Lutheran (LCMS) Ping!
Alleluia! Christ is Risen!
Pr. Speckhard is one of the few persons--other than FReepers--to connect the dots of acceptance of ABC with acceptance of the gaysbian agenda.
Alleluia! Christ is Risen!
Ping.
Ping.
What he writes about can apply to most other denominations as well.
Namely, how will churches continue to define marriage as a man and a woman, when the dominant culture says marriage is just any 2 people? Or in the future, sanctions polygamy and group marriage? More liberal members of all denominations will come to accept homosexual marriage as part of the mainstream culture, and perhaps push for it within their churches. They may be voted down, however, this issue has the potential to cause upheaval down the road.
I also want to see if homosexuals start suing churches over the marriage issue. Having gotten civil marriage rights, will they then continue their lawsuits, this time to force religions to accept homosexual marriage, or else lose the right to perform marriages at all, or lost tax exempt status due to “discrimination”. We don’t know if the LGBT peoples will let it go, or continue to steamroller this issue through courts, this time with the target all of organized religion.
“Pr. Speckhard is one of the few persons—other than FReepers—to connect the dots of acceptance of ABC with acceptance of the gaysbian agenda.”
Every non-Catholic Christian who rejects it that I have found is invariably very conservative. On the other hand try to find one person of any faith who accepts abortion, ‘gay marriage’, or female clergy but who also thinks bc within marriage is wrong.
Civil divorce and remarriage or at least easy civil divorce and remarriage also is a big contributor. That one conditioned a lot of folks that the state defines marriage and can change it to anything at all if judges, pols, or 50%+1 of the voting public agree it should be changed at any one time.
Freegards
Thank you for referencing that article lightman. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.
To begn with, why is Rev. Peter Speckhard waving the white flag at the gay agenda?
The consequence of many generations of parents not making sure that their children are being taught how constitutionally enumerated rights and 10th Amendment-protected state powers work is the following. Many patriots unsurprisingly do not know the Constitution well enough to stop pro-gay activist judges from legislating gay rights from the bench.
More specifically, PC, pro-gay interpretations of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protections Clause aside, not only have the states never amended the Constitution to specifically protect gay "rights," but the Constitution's silence about such rights also means this. The states are free to make laws which discriminate against constitutionally unprotected gay agenda issues like gay marriage, as long as such laws don't unreasonably abridge constitutionally enumerated rights.
In fact, note that the Supreme Court case of Minor v. Happersett shows the following. Virginia Minor basically argued that her citizenship and the Equal Protections Clause of the then recently ratified 14th Amendment gave her the right to vote regardless that she was a woman. But the Court argued that wasn't so because 14A didn't add any new rights to the Constitution, it only strengthed constitutionally enumerated rights.
“3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had [emphasis added].” —Minor v. Happersett, 1874.
And since woman suffrage wasn't a constitutionally enumerated right before the 14th Amendment was ratified, neither was it a right after its ratification.
Note that Virginia Minor's efforts did not go unrewarded. This is because her case inspired the states to ratify the 19th Amendment which effectively gave women the right to vote.
On the other hand, it remains that PC gay rights remain constitutionally unprotected.
Finally, a way for patriots to fight judicial activism is the following. Citizens need to work with state and federal lawmakers to make punitive laws which require all judges to promptly, clearly and publicly specify all constitutional clauses which justify their decisions. And when the Constitution is silent on a certain issue, such as gay marriage, such laws should also require judges to state that the issue is a unique, 10th Amendment-protected state issue.
The reason we are opposed to "homosexual" marriage is because it is a deadly proposition!
How are they connected? Last time I checked, Leviticus 18 only addressed one of these two issues.
His discussion of religious schools raises many interesting issues.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
A sample quote from a very well thought out and very honest article; this is among the best of what I've read in the last few years.
May the wisdom of this article be accepted by LCMS. This Catholic will pray that LCMS hold firm on the issues in question. May LCMS do whatever is necessary to retain the LCMS schools without which the denomination’s future will be bleak. May God bless you and yours!
Fr. Paul Marx, founder of Human Life International (founded in 1981), said early on The Pill would lead to manifold increase in homosexuality.
Its very simple: once sex becomes loosed from primary purpose of marriage, that being reproduction (call it discrete), it becomes entirely recreational (indiscrete).
Elementary Watson.
Debating whether to send the link to a particular LCMS friend. Conservative (on most things) as they come, but this part might strain our friendship.