A Pastoral Letter to a Kangaroo Court



image By Rev. Cary K. Gordon

So many times we read editorials claiming “if it had not been for the courts, we’d still have slavery in America today!” This shameless untruth is nearly always stated in an attempt to praise modern-day judicial activism, (without which homosexual marriage in Iowa could not exist). Besides the glaringly obvious fact that being “gay” is a behavior, and has nothing to do with civil rights, in the first place…besides the fact that as recently as last year, the American Psychiatric Association repudiated the fallacy of “born-gay” science, (which is to say, from an impartial, non-political perspective, that being “gay” is NOT the equivalent of being a particular “race”), few debates of our time seem more prone to deteriorate into willfully unintelligent comparisons, than the one at hand. As I am prepared to demonstrate, the arguments of the left are found wanting. They are unworthy of serious consideration, once their emotion-driven talking points and historically inaccurate claims are exposed and discarded.

The desecration of our nation’s history, along with patent lies, distortions, and general revision-isms, seem to flow like water from the emotional left, anytime they find themselves feeling vulnerable by the nakedness of their own bad arguments.  Particularly when one, such as I, reveals their private disdain for the constitution, exhibited in acts of public judicial abuse. (Abuses they shamelessly praise with adulation, as did Governor Culver last March 31st, in Des Moines).

Along similar lines, a respected acquaintance of mine, (and noted historian), David Barton, once shared the truly disreputable history of America’s courts as they relate to civil rights and activism. “Had it been up to the Court, slavery would have NEVER ENDED: in 1857, the Court declared it “unconstitutional” for the other branches to end slavery or to free slaves. Fortunately, Congress ignored that decision by declaring freedom for slaves in 1862 and President Lincoln also ignored that decision by issuing the “Emancipation Proclamation” in 1863. All substantive progress in civil rights after the Civil War was accomplished only after Congress used Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution to REMOVE reconstruction issues from the Court’s reach.”

In the darkness of the recent Supreme Court decision to usurp the voice of the populous by legislating from the bench, re-defining the 6000 year-old definition of marriage, consider the following truths: Based upon the arguments posed by those who support gay marriage, it is a strong possibility that some of our Supreme Court justices do not believe in a God. Suffice it to say that regardless of whether or not one does, our public should understand that there are two kinds of law that exist in the universe.

1) Those made by men; 2) Those that exist outside of man’s authority. Natural law, or that which exists outside of man’s jurisdiction, like gravity, orbit decay, seasons, time, the natural law of procreation, and the general laws of physics, were not written down after passing a decision by a 3/2 margin in some mere human court. Laws that exist outside of man’s authority do exist, nevertheless, and I assure you, such law possesses what science refers to as a “first-cause.”

With that said, your courts may make all the man-made laws they wish – even outlaw gravity on the basis that it is “prejudicial to those who are inclined to fly and cannot do so without mechanical assistance.” You can do so passionately because of gravity’s alleged “tyranny against freedom,” and gravity will still kill us all if we jump off a building the following day, while “celebrating our new COURT-GRANTED ‘civil right’ to… fly.”

Our jurists may continue to give birth to new laws from their court rooms (wholly undermining our way of life as a constitutional republic and selfishly putting our nation under the tyranny of oligarchy) and actually change the meaning of the word “gravity” in the dictionary, but escape velocity will remain the same every time NASA launches a rocket into space.

Moreover, the religious man believes the “first-cause” of natural law must be the “Lawgiver.” Men/women like those who undermine wholesome family tradition believe any number of a billion things revolving around the doctrine of evolution – things which require far more faith than the religious for the maintenance of their own paradigm. But no matter how angry one becomes, homosexuality will never agree with natural law; an existing law which all men must acknowledge is quite real.  Why? Because to the intelligent religious man, homosexuality will always be un-natural for a myriad of obvious reasons one shouldn’t have to explain. To the intelligent evolutionist, it will NEVER agree with the doctrine of “survival of the fittest.” This explains why 30 states have banned gay-marriage, along with 70 nations of the world.

What’s most important in life is not who wins the argument about the definition of words, but where one goes when he or she dies. If there is a Lawgiver behind this amazing universe, there is a strong likelihood the arbiters of our curious Supreme Court will someday face Him. When they do, I recommend more humility than they’ve shown the people of Iowa. It is at times like this, when a mere human court harbors the hubris to actually believe they are capable at usurping natural law, when pastors must respond to such decisions with biblically justified civil resistance.

The orthodox Christian pastors of Iowa do not and cannot recognize, with regard to the definition of marriage, the imaginary authority of the Iowa Supreme Court. History has already shown who inevitably wins when state wages war against the authority of the church of the living God. So let the battle between state and church begin. True pastors, in the fashion of Christ, will not and cannot bow before the arrogance of Caesar and Herod. We have learned from our past mistakes. We will not repeat the mistake made by Lutheran pastors when confronted with German fascism.

Alexander Hamilton, signer of the American Constitution, best represents the position of this pastor with regard to the court’s insult:

“The law . . . dictated by God Himself is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times. No human laws are of any validity if contrary to this.” 1

1. Alexander Hamilton, The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, Harold C. Syrett, editor (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961), Vol. I, p. 87, February 23, 1775, quoting William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (Philadelphia: Robert Bell, 1771), Vol. I, p. 41.

Rev. Cary K. Gordon is a pastor at Cornerstone World Outreach in Sioux City, IA and President of PeaceMakers Institute.  Rev. Gordon also serves on the advisory board for American Principles Project’s Preserve Innocence Initiative in Iowa.  This is Rev. Gordon’s official response to the IRS complaint filed against Cornerstone World Outreach by Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

Please read our comment policy before leaving a comment.

  • Pingback: A Pastoral Letter to a Kangaroo Court – Caffeinated Thoughts | Gay Marriage News Articles

  • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

    Cary Gordon’s silly rant is so full of holes I hardly know where to start. First of all “gay” is no more a behavior than “straight”. A person can be gay or straight and never acted upon either. Sexual orientation is not dependent on action. His misleading statement that there is “no gay gene” is NOT what the American Psychiatric Association has said. It said that no conclusions as have been found about the origin of homosexuality. Of course, poor Cary relies on the laughable World Net Daily for his information. World Net Daily is the National Inquirer of the right wing nuts. Apparently, Cary doesn’t clearly understand the US Constitution or our judicial system which guarantees equality to all citizens. He seems to think that homosexuals are not really US citizens deserving of equality. In another misrepresentation of the truth, the fact that the Civil rights laws were the result of court decisions seems to be overlooked. Anti-miscegenation laws were also over turned by the courts but that really doesn’t support Cary’s rant. Of course, 6000 years of marriage include polygamy but again, Cary lets that one slide too. In the end, it seems that Cary’s main agenda is to ram his personal issues with homosexuality down the throats of all the citizens of Iowa and with no apparent reason other than he wants to. It is time these Universal Life “Reverends” are seen for what they are, poorly educated people with personal agendas.

    • http://caffeinatedthoughts.com Shane Vander Hart

      Please show me where there is a right to marry in the Constitution? You seem to forget the Civil Rights Act of 1968, seems to me that was a legislative action. Then the 14th and 15th Amendments were initiated in Congress and then ratified by the states, which those say nothing about “sexual orientation” either. The Courts didn’t initiate these.

      I think your ignorance is showing. Also it would seem that you are fine with having your view of homosexuality shoved down Iowans throat. So I tell you what, let us vote. Then we the people can decide, not the courts.

      • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

        LOL sorry but using the silly old chestnut of “where is the right to marry in the Constitution” pretty much shows you have little to support your prejudice. By the way, that was one of the same idiotic statements made to support anti-miscegenation laws. You might want to note that the US Supreme court found in 1967 that marriage was “a basic human right”, But lets face the fact that the REAL issue is YOUR personal issues with homosexuality, not the what the laws or constitution says.

        Since you say that homosexuality is being forced upon people in Iowa, you will no doubt be able to tell us all who has tried to forced you to become homosexual and who has tried to force you to marry someone of your own sex. As for voting on people rights, which one of yours can we vote on? Shane it’s obvious that you have little or no use for America or the American system of government and merely want everyone to do as you say. Sadly for you that won’t happen, so either learn to live with our system or find a theocracy that measures up to your ideals.

      • http://caffeinatedthoughts.com Shane Vander Hart

        I don’t want a theocracy, I just want the definition of marriage to remain the same, and for babies to be extended their right to life (which the right ot life is in our founding documents).

        Regarding the 1967 law – that was a law based on race. You can’t choose your race.

      • Proud Iowan

        First of all, as a proud Iowan, I am embarrassed for Iowa that this page shows up on google news.

        But more importantly, the author of this letter and the guy who keeps hating in the comment section are both bigots and liars.

        Lastly, what about this racist piece of tripe the author calls a letter is pastoral?

      • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

        Indeed you are espousing a theocracy, especially when you want civil judges removed for up holding the constitution. You fail to tell us which definition of marriage you want to remain. Certainly one of the oldest forms is polygamy, practiced from Biblical times to the present. Or maybe the “traditional” version where women are the chattels of their husbands with little or no rights in the marriage. No Shane, your agenda is clear, you have issues with homosexuality. If marriage were of ANY import to you, you would be starting a campaign to make divorce illegal. Even the head of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary admits that evangelical Christians have NO moral high ground against same sex marriage as long as no fault divorce is legal across the US. Work out your personal issues with homosexuality and find other topics that you actually understand for your future rants.

      • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

        The 1967 decision (not law) says that marriage is “a basic human right”. There are NO modifiers to that statement such as “only opposite sex marriage” is a basic human right. The intention of the court was clear, that ALL humans have a right to marriage and that was based on their interpretation of the US Constitution. Sexual orientation, like race cannot be changed. If you think you can, then change yours to homosexual.

      • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

        FYI Shane, arguably the beginning of the civil rights movement was the VERY unpopular Brown v. Board of Education. If people at the time were of your mentality, those judges would have surely been removed from the bench.

      • Smartphoto59

        I thought God was only capable of understand ignorance?
        Are you God or pretending to be him?

  • http://kibblesbits.wordpress.com/ Ann

    I can’t believe this much space was wasted promoting hate of people who are different than you. Thank goodness more Christians are speaking out against hateful people like you and are instead showing Christ’s love for humanity. Keep your religion out of my laws. Not everyone follows a path of hatred and bigotry. If you don’t want to marry a gay man, then don’t. Stick with straight women. But stop denying homosexuals basic civil rights that hetrosexuals like myself have been enjoying for so long…it’s wrong. Morally reprehensible.

    • http://caffeinatedthoughts.com Shane Vander Hart

      Jesus called out sin, I guess he was hateful as well in your eyes. Jesus died on the cross for sin, and I would encourage any homosexual to repent, flee to Jesus and embrace God’s design for sex and marriage.

      “Keep your religion out of my laws.” Fine, when you keep your worldview out of mine. Last time I checked we have First Amendment rights and this is a Democracy, not a judicial oligarchy.

      “Morally reprehensible” – what is the basis for your morals?

      • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

        Apparently you’ve never read the Bible. If you had, you would know neither God nor Jesus ever condemn homosexuality. People who use Christianity and the Bible against others are morally reprehensible and I would suggest YOU repent before it is too late. By the way, many of us who really do believe the Bible find your misuse of it against others to be blasphemy.

      • http://caffeinatedthoughts.com Shane Vander Hart

        John, that has to be the lamest comment I’ve read in quite some time.

        Yeah, I’ve never read the Bible…

        Here read this – http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2009/08/hermeneutical-gymnastics-on-homosexuality/

      • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

        Shane, the more I read of your poorly thought out rants the more I know that you have little or no use for the Bible except as a means to support your own prejudices. You seem not to know the difference between acts which harm others i.e. incest, child molestation and those based on love as in the case of two same sex people getting married. Your misinterpretation of the letters of Paul would be laughable if not so appalling. I suggest you actually READ Corinthians and see what Paul is actually talking about. Your spewing of a deformed interpretation of the Bible can only be the result of some fundamentalist cult indoctrination and has NOTHING to do with the message of God or Christ. While you may be able to sell your nonsense to poorly educated bumpkins, please don’t try to ram it down the throats of educated Christians.

      • http://www.TheGayManifesto.com BigBearCO

        John you are incorrect. I am a Gay man and would love it if christianity wasn’t such a hate filled religion but it is. Leviticus 20:13 specifically says that homosexuality is an abomination before god and that homosexuals must be put to death. It’s there look it up.

        Fortunately in America we are not ruled by biblical law yet and as such the courts have a responsibility to treat all citizens equally. “Cause it says so in the bible” is not a valid reason to deny Gay and Lesbian Americans equal rights.

      • http://twitter.com/berettamanfl John Bartlet

        BigBear, please don’t be misled by those who call themselves Christian and spew judgment and damnation on those they don’t like. They are NOT Christians. The passage you are referring to in Leviticus is part of old Jewish purity laws which NO ONE follows today. Even the most Orthodox Jews may believe homosexuality to be a sin but they don’t stone people for it. Christians do not adhere to the old purity laws and Leviticus is irrelevant to the Christian faith. Those who pretend to be Christian will occasionally pick and choose passages to condemn others (they did it to prevent mixed race marriage in the 1950s) but PLEASE do not confuse them with REAL Christians. Many Christian Churches today welcome everyone including gays and lesbians. A number of Christian Churches are also performing same sex marriage as part of their faith. Do not be misled by those who rage against homosexuals under the guise of Christianity. The New Testament clearly talks about them: Matthew 7:15  ¶Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

      • Smartphoto59

        Jesus told us not to judge?
        Is that not Gods job not yours?

        Is sex the worst sin of all?
        Perversions and sin are in all aspects of life, why are you singling out and weighing sin?
        If you are chosen by god to do so please list this sins in order?

        Judging others is not a sin?
        Please select the passage in which Jesus speaks of homosexuality as sin.
        I know he spoke of judging others and may have spoke of the self proclaimed
        righteous as sinners?

  • Anonymous

    Can you believe this crap?! A guy who looks like a refugee from The Village People wants to throw out the all the justices of the Iowa Supreme Court because they said that the Iowa Constitution makes no distinction in sexual preference when it comes to civil rights; therefore citizens of the same sex can legally marry.

    So along comes this guy, looking like he just wandered out of the Blazin’ Saddles, making the claim that some invisible guy in the sky makes the rules and those rules are 6,000 year old. Whoa, there, Tonto, don’t you bible-thumping fundies “believe” the world’s only 6,000 years old? So your invisible “friend,” who supposedly “created” everything, made the “rule” that only dudes and chicks can play house? Yet the founder of your “cult” ran around the desert with 12 guys and no gals? Sounds pretty gay to me. And what about that David and his “friend” Jonathan whom he loved better than a woman?

    On closing I’ll just say that 100% of the guys who are against “gay” marriage are 100% gay.

  • Limekitten1234

    Of course, God in the bible also says slavery is fine, we should stone adulterers, and divorce and remarriage are grave sins. Retarded.

    God is imaginary. Live in the real world, please.

  • Smartphoto59

    The onus of responsibility is on the Christian not the non believer.
    Christ washed the feet of the poor, sick and morally corrupt not judge and condemn them.

    ” For He who is without sin cast the first stone”.
    What do you really understand of a God who created the universe?
    Have you not perverted Gods word by lifting one sentence from the bible & selecting this as more important
    than all others?

    Why the perverted logic Rev. Cary K. Gordon? Where is your compassion to the worlds sick, poor
    and tormented?

  • Rose

    I stopped taking this article seriously at the phrase “re-defining the 6000 year-old definition of marriage”. Let me guess: The definition of marriage is 6000 years old because thats when the Earth was created, right? Thats what I thought. If you are going to appeal to the public at large, please do not use the ridiculous “scientific” posturing of your creation myth beliefs as proof. The ancient Greeks and Romans both had male-male marriage equivalent institutions in place.
    As far as homosexuality being an action, could you please explain why homosexuality is not only found, but is common in many animal species? Penguins, ducks, giraffes, bighorn sheep, the list can go on of documented homosexuality in the animal kingdom.
    As far comments about the Bible and homosexuality, I can safely believe you are talking about Leviticus, yes? Do you believe all of Leviticus? What did you eat last time you went to a seafood restaurant? What is your shirt and pants made of? Do you send your wife to the garage when she is menstruating? If you don’t do all these things and more, than you are not following Leviticus. The Bible is not something you can pick and choose to follow. If you believe it to be literal instructions, you must follow all of it.

  • http://www.TheGayManifesto.com BigBearCO

    Homosexuality and heterosexuality are both normal, natural and unchangeable sexual orientations. The American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Academy of Science, the United States Supreme Court, 92% of Fortune 500 companies agree.

    The Libertarian Party even supports full equality for homosexuals…including marriage equality and are currently lobbying congress for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act and repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.

    The only organizations that do not believe that homosexuality is normal, natural and unchangeable are some marginalized and discredited christian and muslim organization who are pushing agendas of discrimination against the Gay and Lesbian community based on cherry picked theological teachings that are not founded in reality.