QUICK LINKS
Major Victory
Today was a major victory for people of faith and traditional values.
The Washington State Supreme Court refused to rule against the institution of marriage. To view the Court's ruling, click here.
Even though the marriage issue has become highly politicized, a slim majority (5 to 4) of the judges voted to uphold traditional marriage.
I believe this decision is in direct response to the fervent prayer and faithful work of people of faith.
Thank you to all of you in the Faith & Freedom Network and glory and thanks to God for His faithfulness.
I am reminded of the verse in Proverbs 21:1 (NIV) that says, "The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord."
God bless you.
__________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add this blog to your email inbox.
19 Comments:
Hello Gary I am reminded of the verse in Proverbs 21:1 (NIV) that says, "The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord."
This is great victory and we have been here praying for this as well
Gods blessings
Hello gary we are glad that you guys had a major victory in the state of washington we hope that Marriage stays as one man and one woman
in Him-
I am thrilled that marriage will remain tradition: one man, one woman, one lawyer.
Or was it, one man, one woman, chosen by their Fathers in order to keep blood lines pure!
Separation of church and state. This is why so many people hate religion - God=love and acceptance (at least in the new testament), church= divisive, angry, self-righteous, hypocritical people.
Many people site religous beliefs as the primary reason
for rejecting so called "same-sex marriage".
But the real reason for rejecting it can be easily decided
without using religion as a prerequisite.
By definition, "same-sex marriage" is itself discriminatory since it is an attempt to legalize and legitamize the state-sponsored exclusion of oneself from the other half of the human race.
This is a clear case of sex discrimination since no other public institution would allow
such a obvious violation.
I'm sure the pro "same-sex marriage" movement would counter
with the argument that it is a question of personal choice or preference.
If that's the case, then there would be no need for a marriage in the first place.
Traditional marriage is one of the oldest and most revered traditions in all societies.
Now, let's add religion...
One man + one woman + God =
THE PERFECT DESIGN !
Anonymous
[]
Congratulations from Canada! Your victory gives us hope.
Probably not so much praying but a very obvious compromise. Twice in the majority decision it points out the many hardships and inequities that same gender married couples and say the ONLY reason it didn't consider them in this ruling is because they were specifically asked not to by the plaintiffs. They then go to strongly suggest that "“the legislature may want to reexamine the impact of the marriage laws on all citizens of this state.”
Conservative lawyer Eugene Volokh observes:
To the state legislature, the message seems to be this: “Get moving on addressing the hardships faced by gay couples and their children, some of which we’ve listed for you. You don’t have to give them marriage and maybe not even all of the rights of marriage, but something needs to be done. If you don’t act, we might.”
To gay-marriage litigants, the message seems to be this: “Go to the legislature and see what can be done about the sorts of problems you’ve identified and that we agree exist. If the legislature is unresponsive, come back to us not with a claim for the status of marriage, but with a remedial claim for the benefits and protections of marriage for your families.”
My guess is that this dual message was necessary to get the five votes needed to uphold the state’s marriage laws. (explaining the delay)
If these observations are correct the state will eventually be giving the same support to same gender marriages as it does for opposite gender ones, it will just have a different name (what a waste of time - civil 'union' or civil 'marriage' contracts licensed by the state will still be 'marriage' for the individuals and their religion)
Hm...which is the bigger threat to marriage: Gays who want to be monogomous or the vast number of Christians getting devorced every day?
You mean "the vast majority of people who call themselves Christians getting divorced every day." Not everyone who calls themselves a Christian is a Christian. In general, a Christian who follows the Bible would not normally get a divorce, as God would not want them too. For Bible believing Christians, marriage and divorce basically goes like this:
God does not want you to marry an unbeliever:
"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?" 2 Corinthians 6:14 (As a personal side-note, in my opinion, if two people were both Bible believing Christians who actually try to do the things Jesus tells them, it's highly unlikely that either of them would ever want a divorce.)
God does not like divorce, but if you separate, you should remain faithful so you can go back to your spouse:
"A wife must not leave her husband. But if she does leave him, let her remain single or else go back to him. And the husband must not leave his wife." 1 Corinthians 7:10-11
God doesn't like divorce, but permits it in certain cases:
"Jesus replied, 'Moses permitted divorce as a concession to your hard-hearted wickedness, but it was not what God had originally intended.'" Mathew 19:8
One of the few times where God permits divorce (though he doesn't prefer it) is when a spouse has committed adultery:
"And I tell you this, a man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery – unless his wife has been unfaithful." Mathew 19:9 (i.e. given the two quotes above, He would still rather that you stay together and work it out, but because of people's sinful nature, he allows divorce when a spouse has committed adultery)
But if you are married, even to an unbeliever, you (the Christian) should stay with them (the unbeliever) for the above reason, plus the scripture says:
"If a Christian man has a wife who is an unbeliever and she is willing to continue living with him, he must not leave her. And if a Christian woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he is willing to continue living with her, she must not leave him. For the Christian wife brings holiness to her marriage, and the Christian husband brings holiness to his marriage. Otherwise, your children would not have a godly influence, but now they are set apart for him. (But if the husband or wife who isn't a Christian insists on leaving, let them go. In such cases the Christian husband or wife is not required to stay with them, for God wants his children to live in peace.) You wives must remember that your husbands might be converted because of you. And you husbands must remember that your wives might be converted because of you." 1 Corinthians 7:12-16
So, to sum things up: God doesn't like divorce, but allows it when A)a spouse has committed adultry, or B)An unbeliever chooses to leave a believer, then the believer should let them go. If a Christian gets divorced for just about any other reason, then they themselves are committing adultery if they have sexual relations with anyone else besides their spouse, as they are not divorced in the sight of God (i.e. for a reason acceptable in His perfect judgement).
Like I said, not all who call themselves Christians ARE Christians and God will know the difference on the day of judgment:
"Not all people who sound religious are really godly. They may refer to me as 'Lord,' but they still won't enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The decisive issue is whether they obey my Father in heaven. On judgment day many will tell me, 'Lord, Lord, we prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.' But I will reply, 'I never knew you. Go away; the things you did were unauthorized.' Anyone who listens to my teaching and obeys me is wise, like a person who builds a house on solid rock. Though the rain comes in torrents and the floodwaters rise and the winds beat against that house, it won't collapse, because it is built on rock. But anyone who hears my teaching and ignores it is foolish, like a person who builds a house on sand. When the rains and floods come and the winds beat against that house, it will fall with a mighty crash.'" Mathew 7:21-27
How can we know who's a Christian here on Earth and who isn't? "We shall know them by their fruits." or in a more modern translation that might make a little more sense to the modern reader (note: this begins telling a way to distinguish a false prophet from a true one, but in the last verse, the idea is generalized to people in general):
"Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep, but are really wolves that will tear you apart. You can detect them by the way they act, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit. You don't pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles. A healthy tree produces good fruit, and an unhealthy tree produces bad fruit. A good tree can't produce bad fruit, and a bad tree can't produce good fruit. So every tree that does not produce good fruit is chopped down and thrown into the fire. Yes, the way to identify a tree or a person is by the kind of fruit that is produced." Mathew 7:15-20
So, don't blindly assume that people who tell you they're Christians really are Christians, if you see "fruit" that consistently points to a contrary conclusion.
With all that in mind, back to your original question... "which is the bigger threat to marriage: Gays who want to be monogomous or the vast number of Christians getting devorced every day?" Neither one HAS to be a threat to marriage: 1)Homosexuals can be monogamous without the extra benefits derived from marriage (or are you implying they don't have the willpower to do so without a contract), and 2)I would contend that TRUE Christians AREN'T getting divorced "every day".
-Chris
I'm just amazed that so many of you know exactly what God wants. After all, among many inconsistencies, he told George Bush and the Pope entirely different stories about invading Iraq.
So, you're basing your understanding of what God wants (and calling them inconsistent) on the comments and actions of two people. If you really want to understand God's character, read and study the Bible.
As for your example, I suspect that one of them may have been acting/speaking with guidance from God, but I honestly don't know which one. If you look to see which point of view is Biblically supported, you'll find they both are. i.e. The Bible, typically in a personal relationship context, advocates forgiveness and patience, which would seem to be in line with what the pope suggests in this matter. That said, the Bible also shows God judging nations at times and using both godly and ungodly nations to do so, so the actions Bush has taken may also be within God's will. In fact, in many cases, God used nations to exact judgment on other nations, then turn around and use the first judged nation to bring judgment on another. Given that, it maybe be that 9/11 was a judgment from God to wake us up to the ways our society is slipping into moral relativism and we're now (or at least were during the start of the war) judging the nation of Iraq, for is it not a loving thing to do for the people of a country to judge their evil leadership and set them free? Maybe these events (perhaps us being judged and exacting judgment on another country) are causing people to look to God, resulting in things like traditional marriage being upheld, which may spare us from further judgment we'd be due if we were to become a Godless nation.
-Chris
P.S. In case it wasn't clear, I wanted to reitterate that I'm not sure who (the Pope or Bush) was speaking/acting within God's will (maybe both in some way, or possibly neither), but either way, I'll keep trusting God, and praying for our nation and all its people. :-)
-Chris
Actually, it's based on much more than the comments of two people. My goodness, Pat Robertson's comments alone scare the heck out of me. I think people are generally just putting their own words in God's mouth. btw - I'm ok with God, it's the fan club that scares me.
I don't recall Bush saying anything other than he prays for guidance. That is a big difference from saying "God told me"... I have also never heard of the Pope saying God told him something about Iraq.
Pat Robertson---I know what you are speaking of. I actually have met him. He seems to be a nice and amiable man and I believe he really wants to do good. In fact he has done good. He has set up some organizations that do wonderful things like Operation Blessing.
He has graciously accepted (constructive) criticism from other Christian leaders and he has appologized for some of the things he has said.
I used to not like Christians either. Then I met a real one. Then I met some more. Then I realized they are just people trying to get through life the best way they can just like everyone else. We are all only human and prone to mistakes. Unfortunately for Robertson, his are amplified and broadcast around the country.
Believe it or not there really are people who do hear from God. It isn't some spooky big deal or a thunderous voice from the clouds. And yes there are also people who put their own words in God's mouth.
Now (For such a time as this...), the Bride of Christ, His Church, must pray (and commit to action) to repeal Unilateral, No-Fault Divorce in WA State (RCW 26.09.030, et.seq.) and return the "stability" (much "talked" about in the Majority Opinions(s)) to Marriage. Marriage is the God -made Union of One Man, One Women, For Life (Romans 7:1-3, 1 Cor. 7:39, etc.). If We would not have fallen for the Lie of Easy, No-Fault, Divorce by Neo-(unbiblical)-Femminist Fiat, and Secular Humanist Legal Elitists, some 30 years ago (1973...), we surely would not have gotten to the present day arguments for same-sex marriage. There is PRESENTLY a case, here in Washington State, seeking Discretionary Review in the Washington State Supreme Court on this very issue--Earnestly Contenting for God's Design for His Creation Marriage. There is NO SUCH THING as Divorce without grounds in God's economy, IF there be any grounds at all... (See Website "Spirit of Hosea" under audio acrchive: http://www.mm9.biz/soh.html).
The WA case is "In Re The Marriage of Carlson" and is presently on appeal from the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division One.
Sincerely, In Christ,
Ron Carlson.
WOW, I wonder if the Church, Christian lawyers, and para-Church organizations, presumbably standing for God's plan of Marriage and Family, will legally intervene (via Amicus or otherwise) and fight for this righteous cause...?
Has God not given us all the Word and the Ministry of Reconciliation...?
Does He not emphaticly declare Marriage as a sacred Covenant...?
Does He not Hate Divorce...?
Is God not the Supreme Ruler of the Universe...? (According to Preamble of the Washington State Constituion, YES, He Is...!!!)
Does the Bible have more to say about Divorce than Abortion and Homosexuality combined...? YES...!!!
Where is the Body of Christ in the Battle regarding the "redefining" of Marriage, Created as a life-long Covenant, to less than a simple business contract via enactment of Unilateral, No-Fault Divorce on Demand...???
If we have the Mind of Christ are we to embrace Divorce or Hate it as God does...?
Ron Carlson that is good info to know! Thank you! :o)
"Believe it or not there really are people who do hear from God. It isn't some spooky big deal or a thunderous voice from the clouds. And yes there are also people who put their own words in God's mouth."
Well said. :-)
Why are we all literally "begging" politicians to be involved with our religious affairs? If the term "marraige" is truly a Judeo-Christian term with Biblical roots as we are claiming, then why are asking politians to define it?
We, as Christians are shooting ourselves in the foot. The "church-state" separation is meant to keep politicians out of our church, not the other way around as we tend to think. Remember why the Puritans from England sought refuge in America.
Let's ask politicians to remove the term "marriage" from the government entirely, so that we as Christians can remain entirely free from government intrusion.
Post a Comment
<< Home