Thursday, February 02, 2012

Mocking Marriage: A Multi-Layered Deception

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
Last night the Washington State Senate passed SB 6239, 28-21 with 4 Republicans voting for it. The bill alters and redefines marriage, legalizing so-called homosexual "marriage."

The House will soon pass their companion bill and Governor Gregoire has promised, although she has been morally conflicted about it, she will sign it.

And what about all those lawmakers who said they wanted to honor civil rights in voting for the bill but preferred that the issue would be referred to the people for a vote? Even the Governor agreed. Well, that was deceptive. An amendment was offered which would have referred it to the people, but the lawmakers, marching to the Seattle Times drum beat said, "no." (26-23)

Our Stand For Marriage coalition will now run a referendum. Please watch for details.

Why are the Times editors and elected officials so afraid of the people who buy their paper and elect them to their job?

The Times called the deeply held often biblically based religious beliefs about marriage, held by many, "Whims."

Those lawmakers who have forsaken the teaching of their church, their parents and the Bible to support redefining marriage are most often hailed as "courageous" heroes.

Why are those who believe in natural, biblical marriage and stand in its defense, often characterized as bigots, haters, narrow minded and worse?

Just last week, the Maryland Governor's wife, Katie O'Malley, told a national convention that they would have had homosexual "marriage" in their state except, "There were some cowards that prevented it from passing." After a public backlash, she later said she should have chosen different words.

In this brave new world of elevated and celebrated homosexual behavior, redefining marriage is "courageous" and "bold."

Standing for and defending natural marriage, the oldest social institution known to the human race, is "cowardly."

The Washington State Legislature and the Governor have chosen to mock marriage.

The basis for that decision is a multi-layered deception.

"Marriage Equality" is a deception. Both Senators Swecker and Stevens made that clear last night. The action taken by the legislature, which will be signed into law by the Governor, is not "marriage equality." It does not provide equality for a number of classes or groupings of people who may claim loving, long term relationships and a desire to marry. What about polygamists and blood relatives, to name a few? Does this law provide equality or does it discriminate?

This law provides "special rights." Not "equal rights."

But a legislature that has proven itself unable to solve a long list of problems plaguing the state, has risen to the redefining of marriage and in days pushed through legislation.

And a "courageous" governor will sign it.

Here are the 5 basic deceptions put forth by homosexual activists seeking to alter the culture and redefine marriage.

Janice Shaw Crouse is a former speech writer for President George H.W. Bush and now a political commentator for Concerned Women for America.

The following is taken from a column she wrote:

Let’s begin with the basic argument that people are “born gay.” Apparently, activists are operating under the assumption that if they say this long enough, people will believe it. Yet the science is not there to substantiate their oft-stated premise that homosexuality is genetic and is immutable. The studies that purport to support the idea have not been replicated; instead, they have been repudiated or considered inconclusive. The generally accepted theory is that some people may be predisposed to emotional vulnerabilities that can be exacerbated by external factors, such as parental approval, social acceptance and gender affirmation. Indeed, a growing number of individuals have chosen to reject the homosexual lifestyle. In addition, there is an acknowledgement, even among homosexuals, that persons can “choose” their sexuality (be bisexual or not).

Let’s look at five other myths associated with same-sex “marriage.”

Myth #1: Having same-sex couples celebrate their love does nothing to harm anybody else’s marriage or damage the institution of marriage.

The argument that “what I do is my business and doesn’t hurt anybody but me” is an old argument that has been refuted in numerous ways. The institution of marriage has existed throughout history in almost every culture to protect women and children. Marriage is already under attack from a promiscuous, me-centered culture that derides any male who “gives up” his rights for altruistic reasons and labels him a “powerless wimp.” Likewise, women who “hold out” for marriage are called “prudes” and worse. These cultural changes are bad enough. Society opens the floodgates of cultural destruction if marriage becomes meaningless. Counterfeits always devalue the real thing. Counterfeit marriage will lead to “anything goes” unions. There will be no legal reason to deny anyone the umbrella of “marriage.” The age of those seeking unions will be irrelevant; their blood relationship won’t matter; the number of partners seeking the ceremony or any other characteristic will become meaningless. The whole institution of marriage will be rendered irrelevant. Just look at Scandinavia: they legalized “same-sex marriage;” now, cohabitation rather than marriage is the prevalent household arrangement.

Myth #2: Same-sex “marriage” is an “equal rights” issue.

Activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is like the civil rights issue of racial equality, that homosexuals “deserve” the right to “marry” and have the same benefits and protections of marriage that heterosexuals enjoy. Any denial of that “right,” they say, violates their “equal rights.” The reality is that the same-sex “marriage” effort is more about getting society’s approval for behavior; it is not about benefits or protections. All American citizens have the right to marriage, and all the protections that homosexuals seek are already embedded in American law. Anyone can legally designate beneficiaries and establish who can or cannot visit them in hospitals. Clearly the push is for approval, mainstreaming an aberrant set of values and condoning certain behaviors; it is not for establishing “rights” that already exist. Marriage is more than a “legal” institution; it is an institution supported by society as a haven for children, the foundation of the family, and the well-spring of civility and national strength. The homosexual activists are seeking a special right, one that denies the human truth that male and female are designed to be “one” and are created as the natural means for propagating the human race.

Myth #3: Any group of people — including homosexual couples — can contribute to the well-being of children and form a productive unit of society.

Conveying marital status to any group of people gives them societal affirmation and establishes them as an essential element of society when the research indicates they are not capable of performing those functions. Social science research sends a clear and unequivocal message: the married couple, mom-and-dad family is best for children — not just good, but best in comparison to any other household arrangement. Other households (headed by anyone other than the married mother and father) are far inferior and damaging to children’s well-being and their futures. Already our children are at risk from the increase in cohabitation and the decline in marriage. If we add same-sex “marriage” into the mix, we are disregarding the best interests of our nation’s children. American children are at risk in carefully-documented ways when they are raised in any household but a married mom-and-dad family: They make worse grades, are likely to drop out of school, more prone to getting into trouble, have greater health problems, are more likely to experiment with drugs and/or alcohol, and will likely engage in early sexual activity and thus be more likely to contract a sexually-transmitted disease, have an abortion(s) and/or teen pregnancy.

Myth #4: Same-sex “marriage” is a matter of freedom of conscience and freedom of religion.

This is one of the more insidious myths related to “same-sex marriage.” There is no way to ignore the fact that same-sex “marriage” violates the deeply-held beliefs of millions of Christian, Jewish and Muslim citizens whose opposition to same-sex “marriage” is founded on central tenets of their faith. Knowing this, the homosexual activists are working through indoctrination programs for the nation’s children. Our public schools are becoming the means through which activists plan to change public opinion and the rule of law. Curriculum programs are instilling the idea that there is no legitimate opposition to homosexuality; instead, any opposition is bigoted and hate-filled. Laws are being changed to force innkeepers, businesses and even our social services to celebrate homosexuality.

More to the point, same-sex “marriage” is already used as a bludgeon to destroy the religious liberties and drive out Christian social services. One recent example: Massachusetts and the District of Columbia have both driven out Catholic adoption agencies, whose moral stand is unacceptable to the homosexual agenda. The radical politics of homosexuality requires orphans to remain without parents at all rather than to allow a Christian agency the religious liberty to find them a home.

Myth #5: “Same-Sex Marriages” are just like heterosexual marriages.

This last myth is probably the one furthest from the truth. In actuality, homosexual unions have a very short lifespan; many of the same-sex “marriages” in Massachusetts are already being dissolved. Further, the health risks associated with homosexual practice are very real and very much in evidence in the emergency rooms of hospitals. There is no denying: Homosexual sex is dangerous and destructive to the human body. Both HIV and HPV are epidemic among homosexual men. Domestic violence is a common problem — twice as prevalent among homosexual couples as in heterosexual ones. Indeed, legally creating a union does not enable two men or two women to become “one flesh,” nor does a legal ceremony give the union sanctity. Instead, the ceremony creates a sham that will devalue all marriages. The government establishes “standards” for measurement and value; to declare a sham union equal to marriage would devalue the “standard” and render all unions worthless and irrelevant. If the U.S. government establishes same-sex “marriages” under law, it will be redefining marriage — completely and irrevocably. Such a powerful statement will contradict the prevailing social science research: There is a big difference between 1) a family created and sanctioned by society when a man and a woman commit to each other and thus form a cohesive unit, and 2) a couple or group of people who live together to form a household in defiance of the prevailing moral codes to render meaningless an institution that has been the bulwark of the family and society throughout history.

Conclusion: The bottom line is that this social issue is a defining moment for mankind, not just this nation. What the homosexual activists are seeking is not a minor shift in the law, but a radical change in the fundamental institution that forms the basis for society. Will we protect marriage as the primary institution protecting women and children, or will we surrender to the forces that claim no one has obligations to others and that adults can do anything they want in their sexual lives regardless of how those actions affect society, especially children, and undermine the public good?


Faith and Freedom, along with other faith based organizations in the state will immediately begin the process of running a referendum to put the marriage issue on the November ballot.

I cannot overstate the importance of your support at this time. Please stand with us.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Active. Be Informed. Be Blessed.