens. There is no federal marriage contract and it should be morally obligated to acknowledge all legal marriages, not just some of them.

    But American morality is winning in the long walk towards a more perfect union.

    Thank God.

    1. You consistently speak sweet words complete with total ignorance. Maybe one day you will awaken from your comic stupor.

    2. Thanking the serpent again, eh?

      "now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the women, "Did God really say, You must not eat eat from any tree in the garden?" The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' " You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." Gen 3: 1-5

      Then she ate some and Adam, because he didn't man up, ate some too and death and suffering have been our lot ever since.

      Satan's morality is winning in the long walk towards a more perfect destruction.

      "and Jesus wept" John 11:35

      Craig in Lacey

    3. May you someday have the minimal courage to speak using a consistent and individual identity - gmail accounts are free. If you did your empty words might have more weight.

    4. No Craig, thanking God. You are the one who has taken the role of the Pharisee and refused Christ's Law, not I.

      That you can't tell what's right from wrong is your choice, may God forgive you all your imperfections and all your wrong choices. Christians who have accepted Christ's Law are stanch supporters of marriage equality and all citizens being treated so under the law.

      Again I thank God that the path you have chosen can not be forced on Christ minded people, and may you find God.

    5. I can tell right from wrong just fine thank you, God's Word defines what's right and what's wrong. If I was a Pharisee I wouldn't care what you did.

      They didn't care about the sheep. only themselves.

      I follow Christ's law and that means I am not to condone that which God has forbidden. How am I showing love for my neighbor by affirming immoral behavior? It's because I seek to fulfill the Great Commission and follow Christ's law that I even bother to call you to repentance. May God forgive you for your hardness of heart. .

      There are so called 'christians' who are pedophiles, adulterers, whoremongers, thieves, blasphemers, liars, murderers, false prophets, homosexuals etc. and they are staunch supporters of like minded people and unrepentant about their behavior. So what? They are known by their fruit, their fruit is death, they have no part in Christ.

      I thank God he has given me discernment to understand the times and to stand firm against all the schemes of Satan. I pray that those seeking to follow Christ are not enticed by fine-sounding arguments that tickle the ears of those who seek only their own satisfaction. False prophets, as was the serpent.

      Yes, indeed I thank God that the path you have chosen can't be forced on Spirit-filled Christians, even with all the power of the State behind you. May you someday repent.

      Craig In Lacey

      Craig in Lacey

    6. Craig, Christ's Law forbids exactly what you are doing. But Christ said that there will always be that one thing anyone will willfully not do. That's why none are saved by the Law but only by Grace.

      May you someday accept that Grace and God's Love.

    7. Oshtur,
      You never cease to amaze me as to how you can twist God's word to suit your own moral code. You twist those scriptures that you think work for your purposes and completely ignore the very direct scriptures that clearly condemn homosexuality.

      Thank Craig for your reasoned and patient response to Oshtur. It is wearing to continually show someone a mirror but I know that Oshtur will simply say the same to those of us who actually believe God meant what He said. No one has been confused by whether homosexuality was wrong. Not ever in history. So that alone shows where truth lies. Even Sodom that was completely controlled by the sodomites, that means the majority were having their way, was clearly shown to be wrong and Lot for one man knew that it was evil.

    8. Again This isn't 'my' moral code, it's the one held by Christians who follow Christ's Law, it is the one of many of our founding fathers' religions, and the one held by the oldest non-cult sects of Christianity.

      Really, who do you think would be in control of Sodom - Portlandians?

    9. Those founding fathers are their graves.

      Which oldest non-cult sects condoned homosexual marriage? Since when did Christ allow sects at all? It is Satan's work to divide the body of Christ, it is his greatest achievement.


      Thank you, brother. It is not for myself that I do this and it's not wearing. It is love for my fellow man that compels me and I gladly carry the burden. I seek only to edify, that some might be saved.

      Craig in Lacey

    10. Ah moving the bar - you talk about homosexuality but then raise it up when you ask for information. Moravian, Lutheran, Episcopal, Baptist, and many more support gay members.

      It was Satan's work to corrupt the early Church with Roman superstitions false doctrines, and make it try and live under the yoke of the old Law that had passed once again. I mean the Immaculate Conception is based on the Roman false dichotomy of spirit and flesh that degraded Christ's teachings. That people later renewed their dedication to Christ's Law over pagan dogma and rejected these false teachings was not the work of Satan but of God.

      And our founding fathers were the radical liberals of the era and would be today, they were dedicated to the Enlightenment principles which are the same ones that say all are equal under the law, and the laws of nature instruct us in any divine plan. We know how sexual orientation develops, we know that all people, male and female, have all the genetic information needed to be attracted to either men or women. That some are is God's plan - we would frankly be designed differently if that wasn't the intended result.

      All references to sexuality in the Bible are contextual, there is no condemnation of two same sex people in a loving relationship, only rapists, heterosexual libertines, and marital infidelity exceptions. Again, there is no sex in heaven, hypocrites and hard heartedness are far more concerns of Christ by His own words.

      But you know all this and still you nit pick at the holiness of your neighbors while your own supposed righteousness hangs on you like rags as it does on us all.

      you don't think you can be gay and holy then don't, but many many others disagree and one thing I know for sure - you are not the measure of God's Love.

    11. Moving the bar? I would never raise homosexuality up as an example of Godly living any more than I would sleeping with my sister, my mom, my dad, or my sheep.

      I know, those are taken out of context too, right?

      "Do not defile yourselves yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants" Lev. 18:24-25

      Again, this is a warning to God's people not to act like pagans, in this example Egypt and Canaan, its detestable and he punished those people for their sin and warned Israel that those who practiced such things would also be cut off from their people. Paul reiterated that warning in the Epistles, to the church no less, which is neither Jew nor Gentile.

      How do you know there were no committed homosexual relationships in Egypt, Canaan, Rome or Corinth? God made no provisions for the behavior, either way.

      Again, Jesus established what marriage is in Genesis (in context) and reiterated it in the Gospels (in context). Since He is the creator of all things, He is the Word. That there is no sex in heaven has nothing to do with sex here on earth . Yes, context is King! Either you lack discernment or exegis, I don't know which, maybe both.

      That men were created equal predates the enlightenment by about 6000 years, it's recorded in Genesis. All the rest of that sexual orientation stuff you cite is Kinseyian psychobabble. By that standard God created pedophiles with an attraction to kids and others with an attraction to family members and others with an attraction to animals, after all, if God created them that way they can't help themselves. Its their genetics,.ya know? Hogwash!

      God created us with the ability to choose, He set before us life and death, blessing and cursing. He said choose life and that life is in His Son, but he will honor our desire for death.

      Do you know what holy means? "Set apart", not of this world. As I've said before, I have NO RIGHTEOUSNESS OUTSIDE OF CHRIST, can you read that better =). I recognize and acknowledge my sin, you don't seem to want to and that's extremely sad, brother.

      I will continue to pray for you =)

      Craig in Lacey

    12. And that's why it's pointless to talk to you. You bright enough to know people being attracted to men and women is part of our nature, there is no indication there is one to prepubescent children, siblings or other species. But you toss out the comparisons anyway.

      You are never going to prevail by being disingenuous. People with a same sex spouse can keep Christ's Law, accept His Graceand Love just as any other as Christians know.

      Keeping to you dogma and superstition will not save you. Please accept Christ and his yoke, it is lighter than you've been led to believe.

    13. Its because we refuse to acknowledge that God is the final arbiter of right and wrong that sexual immorality exists.

      He has told us the boundaries for sex, 1 man and 1 woman within the boundaries of marriage. As I've asked before, show me something different from Scripture, until then I'm called to .......

      "Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke, and encourage- with great patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what there itching ears want to hear. (2 Tim. 4: 2-3)

      It is natural for a male to be attracted to a female and vice versa, its not natural to be attracted to the same sex, siblings, animals, etc. and God has said so, repeatedly.

      There is nothing disingenuous about it, God will prevail. The apostate church will not however. My cross is light and yes I have accepted Christ. It is my joy to bring the good news to you, you're resistant because you want to do what the flesh wants to do, I understand, believe me.

      Craig in Lacey

    14. Again Craig, there is nothing incompatible about same sex spouses and Christ's Law which is obvious since you have never been able demonstrate one. You are confusing past contextual and cultural dogma things that Christians have full authority to 'tighten and loosen' here.

      Same sex marriage is no different than different feast days - none are obstacles to keeping Christ's Law.

      The yoke is lighter than you can understand, may God grant you understanding someday and your unintentional harming of your neighbor end.

    15. Really? Compatible with Christ's law? How are you showing love for God by purposely disregarding His Word? How are you showing love for your neighbor by purposely leading him astray? Telling Him that God didn't really mean what He said.

      "Tighten and loosen", what kind of nonsense is that? No where is man given the right to disregard God's commands. When He says ' do not murder', that's what he means, when he says ' don't have sex with your sister', that's what he means, when he says 'do not covet your neighbors goods or his wife', that's what he means, when he says 'honor your mother and father', that's what he means, when he says 'don't lie with a man as with a women', that's what he means. He called it an abomination, whether it was pagans or Jews. He promised them DESTRUCTION.


      No Oshtur, I'm not confused at all. Unrepentent sin is an obstacle.

      Craig in Lacey

    16. "How are you showing love for God by purposely disregarding His Word? How are you showing love for your neighbor by purposely leading him astray?"
      These are the question a you need to answer.

      "Tighten and loosen", what kind of nonsense is that? No where is man given the right to disregard God's commands.
      As Jesus taught us we don't even understand the Law and as this statement and what follows shows you in particular don't. That you don't know Jesus gave us the ability to 'tighten and loosen' dogma sort of says it all.

      May you someday accept Jesus' teachings.

    17. I accept the teaching of the whole of Scripture, you do know those are Christ's teachings as well?

    18. If you did we wouldn't be having this discussion and you'd be supporting marriage equality or banning shrimp.

    19. I would support it if God's word said it was acceptable to Him, until then...... Ah, no.

      Craig in Lacey

  2. “Brethren, our preaching will bear its legitimate fruits. If immorality prevails in the land, the fault is ours in a great degree. If there is a decay of conscience, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the public press lacks moral discrimination, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the Church is degenerate and worldly, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the world loses its interest in religion, the pulpit is responsible for it. If Satan rules in our halls of legislation, the pulpit is responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away, the pulpit is responsible for it. Let us not ignore this fact, my dear brethren; but let us lay it to heart, and be thoroughly awake to our responsibility in respect to the morals of this nation.” Charles G. Finney, Power From On High, Chapter 11 (c. 1871-1874)

  3. Gary, it’s incredible to me that you find in your heart a desire to attack gay and lesbian soldiers for wanting to live with their spouses or to provide protections for them. You gladly reap the benefits of their sacrifices fighting for your freedom of religion and speech, yet you want to deny them those very same freedoms they are paying a great price for.

    You have an unyielding fascination with “who they sleep with” and a singular obsession to not only deny gays and lesbians marriage but to deny them any place at the table of American society.

    I understand that you believe homosexuality is immoral, and you have absolute freedom to live by those personal values. But why your insistence that all people live by your values? Because they are God’s, you say? The claim that you know God’s will is the highest form of egoism there is. Keep your own house in order…

    Finally, Americans elected our president to represent us and to make choices. He is doing exactly what our democracy has elected him to do. If you believe he’s wrong, speak up with some arguments and fight for new leadership, but don’t bother us with questions about his authority to act on our behalf. The American people have granted it to him.

    1. Not all the American people and it our right to oppose him. I don't care if you saint him, he ain't God. Neither is Gary and he is speaking up with arguments. Obama isn't acting on my behalf, so you bet I'm going to question his authority.

      You don't need special powers to also know God's will, as sit forth in the Bible. It is not my interpretation or my opinion, "thou shall not lay with a man as with a woman, it is an abomination". Lev. 18:22

      Be you pagan or Christian or anything else, God promises sure destruction on unrepentant sin. Our society is awash in it and destruction is coming.

      " Be not deceived, God cannot be mocked,. You will reap what you sow." Get your own house in order.

      Thnx Gary, keep it up!

      Craig in Lacey

    2. The president was not elected to make moral decisions for us. Those moral decisions were given to us long before any of us had come around. If you had studied ancient history you would understand what is going on today.
      He was elected to keep our country safe from harm from other countries and to follow completely the constitution. He was not elected to bully the American people around.

    3. Craig, you're not reading closely enough. You have a right to oppose him with arguments, but Gary is questioning the *authority* of his actions, calling him a "moral arbiter" who makes decisions "by decree," as if he weren't elected to do his job by the American people. If he's doing something outside his authority, let us know.

      And my house is in order. How about staying out of it?

      And anonymous 11:15 above, the president was elected to make moral decisions for us, and every single decision he make involves morality. Every single one.

    4. PS Craig: Thank you for the Bible quote. You're right! It is clear! Here's another:

      Leviticus 25:44-45

      "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property."

      Thoughts? Is slavery OK in any circumstance? Seems clear to me that it is...

    5. I read it closely and yes, Gary is questioning his moral authority to dictate by decree, which is more akin to a Caesar. For someone who claims to be a Christian and knowing the founding principles of our country and the clear biblical teaching on marriage to act contrary to that removes any moral authority he had on the subject. He is not making this moral decision in keeping with the history of our country nor the will of the majority. I have the right to question that as well. Legislating is done by Congress, per the Constitution.

      Clearly that is what it says, our country has decided not to have slaves, other countries have, including Africa. It doesn't say kidnapping for the purpose of slavery is allowed, which is what this country did. Biblical teaching says to not abuse slaves, which our country surely did, even those who claimed Christ. I make no apologies for them.

      I'll stay out of your house if you stay put of mine. Deal?

      Craig in Lacey

    6. Craig... You are truly unbelievable. In insisting gays cannot marry because of a literal interpretation of the Bible, you say slavery is OK with God as long as we treat them well.

      So, America got it wrong only because we kidnapped our slaves and didn't treat them well -- not because ownership of fellow human beings in and of itself is wrong? Seriously???

      Slavery is reprehensible in ANY circumstance. ANY. You do not describe a gracious or just God, and I think the majority vision of Him does not match yours.


      I would love to hear what other Christians have to say about this claim.

      PS I'm not in your house. I'm not concerned with your marriage as you are with mine.

    7. I can honestly see Craig testing witches to see if they float....

    8. Seriously! That same gracious and just God did allow slavery as the passages clearly say, you're going to have to take that up with him. It also literally says don't have sex with your sister. Are you saying we shouldn't take that literally as well? Honor your mother and father? Murder? Stealing? Blasphemy?Adultery?

      Unbelievable? Picking and choosing is.

      Your not married, regardless of what the state says.


      Where does the Bible say to see if witches float?

  4. Having a pink army scares me about my kids future. When were attacked it's going to be too late.

  5. Touche. Great arguments. Keep up the good spirit.

  6. How can Obama have morals when he's been taking money from Friends of Hamas?

    1. Ok, ever since this blog made national feeds we have had people saying things like this that make me get a real 'trollish' vibe. Even Fox News now knows they made a mistake on this one, that there is no 'Friends of Hamas' group and they took a sarcastic remark made by someone as if it were true.

      This group is prone to enough discussionary noise without someone deliberately trying to add to it with silly statements like that.

  7. i know a god of love, not one of legalism, to bigots racists, homophobes, prisoners, homeless people, homosexuals, heterosexuals people of other languages and races, HUGS because jesus loves you and i do too. love the lord your god with all your heart mind soul and strength and love your neighbor as your self. do you all have love? or legalism? think. he who is with out sin will cast thy first stone. from someone who is loved and forgivin.


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