The battle needs to be waged in the states through voter initiative. That should divert economic resources from the gay sector into pro gay marriage efforts and away from campaign contributions to Obama. This just happened in North Carolina with Amendment 1. Washington State has Initiative 1192 and Referendum 74 collecting petitions at this time for the November ballot.
On the perversion of the family issue, we need to formulate a clear message that defends monogamous heterosexual marriage. We have a huge electorate who does not know the implications of normalizing homosexual relationships and has been dumbed down by the Hollywood media. You see them clapping on shows that promote homosexuality and same sex marriage. Most American have no clue what the battle is about. The media indoctrination for same sex marriage has been irresponsible and non-stop. How we stop the propaganda campaign will be a challenge.
Basically, same-sex marriage violates the natural parent-child bond in every family, and the right of the family to protection by society and the state. It will discard the fundamental understanding that the family based upon the heterosexual marriage is very foundation of society. Same sex-marriage will de-naturalize the family by rendering in their entirety familial relationships as ever changing expressions of law. That universal understanding for thousands of years that the family is a small society (a sovereign state) with unique rights and responsibilities independent of the state will be no longer. Instead, the family will become mere policy relationships, defined and imposed by the state. The family (this society) founded more immediately in nature--the proles (procreation or fruitfulness)--will no longer have the distinction of sexual difference, with its distinctive quality of generative power. The family must continue to be the natural and fundamental group unit of society. With a change in the definition of marriage the family will have no direct connection to nature. This leaves the parent-child relation open to increasing intervention by the state. And with the possibility of the state being influenced by foreign forces, the definition of the family could be expanded to include such barbarous practices as marriage to children and polygamy.
With the definition of marriage redefined, the state with its new found power, will undermine further the sovereign nature of the family, and the sphere of the church or religious community as well—the two spheres where divine and human rights independent of the state are located. This will come as an all out assault on hetero-sexism, or anything that seems to privilege the male-female binary or the nuclear family. It will enable the state to indoctrinate our children and deprive us of the power to intervene. The individual--men, women and children--will be reduced to be subjects of the state with no divine rights. We must understand the serious nature of this fight. There will be no peace is to be had by capitulation.
The big question is can this fight be fought in the midst of a presidential campaign? Could it backfire and be used against our candidate? Remember, we are dealing with an indoctrinated public who is ignorant of the real issues and their consequences. Can smart minds formulate the argument sufficiently that they will not be painted with the wide brush of political correctness?
This fight must be be vigorously taken up by Christians who can boldly declare that marriage is a gift—something we receive with creation, not something we invent—and that only what is capable of being a marriage act is natural sex. I believe that this issue can be fought on the moral level as it presents itself to the sovereignty of the family. It should be made a human rights issue. Then, it ceases to be a Republican or a Democratic cause, and spun to justify an attack against our presidential candidate.
Excellent points! I think I need to memorize your post!
Excellent, insightful and on-target post. Thank you.
The big question is can this fight be fought in the midst of a presidential campaign? Could it backfire and be used against our candidate?
Since O does not have a positive economic record on which to run, his tactic appears to be one of distraction from issues of importance to the american people. So far, with mainstream media assistance, he has diverted public attention to the "Republican war on women" by means of free contraception, marriage via his announced support of same sex marriage while dredging up an incident with Romney from 49 years ago! - and we are only in the month of May. This election is evolving into one of the ugliest battles we have ever witnessed.
With 24/7 news, the public now relies on sound bites to make their decisions. Few are those americans who will take the time to read and research key issues. IMHO, it is important for the Republican candidate to develop a list of key issues that can be addressed in short, simple statements that will garner and hold public attention. He will need to stay on topic and not allow himself to be pulled into the deceitful web of discord carefully calculated to distract. We have just experienced 4 years of growing socialism under Obama and know, from his open mic comment to Russian president Dmitri Medvedev, that he plans on winning and how Russia will benefit under a 2nd term.
It will take a concerted effort on behalf of the few (like us) to protect our nation or risk facing the same future as Greece and now, God help us all, France. Can Obama's progressivist agenda be halted? Yes! Seven years after being voted into power, Spain's Socialist Party, was voted out last year. I credit Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Spain last summer as key to rallying the catholics and opening the eyes of others who had been lulled into a false sense of security. The pope will not be visiting the US this year, so we must rise to the challenge of defeating O and his socialist policies.
Funny that Obama can assert with a straight face that he's for the marriage of men to men because of his understanding of Jesus Christ and the Golden Rule; but when Timothy Dolan or Franklin Graham say they're against it for the same reason, they get faulted for "arrogantly claiming to know the mind of God."
This convinces me even more that in the public debate we need to focus on Natural Law rather than Revealed Law. As a species we exhibit reproductive sexual differentiation. Across all the centuries, cultures and continents this has determined the way we extend ourselves and our societies across generations. Our marriage laws and customs have always been shaped by this fact.
That would be a good place to start.
BTW, I just tried to google "Manhattan Delaration" and got a series of random redirects: one to "Rihanna's Fringe Bikini," one to "A Sexy Career in a Chancy Economy," and one to "What'll Justin Bieber Do Next?"
Cyber Pranksters.
Think somebody out there feels threatened by Natural Law?