[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

46% of those deaths were occurring on the day of vaccination or within two days

In 2002 the US signed the Hague Invasion Act into law

MUSK is going after WOKE DISNEY!!!

Bondi: Zuckerberg Colluded with Fauci So "They're Not Immune Anymore" from 1st Amendment Lawsuits

Ukrainian eyewitnesses claim factory was annihilated to dust by Putin's superweapon

FBI Director Wray and DHS Secretary Mayorkas have just refused to testify before the Senate...

Government adds 50K jobs monthly for two years. Half were Biden's attempt to mask a market collapse with debt.

You’ve Never Seen THIS Side Of Donald Trump

President Donald Trump Nominates Former Florida Rep. Dr. Dave Weldon as CDC Director

Joe Rogan Tells Josh Brolin His Recent Bell’s Palsy Diagnosis Could Be Linked to mRNA Vaccine

President-elect Donald Trump Nominates Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture

Trump Taps COVID-Contrarian, Staunch Public Health Critic Makary For FDA

F-35's Cooling Crisis: Design Flaws Fuel $2 Trillion Dilemma For Pentagon

Joe Rogan on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine Aid

Joe Rogan on 62 year-old soldier with one arm, one eye

Jordan Peterson On China's Social Credit Controls

Senator Kennedy Exposes Bad Jusge

Jewish Land Grab

Trump Taps Dr. Marty Makary, Fierce Opponent of COVID Vaccine Mandates, as New FDA Commissioner

Recovering J6 Prisoner James Grant, Tells-All About Bidens J6 Torture Chamber, Needs Immediate Help After Release

AOC: Keeping Men Out Of Womens Bathrooms Is Endangering Women

What Donald Trump Has Said About JFK's Assassination

Horse steals content from Sara Fischer and Sophia Cai and pretends he is the author

Horse steals content from Jonas E. Alexis and claims it as his own.

Trump expected to shake up White House briefing room

Ukrainians have stolen up to half of US aid ex-Polish deputy minister

Gaza doctor raped, tortured to death in Israeli custody, new report reveals

German Lutheran Church Bans AfD Members From Committees, Calls Party 'Anti-Human'

Berlin Teachers Sound Alarm Over Educational Crisis Caused By Multiculturalism

Trump Hosts Secret Global Peace Summit at Mar-a-Lago!


Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: Pastors Prepare Pulpits for 'Marriage Protection Sunday'
Source: The Christian Post
URL Source: http://www.christianpost.com/articl ... rriage.protection.sunday/1.htm
Published: May 24, 2006
Author: Pauline J. Chang
Post Date: 2006-05-24 09:28:59 by Red Jones
Keywords: None
Views: 315
Comments: 28

Pastors Prepare Pulpits for 'Marriage Protection Sunday'

Christian and pro-family groups are creating a ''groundswell of support'' for traditional marriage among pastors and conservative churchgoers.

Wednesday, May. 24, 2006 Posted: 7:01:31AM EST

WASHINGTON – With less than two weeks remaining before the Federal Marriage Amendment hits the Senate floor, Christian and pro-family groups are creating a ''groundswell of support'' for traditional marriage among pastors and conservative churchgoers.

The Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention has dubbed June 4 “Marriage Protection Sunday,” and is requesting pastors to preach about gay marriage and encouraging Southern Baptists to tell their senators to vote for the amendment.

“Supporters of traditional marriage need to bombard their senators’ offices with e-mails and phone calls,” ERLC President Richard Land told Baptist Press, “and preachers across America need to let the pulpit ring forth in clear and no uncertain terms on Marriage Protection Sunday, June 4, and help create a groundswell of support for this amendment.

“I can assure you the opponents of traditional marriage are doing their best to let their voices be heard in the corridors of the Senate. It is up to us to let our voices be heard loudly as well,” he said.

The 16-million-member Southern Baptist Convention is among a host of familiar players in the same-sex marriage debate that has amplified the voice of “values-voters” in Washington. The denomination is working with a powerful pro-marriage amendment coalition that includes groups like Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council to foster support for the Senate resolution through mass-mailing, conference calls, and internet outreaches.

The Washington-based Family Research Council has already collected nearly 38,000 names in an online petition calling on U.S. Senators to preserve traditional marriage in America. The group hopes to gather 50,000 names by the week of June 5, when the Senate is slated to take up the measure.

Meanwhile, Focus on the Family Action has promoted a postcard campaign to get pastors involved in the effort. James Dobson, chairman of FOFA, joined with the Southern Baptist’s ERLC in sending an Apr. 12 letter to mobilize 43,600-plus Baptist churches around the issue.

Since the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized gay marriage in that state in 2004, pro-family leaders rallied for a national constitutional amendment that would protect traditional marriage in other states and overturn the notorious Massachusetts court decision.

They warn that without such an amendment, states would be powerless to protect its laws from being overturned by “activist judges.” They also call the issue “the most important” in the effort to protect families and preserve God’s will for mankind.

“Very few issues threaten the foundation of our culture as deeply as the same-sex marriage issue,” a statement from the ERLC read. “Help preserve God's design for marriage in the United States by supporting the Marriage Protection Amendment.”

Some recommendations for Marriage Protection Sunday include preaching about the issue on June 4 and distributing information on same-sex marriage. Lay Christians are encouraged to email, call, or hand-deliver mail to their senators, telling their representatives to pass the amendment.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on May 18 approved the Marriage Protection Amendment in a 10-8 party-line vote. The Senate is slated to discuss the amendment on June 5, and will likely vote on it by June 6 or 7.

Ratification of an amendment to the Constitution requires passage by two-thirds of both the Senate and the House, as well as approval by three-fourths of the states.

Neither houses of Congress came close to a two-thirds majority when a similar amendment was placed on the floor in 2004. Traditional marriage supporters are hoping that the new Republican-majority Congress will garner enough votes to pass this time around.

"We certainly don’t see any reason why we wouldn’t have more votes this time than last time,” Duke Barrett, vice president of the ERLC told BP. “The Senate is decidedly more conservative, certainly more Republican, than it was the last time. We believe that if enough senators hear from their constituents, the MPA can be passed.

"It’s obvious that a significant majority of Americans throughout the country do not want same-sex marriage," he said. "If that significant majority will communicate their convictions to their senators, the amendment should be passed.” >

Pauline J. Chang pauline@christianpost.com

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 28.

#2. To: Red Jones (#0)

I don't believe in gay marriage either, but I think these preachers should also be preaching against no fault divorce and living together without getting married and having kids out of wedlock. To be fair, those things are more hurtful to the institution of marriage and society in general than gay marriage.

mehitable  posted on  2006-05-24   11:26:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: mehitable (#2)

I wholeheartedly support marriage between any consenting adult. Government has no right to dictate who people love and who they wish to bond with.

Heterosexual marriage is a train wreck - has been for decades - with divorce, marginalization through contract marriage, and other problems endemic to it that have reduced it's value and impact as a bond to use as a foundation for relationships and families. These people picking on others in a wedge issue fashion for their own power base building purposes need to worry first about their own problems before they worry about those they perceive in others.

I know several couples - mostly women couple as Eugene is a Mecca for lesbians on the West Coast - and if they consider themselves married, I do to. And I am proud to do so.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-05-24   11:57:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Ferret Mike (#3)

I have to disagree with you there. To me marriage is not just about a relationship between 2 people. It's the building block of an entire society. There is no societal value or benefit to two gay or lesbian people getting "married". It may make them feel good, but it has no real societal benefit. The need for marriage - why it exists - is to provide a stable framework for raising children and transmitting knowledge, information, and property across generations. That's why it exists. It doesn't exist to make people feel good, or for tax benefits, or for insurance - all of those things are definitely secondary and if you eliminated ALL of them, there would STILL be a need for some formal, communal recognition of marriage to promote a stable society based on families.

I think when people support things like gay marriage, what they are really saying is that they no longer understand what marriage is or why it exists, or why it is important to society. It's part of the selfishness and short sightedness of our society that cannot see beyond the gratifications of its own immediate needs.

mehitable  posted on  2006-05-24   13:15:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: mehitable (#5)

"I have to disagree with you there. To me marriage is not just about a relationship between 2 people. It's the building block of an entire society. There is no societal value or benefit to two gay or lesbian people getting "married"."

Happy people whose relationships are protected has incredibly high societal value. If two people build a life together, they deserve all the tool needed to access the benefits they have earned as employees and citizens.

"The need for marriage - why it exists - is to provide a stable framework for raising children and transmitting knowledge, information, and property across generations."

I see. Then people who are not able to bear young should not be allowed to marry then according to your premise. Many lesbian, gay and trans-gendered people have great skills and offer benefits to society and they should be allowed the human dignity to form a marriage with whom they chose.

The APA did great research that shows people do not chose to be homosexual and are completely normal on all respects. The only difference being their gender preference. Those growing up imprinted with a preference for same gender sex deserve role models and mentors too.

"I think when people support things like gay marriage, what they are really saying is that they no longer understand what marriage is or why it exists, or why it is important to society. It's part of the selfishness and short sightedness of our society that cannot see beyond the gratifications of its own immediate needs."

I see scapegoating and mean spirited bigotry when I see sentiment against a basic right like this being granted. It is selfish and myopic to oppress people and not allow them full expressions of themselves and their relationships, not the other way around.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-05-24   16:06:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Ferret Mike (#7)

Mike, you can rage on and on about the nonsense of gay marriage for days - it doesn't matter. In the scheme of any society, there is no purpose for gay marriage. The sole reason marriage exists at all is to provide a framework for raising children and transmitting property. That's it. That is ALL it's ever existed for. It has nothing to do with the happiness of individuals or tax benefits or insurance or anything else. The assumption, based on common sense and experience is that the vast majority of hetero couples will have children in the natural course of their relationship and so we recognize this and create a system that enhances and supports this. The same is not true for gay couples. Maybe there could be some kind of societal recognition of these relationships, but it is not nor will it ever be...marriage. THat's just reality.

See while folks like you go on and on with your lovely bubble like theory of how life should be and how people should behave, reality comes in like a bear and bites us all in the ass. Reality is the declining demographics in virtually every western country that will eventually doom us to extinction because we are simply too foolish and silly to recognize what people have known for ages - that marriage is for raising children, not for self fulfillment. In our quest for self fulfillment and happiness we doom future generations to extinction.

There is no future in gay marriage. It's a stupid and inherently meaningless concept.

mehitable  posted on  2006-05-24   16:36:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: mehitable (#8)

"Mike, you can rage on and on about the nonsense of gay marriage for days - it doesn't matter."

Raging? Whose raging, I thought I was discussing. ;-D

"See while folks like you go on and on with your lovely bubble like theory of how life should be and how people should behave, reality comes in like a bear and bites us all in the ass. Reality is the declining demographics in virtually every western country that will eventually doom us to extinction because we are simply too foolish and silly to recognize what people have known for ages - that marriage is for raising children, not for self fulfillment. In our quest for self fulfillment and happiness we doom future generations to extinction."

Au contraire, it is folks like you trying to force people not to be as they are, not me. Demographics in developed countries change because people start reacting to their perceived future and quality of life. Homosexual people do not factor into how many children are born.

You are either gay or lesbian or not. You can't be made homosexual, and homosexuals cannot be made into heterosexuals. Only those with a preconceived agenda constructs fiction around the notion that is possible.

Baiters and haters want to make people they are bigoted against miserable. They want to change the unchangeable. The use of Homosexuals as a wedge issue is meant to spook the herds into accepting an agenda of beliefs and an ideological slant they otherwise might have too much good sense to pay attention to.

The wedge issue makers feel the serendipity to this wedge issue is that it makes people miserable and makes some hate themselves. Much as studies during the worst of the Negroes in the Jim Crow era showed many Blacks preferred white skin to their own because of the self loathing bigotry imparted on them.

I live in Oregon and watched the whole thing happen up in Portland, and the only pathetic and wanting people I saw were those pro-actively baiting and hating those they wished to strong arm into silence.

Anyone who wishes to for a relationship and formalize it should. It allows the access to that they worked hard for, helps protect their rights and well being, and it isn't anyone else's business but their own.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-05-24   16:52:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Ferret Mike (#10)

You're right - I shouldn't have used the word "raging" - it was a poor choice of words. I'm not quite sure what the right one would be in this context - maybe obsessing :)

I think you are totally misunderstanding my point. I don't care if people are gay or not. I don't think there should be laws against being gay, nor am I personally in favor of discriminating against them in most situations. And yes...many of my best friends are gay (or have been).

Marriage is about a function. That function is about having children and building the future and keeping society going. Marriage provides a stable framework for that and for the building and transmission of assets. The overwhelming majority of hetero couples will have children. Marriage serves them in the function of helping to raise and support those children. That is all marriage is for and all it ever was for. PERIOD. That's it. Other than that - why would anyone bother to get married?

There is NO POINT in marriage for gays as they do not inherently produce children in the context of their own relationships. Gays are not the future of any society. They may enrich it, but they don't keep it going. That's just the reality. People defy reality at the risk of extinction.

mehitable  posted on  2006-05-24   17:04:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: mehitable (#14)

"Marriage is about a function. That function is about having children and building the future and keeping society going. Marriage provides a stable framework for that and for the building and transmission of assets. The overwhelming majority of hetero couples will have children. Marriage serves them in the function of helping to raise and support those children. That is all marriage is for and all it ever was for. PERIOD. That's it. Other than that - why would anyone bother to get married?"

Marriage is about relationships. If what you say it true, then there would be marriage for futile heterosexual couples of child bearing years only.

Not only that, but many lesbian and gay people have children themselves by artificial means or from past relationships built on trying to appease a prejudicial society. Therefore, the line item - not pivotal - role of estate planning is an issue endemic and of concern to the entire human race, not just fertile, child bearing heterosexual couples.

And as far as the point of anybody goes, everyone is part of the past, present and future of the human species and it's society. And whether a child is a consequence of the relationship between two people at the moment, a past one or is adopted, they are are equally important and deserve equal consideration in terms of who is who in any family.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-05-24   17:24:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Ferret Mike (#17)

Well, we're never going to see eye to eye on this. I just want you to know that my position isn't based on any hatred of gays, but just on my belief that marriage serves a function which is not primarily served by gay relationships. Apparently most gays agree with me, as when they have the option to marry or have a contractual relationship, the overwhelming majority choose not to. Therefore, it must not serve a purpose for most of them the way it does for heterosexuals.

mehitable  posted on  2006-05-24   18:08:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: mehitable (#19)

"I just want you to know that my position isn't based on any hatred of gays, but just on my belief that marriage serves a function which is not primarily served by gay relationships."

Bigotry has many levels to it. I note you are not exceptionally hateful or intolerant, that's about it.

" Apparently most gays agree with me, as when they have the option to marry or have a contractual relationship, the overwhelming majority choose not to. Therefore, it must not serve a purpose for most of them the way it does for heterosexuals. "

And of course yours' is a scientific study of this in terms of numbers and reasons, right? Not convincing an opinion in terms of statistics and reasons anyone does anything. Building a false premise on skewed thinking and statistics is an interesting game, but I do not find you convincing.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-05-24   18:16:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Ferret Mike (#24)

P.S. No, it's not about "relationships". It's about having children and bringing them up in a stable, legal framework. It's about transmitting knowledge and assets across generations. The relationships aspect is absolutely meaningless in terms of the societal need for legal marriage. Otherwise, most people could simply either live together, or have a handfasting, or have a church ceremony. It's when you have children that legal marriage becomes a need for an entire society.

mehitable  posted on  2006-05-24   18:24:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: mehitable (#26)

"It's about having children and bringing them up in a stable, legal framework."

To reiterate a point: Gay and lesbian people have kids too, and those kids deserve a right to not have their family in turmoil and to be jeopardized by a lack of legal protection that occurs due to bigotry.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-05-24   18:54:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 28.

        There are no replies to Comment # 28.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 28.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]