Apologetics


That’s the recommendation of the Ohio Supreme Court’s Board of Professional Conduct. In their opinion, judges should not be allowed to marry only opposite-sex couples or even forego marrying anyone in order to avoid marrying same-sex couples. Either marry same-sex couples or find a new job:

A judge’s oath to support the constitutions of the United States and the State of Ohio requires the judge to recognize and adhere to binding court interpretations of the same. A judge’s unilateral decision to refuse to perform same-sex marriages based on his or her own personal, religious, or moral beliefs ignores the holding in Obergefell and thus, directly contravenes the oath of office.

In other words, Christian judges who want to be faithful to their God and their conscience need not apply. Religious liberty and the freedom of conscience is not allowed as a judge. We are watching religious liberty and the freedom of conscience erode before our very eyes and yet few hear the alarm going off.  We said it would happen, and it’s happening left and right.  This is just the beginning.

Everyone on the left said that giving rights to gays and allowing same-sex marriage wouldn’t affect anyone. It was a lie. The effects have been immediate. Think of all the professions that Christians are being excised from by the threat of the law: judge, county clerk, florist, wedding photographer, wedding cake baker, wedding planner, adoption agency. The list will continue to grow. People outside of the law and wedding industry are already starting to lose their jobs simply for believing in natural marriage. I fear this trend will only grow in the coming years.

 

HT: The Blaze

David-WellsThe Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice had threatened Chaplain David Wells that if he does not sign a state-mandated document promising not to identify homosexuality as a sin, he will lose his chaplain credentials. He would not sign it, and thus lost his credentials after serving for 13 years.

Once again we see how the push for homosexual rights hasn’t affected anyone!

The state is being faithful to the gay rights agenda. The question is whether or not Christians will continue to be faithful to Christ or will buckle to Caesar. I congratulate David Wells for standing strong.

There is no evidence that sexual orientation is biologically determined.  In fact, there is evidence that disproves it. They are called twins.  Since identical twins experience the same hormone bath in the womb and the same DNA, when one twin is gay, both should be gay 100% of the time.  But both are gay less than 15% of the time (11% for men; 14% for women). In fact, non-identical twins are twice as likely to both be gay as identical twins, which can only be explained by environmental factors, not DNA.  At best, sexual orientation may be biologically influenced.  But clearly, the major cause of same-sex attraction is social in nature.  It is nurture, not nature that is the primary cause of sexual orientation.  And sexual orientation is not something that is fixed and unchanging, but changes over time.

And now, there is a report released showing that 49% of young people in the United Kingdom say they are not 100% heterosexual, but experience degrees of same-sex attraction.  And what’s really interesting is seeing how this compares across other age categories: (more…)

This has been making its rounds in the media. This pastor, and all those clapping at this immorality will have to give an answer to God one day for their actions. It is shameful to celebrate as beautiful something God considers to be abominable, and to do so in the name of Christ. I sympathize with those who experience same-sex attraction, but the church ought to be there to help them resist their temptations, not to applaud them for giving in to them.

We find out that Catwoman is bisexual, the Green Lantern, Loki, Iceman, and many more are gay.  Now, Wonder Woman is officiating a same-sex wedding.  It seems that DC Comics and Marvel are bending over backward to push homosexuality. And who are they pushing homosexuality to?  Your children.  Parents, it’s time to parent.

55d3b08b1d00006e001452df

Katy FaustBack in February, Katy Faust penned an open letter to Justice Kennedy (whom everyone recognized would be the swing vote on the same-sex marriage case the U.S. Supreme Court decided recently), arguing that he should not make legal provision for same-sex marriage in the U.S.  What makes Katy’s letter so interesting and pertinent to the debate is the fact that her mother is a lesbian and she was raised in a same-sex household.  This gives her an interesting and important perspective on this debate.

Katy points out that the reason government involves itself in the institution of marriage is for the sake of children.  The welfare of children is the only reason for the government to be involved in anyone’s romantic relationships.  She further argues that children have the right to their natural parents and the influence of both genders: “Each child is conceived by a mother and a father to whom that child has a natural right. When a child is placed in a same-sex-headed household, she will miss out on at least one critical parental relationship and a vital dual-gender influence.”  Same-sex marriage is an injustice because it intentionally robs a child of their fundamental right to both of their parents.

(more…)

Angela MerkelA story broke on July 15 that I’ve been meaning to write about. During an interview[1] with Florian Mundt, German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, made it clear that she does not want Germany to follow the American example of making legal provision for same-sex marriage.  Merkel said she supports civil unions with benefits equal to marriage, but she “make[s] a different at some point.” For her, that point is the definition of marriage: “For me, personally, marriage is a man and a woman living together.”

While I disagree with Merkel that same-sex couples should receive the same benefits as married couples, her position is actually quite sensible.  Essentially she is saying “Same-sex couples should be treated as equal to married couples in every way, but they have no right to have their relationship called a ‘marriage’ because a marriage is, by nature, a male-female union.”  She is drawing on the intuition that “marriage” has an essence – that marriage is fundamentally a male-female union, and thus it is impossible for a same-sex union to be a marriage. This position is quite rational since it is based on objective observations about human nature and biological function.

(more…)

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 392 other followers