Marriage Certificate

We can’t stop homosexual “marriage” with a Marriage Amendment.  This isn’t pessimism, it’s reality.    Moreover, I am not going the route of libertarian-infatuated Glenn Beck and giving up, or conceding the point that this whole debate is irrelevant.

However, It has become clear in recent months that feminist proponents of homosexual “marriage” in America aren’t about to let a little thing called a Constitutional Amendment slow down their assault upon the world as God made it. 

Suppose we pass this Vitter sponsored Marriage Amendment (HJ 56):

SECTION 1. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

Stephen Baskersville of The American Conservative pointed out that what is happening across the pond is likely to happen here:

Britain’s Gender Recognition Act allows transsexuals to falsify their birth certificates retroactively to indicate they were born the gender of their choice. “The practical effect C9 will inevitably be same-sex ‘marriage’,” writes Melanie Phillips in the Daily Mail. “Marriage as a union between a man and a woman will be destroyed, because ‘man’ and ‘woman’ will no longer mean anything other than whether someone feels like a man or a woman. 

What must we do then?   Define, have a constitutional amendment defining male and female?   The founders of our country recognized that certain things are self-evident.  But those who are hell-bent on throwing off God’s standards are willing to redefine reality in order to promote their agenda.  Law can no more save a country, than it can save an individual.  These are first of all, moral issues, secondarily, legal issues.

But how did we get to this place?  Baskerville of Patrick Henry College also observes:

Homosexuals did not destroy marriage, heterosexuals did. The demand for same-sex marriage is a symptom, not a cause, of the deterioration of marriage. By far the most direct threat to the family is heterosexual divorce.

It is the decline of marriage, not an ascendancy of reason that has brought us here.  Baskerville lays the fault at the practice of no-fault divorce. Anytime a couple gets divorced because “they don’t love each other” a new false foundation for marriage has been laid down. The same would be true for such things as incompatibility, or divorce for the sake of children (which mirrors the reason often given for staying together).

But marriage, as I have pointed out elsewhere is a God-ordained institution.   Wholesale abandonment of God’s Word and standards for marriage, as well as a dearth of true gospel preaching have doomed our nation to godless laws.  And it is only a revival that will rescue us from the judgment of God. 

Baskerville  added this lament:  “No American politician of national stature has seriously challenged unilateral divorce”.   Perhaps he doesn’t consider Mike Huckabee of “national stature”, but Huckabee has continued to speak out against divorce:

I think America has got to sort of brace itself and say, “How good is this?” For example, on the issue of marriage, no-fault divorce became the vogue in the early ’60s. When states first introduced it, then everybody got on the bandwagon, and the result is now one in two marriages virtually ends in divorce in the country.

Divorce is one of the key predictors of poverty for a child growing up in a home that’s broken. Without making any judgments about the value or rightness or wrongness of it, it’s an economic fact that when children are involved in a divorce they are more likely to end up spending part of their childhood in poverty than if they have a two-parent household.

In an article entitled “Ark. Governor Embraces Covenant Marriage: Movement Seeks to Make it Harder to Get Divorced” Huckabee’s credentials on this perspective are legitimized. 

But let’s not be fooled.  Electing the right leaders won’t get the job done.  There must be a revival of not only marriage, but Biblical standards due to conversions resulting from the gospel of Jesus Christ.  Otherwise, we can only slow down the retreat into “homosexual marriage”, which is one unnatural consequence to our failure to uphold God’s standards.

 

52 comments
  1. *yawn* another Stupid story on confusing religious marriage and civil marriage. Not All churches are against gay marriage. Metropolitan Community Church, Unitarian Universalist Church, United Church of Christ have no problem with gay couples wanting get married in their church. Marriage Amendment would violate their religious liberty.

      1. Thanks for your civil posts.

        “Who’s to say these church are right or wrong”(?)

        God says. Not me. Not you. Not an opinon poll, Not a judge or president or governor or legislator. And he already has said, over and over in his Word.

      2. How would Know, Did God appointed you his representative or You’re making things up just to appease some lost souls.

      3. Did you even try to check on what these churches say, I was trying give some insight on what other churches say. If you were willing to open up.

      4. I have read what churches believe, that do not even accept the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, and the authority of Scriptures. Their viewpoints, since they reject the God they purport to believe, are without credibility.

    1. No one said that these decisions come from a church. We are not a theocracy. But governments are just as accountable to God as churches.

      I think it is you who is confused. There is nothing stopping those “churches” from doing a little hocus-pocus ceremony and saying they are “married” now, many of them already do. But God doesn’t recognize them, for “male and female he created them.” Neither should government recognize them as “married” for they are not.

      1. Why, Is it? because they’re different or because that text in Leviticus say it’s wrong. But That same book also say it wrong eat shellfish then why aren’t you protest Red Lobster. Come back with better argument with using God as way of self-aggrandizement.I think People like like you forget how think with compassion like Jesus. I could go on and on.

      2. Your arguments do not follow. The laws of Iowa, for example, deal with all kinds of issues that would appear to be irrelevant to the masses. Laws can all be just, but not of the same sort. Comparing the eating of shellfish with the Created order is not only foolish it is an attack upon the veracity of Scripture, which one claiming to represent his bride should not do.

      3. The point if you believe in Bible word for word you can’t pick and choose which part to follow or ignore. You Prove my point about People who tout morality don’t practice what they preach, If you’re smart you can look out all of scandal of the Televangelist caught variety of scandals.

      4. The issue with civil marriage is not whether God recognizes it, but whether the state does.

        Given Jesus’ pronouncements on marriage after divorce, should the state not recognize those marriages? I don’t understand why people who are so adament on keeping same-sex couples from marrying are generally silent on divorced people getting married.

        Also, there are Muslims and Jews who will argue that God has prohibited the consumption of pork. Should the state get involved in enforcing that prohibition?

      5. Another red herring. If you read the tenor of both my article and the original article, the relationship of divorce to this issue is quite apparent. Another day, another post.

      6. “male and female he created them.”

        Genesis 2. Immediately after the bit saying how God created a Flat Earth with a beaten metal dome (see “Firmament”) over it to keep out the waters above, and little lights inset in it which are called stars. Two big ones too, the sun and the moon. A dome that has valves in so when the windows of heaven are open, it rains. And with storehouses of snow and hail above them, as described in Job.

        This is not an attack on the Bible; it does show though that it should not be considered an infallible authority on matters astronomical, or biological.

      7. “male and female he created them.”

        Genesis 2. Immediately after the bit saying how God created a Flat Earth with a beaten metal dome (see “Firmament”) over it to keep out the waters above, and little lights inset in it which are called stars. Two big ones too, the sun and the moon. A dome that has valves in so when the windows of heaven are open, it rains. And with storehouses of snow and hail above them, as described in Job.

        This is not an attack on the Bible; it does show though that it should not be considered an infallible authority on matters astronomical, or biological.

      8. “male and female he created them.”

        Genesis 2. Immediately after the bit saying how God created a Flat Earth with a beaten metal dome (see “Firmament”) over it to keep out the waters above, and little lights inset in it which are called stars. Two big ones too, the sun and the moon. A dome that has valves in so when the windows of heaven are open, it rains. And with storehouses of snow and hail above them, as described in Job.

        This is not an attack on the Bible; it does show though that it should not be considered an infallible authority on matters astronomical, or biological.

      9. I think NASA would disagree on the cosmology, which is straight from babylonian sources.

        Genesis 1:25-27 states humans were created after animals were. Genesis 2:18-19 says the opposite.

        Genesis 5:3-18 says Enoch was the 6th son from Adam, as does Like 3:37-38. But Jude 14 says the 7th.

      10. Genesis also says that life lived on land before it lived in the sea, and birds before mammals and reptiles, and plants existed before the sun did. Reality says otherwise.

        Unless we’re talking Sega Genesis.

      11. “male and female he created them.”

        Genesis 2. Immediately after the bit saying how God created a Flat Earth with a beaten metal dome (see “Firmament”) over it to keep out the waters above, and little lights inset in it which are called stars. Two big ones too, the sun and the moon. A dome that has valves in so when the windows of heaven are open, it rains. And with storehouses of snow and hail above them, as described in Job.

        This is not an attack on the Bible; it does show though that it should not be considered an infallible authority on matters astronomical, or biological.

      12. “male and female he created them.”

        Genesis 2. Immediately after the bit saying how God created a Flat Earth with a beaten metal dome (see “Firmament”) over it to keep out the waters above, and little lights inset in it which are called stars. Two big ones too, the sun and the moon. A dome that has valves in so when the windows of heaven are open, it rains. And with storehouses of snow and hail above them, as described in Job.

        This is not an attack on the Bible; it does show though that it should not be considered an infallible authority on matters astronomical, or biological.

      13. “male and female he created them.”

        Genesis 2. Immediately after the bit saying how God created a Flat Earth with a beaten metal dome (see “Firmament”) over it to keep out the waters above, and little lights inset in it which are called stars. Two big ones too, the sun and the moon. A dome that has valves in so when the windows of heaven are open, it rains. And with storehouses of snow and hail above them, as described in Job.

        This is not an attack on the Bible; it does show though that it should not be considered an infallible authority on matters astronomical, or biological.

  2. There is absolutely nothing immoral about a loving homosexual couple—nothing. America is not and should not be a theocracy. No one cares who you worship in private, but really—do you need to push it in our faces (sarcasm intended)

    1. The Theocracy argument is also nonsense. Such a thing as “homosexual marriage” was hardly contemplated 20 years ago, yet this nation has never been established as Christian Nation, according to the First Amendment, yet alone a theocracy. Now you’re making it up.

  3. These people need to read my two groundbreaking books on the subject….”The Erotic Inadequacies of the Gay Pee Pee” and “Faggotry Can Be Cured”…they dispel a lot of the myths about the ‘moral equivalence’ of so called ‘gay marriage’

  4. I think that gay marriage should be put to a vote by the only people effected by it, the two gays who are about to enter holy matrimony. If one partner votes “I do” and the other partner votes “I do” they are now married. Simple as that.

    1. There is nothing “holy” about it. On the contrary, it is a fist-shaking act intended to challenge an Almighty God to bring judgement. God will not be mocked, whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap.

      1. This is a bogus argument. The Word of God is true and on many points doesn’t need special interpretation. I don’t “speak for him”. I can read and understand plain English, and you can, too. You just don’t like what God says.

      2. What Took you so long, Reply. Face You have no argument. Other then. You’re god’s ambassador. Kindly Back off. Let people who don’t subscribe to your foolish beliefs alone.

  5. Yes, we *do* need a legal definition of male and female if we are to reference those terms in law, because while “some things are self evident”, biological sex isn’t one of them. Not a tiny minority either, we’re talking about 1 in 60, 5 million people in the USA have bodies neither wholly male nor wholly female.

    And it’s complicated, as some of those with 5ARD or 17BHDD syndromes have a natural sex change. They are as God made them, to look like girls when born, but to masculinise later. Some can even father children afterwards. Changes in the reverse direction happen from other syndromes too.

    Try using chromosomes, XX for female, XY for male and you get cases like this:
    “A 46,XY mother who developed as a normal woman underwent spontaneous puberty, reached menarche, menstruated regularly, experienced two unassisted pregnancies, and gave birth to a 46,XY daughter with complete gonadal dysgenesis.” — J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Jan;93(1):182-9

    And 1 in 500 people who look male have 47XXY chromosomes, neither male nor female.

    You’re trying to do the legislative equivalent of dictating that Pi is equal to 3, or that the Earth is Flat.

    1. This is such a red herring. The Gender Recognition Act is not about science. It is about human self-destruction.
      The Act requires no proof of genetics. You are making it up.

  6. “Has God ever really Destroyed any country that allow (sic) gay marriage? No”

    Four points.

    First, how many countries have settled the issue? 1? 2?
    Second, do not presume upon God’s patience. He may be leaving room for repentance.
    Third, nations which have a famine of God’s word, are already under God’s judgment. “Gay Marriage” not only brings about judgement, it is judgment itself.
    Fourth, can you say “Sodom and Gomorrah”?

  7. “Has God ever really Destroyed any country that allow (sic) gay marriage? No”

    Four points.

    First, how many countries have settled the issue? 1? 2?
    Second, do not presume upon God’s patience. He may be leaving room for repentance.
    Third, nations which have a famine of God’s word, are already under God’s judgment. “Gay Marriage” not only brings about judgement, it is judgment itself.
    Fourth, can you say “Sodom and Gomorrah”?

    1. First Amendment Trumps all of that. Game Over, You lost. Even some the other churches are taking second look at of that. IF all of Christian has change their mind would be a Good Christian and follow them as you’re “told” too.

  8. See Littleton v. Prange, No. 99-1214 (Tex. 18 May 2000)

    “Taking this situation to its logical conclusion, Mrs. Littleton, while in San Antonio, Tex., is a male and has a void marriage; as she travels to Houston, Tex., and enters federal property, she is female and a widow; upon traveling to Kentucky she is female and a widow; but, upon entering Ohio, she is once again male and prohibited from marriage; entering Connecticut, she is again female and may marry; if her travel takes her north to Vermont, she is male and may marry a female; if instead she travels south to New Jersey, she may marry a male.”

    Because the court held that XY chromosomes make you male, even if you’ve given birth.

    By accusing me of making things up, you’re bearing false witness. Last time I looked, that was a violation of one of the ten commandments.

    I’m Intersexed, by the way. The diagnosis in 1985 was a mildly Intersexed male, the one in 2005 (when they had things like MRI scans, ultrasounds, and genetic testing) was that I was a severely intersexed female.

    It’s not a wonderful situation to be in, but fortunately Isaiah 56:3-5 tells us what we must do, and that a special reward awaits us in the hereafter because of all the malice and spite we endure here, often from deeply religious and even more deeply ignorant people.

  9. See Littleton v. Prange, No. 99-1214 (Tex. 18 May 2000)

    “Taking this situation to its logical conclusion, Mrs. Littleton, while in San Antonio, Tex., is a male and has a void marriage; as she travels to Houston, Tex., and enters federal property, she is female and a widow; upon traveling to Kentucky she is female and a widow; but, upon entering Ohio, she is once again male and prohibited from marriage; entering Connecticut, she is again female and may marry; if her travel takes her north to Vermont, she is male and may marry a female; if instead she travels south to New Jersey, she may marry a male.”

    Because the court held that XY chromosomes make you male, even if you’ve given birth.

    By accusing me of making things up, you’re bearing false witness. Last time I looked, that was a violation of one of the ten commandments.

    I’m Intersexed, by the way. The diagnosis in 1985 was a mildly Intersexed male, the one in 2005 (when they had things like MRI scans, ultrasounds, and genetic testing) was that I was a severely intersexed female.

    It’s not a wonderful situation to be in, but fortunately Isaiah 56:3-5 tells us what we must do, and that a special reward awaits us in the hereafter because of all the malice and spite we endure here, often from deeply religious and even more deeply ignorant people.

    1. I followed your references, not a one said that genetics is used to determine whether a person is a man or woman for the purposes of the Gender Recognition Act in the UK. So I stand by my statement that you are making that up. You are making up the statistic about 1 in 60 having both male and female bodies, too. Having hormones out of balance doesn’t change your gender anymore than me being fat makes me a pig (in my genetics or my species).

      1. Perhaps I didn’t make it clear – the GRA uses chromosomes to determine whether someone is transsexual or not. If they have cross-sexed or anomalous chromosomes from an Intersex condition, they cannot be transsexual, therefore cannot get a Gender Recognition Certificate.

        I’ll quote from the ICD-10
        Transsexualism (F64.0) has three criteria:

        1. The desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by the wish to make his or her body as congruent as possible with the preferred sex through surgery and hormone treatment
        2. The transsexual identity has been present persistently for at least two years
        3. The disorder is not a symptom of another mental disorder or a chromosomal abnormality ”

        As regards the 1 on 60 figure, see Anne Fausto-Sterling’s book “Sexing the Body” page 51, available on Google Books:
        “The figure we ended up with – 1.7% of all births – (see table 3.2) – should be taken as an order of magnitude estimate rather than a precise count”

        1 in 60 is a little under 1.7%

        This is also in accordance with similar results from the Intersex Society of North America. Note that Sax puts the figure much lower – but only by excluding the most common forms of Intersex, such as having 47XXY chromosomes instead of 46XX or 46XY, and indeed all syndromes not causing obviously ambiguous genitalia (and a few that do).

      2. Yes, you were not clear. If you are saying that you believe there are people that are genetically male and female (or neither, as it were) and that these folks are excluded from getting a GRA certificate, I am not sure what your quibble is with the original post. I am arguing that a simple declaration of desire or experience is the basis of allowing people to legally “change” thier gender and that it ignores reality in favor of fantasy.

        The debate about intersexuality was not my original point and though worthy of debate (I still disagree with your premise!), it is mostly irrelevant to the point.

  10. One thing:

    “Britain’s Gender Recognition Act allows transsexuals to falsify their birth certificates retroactively to indicate they were born the gender of their choice. ”

    Well, by that definition… so do 48 states of the USA, the first since 1955. Tennessee and Ohio are the only two states that don’t allow correction to birth certificates after transition. They also still have laws against mixed-race marriage on the books too, though these aren’t enforced.

    So much for it causing “same sex marriage” or “what is happening across the pond is likely to happen here:” In fact, the UK is following, belatedly, long-established practice in the US, some 50 years later.

Comments are closed.

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

Infographic: How Obamacare Impacts Iowa

The National Republican Senatorial Committee released an infographic that shows how Obamacare negatively impacts Iowa.

Legislators Should Follow Jason Chaffetz’s Example

Shane Vander Hart: Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) decided not to run for a 6th term so he could go into the private sector. Others should do the same.

12 Russian Intelligence Officers Indicted in DCCC, DNC, and Clinton Campaign Hack

A grand jury convened as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation returned an indictment against 12 Russian intelligence officers for their interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.

Grassley: Preserving The Second Amendment

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) defended the 2nd Amendment and introduced an amendment to strengthen the NICS background checks on the Senate floor.