As the American people celebrate an historic victory for Barack Obama as the next president, many Christians are marking victories of their own with the passage of several state amendments protecting traditional marriage.
U.S. voters in Florida and Arizona approved measures banning same-sex marriage. And in Arkansas, voters passed a measure banning unmarried couples, that would include homosexuals, from adopting children.
The vote on the marriage amendment in California, meanwhile, is still undecided with supporters of the gay-marriage ban celebrating early poll numbers while opponents argue that too many votes remained uncounted.
For Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel – a nonprofit organization that defends the sanctity of human life and traditional families – the passage of at least the marriage amendment in Florida was a "bright star on an otherwise dismal night, in which America elected the most liberal President in her history."
With Obama poised to step into the Oval Office, many Christians are keeping a wary eye on moral issues. Some are nervous about an Obama presidency and what that means for traditional families as well as the unborn.
"While we celebrate the transcendence of race as a dominant issue in U.S. politics – and the expiation of America's past racial sins represented by Obama's triumph – the truth is that Obama is a far-left ideologue on abortion and homosexuality," said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth about Homosexuality, in a statement Wednesday.
Meanwhile, the pro-gay group Family Equality Council called Obama's election a defining moment in history as it noted Obama as the "first presidential candidate to directly address LGBT family issues."
"President-Elect Obama’s victory is particularly meaningful for the millions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) parents raising children in this country and their extended family and friends," the council stated, adding that Obama had earlier written to the group "saying that we have 'to do more to support and strengthen LGBT families,' including 'equality in relationship, family and adoption rights.'"
But many Christians are still standing for pro-life and family issues and are encouraging others not to abandon the struggle.
"This is no time for surrender or the abandonment of our core principles," said preeminent evangelical R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky. "We should look for opportunities to work with the new President and his administration where we can. We must hope that he will lead and govern as the bridge-builder he claimed to be in his campaign. We must confront and oppose the Obama administration where conscience demands, but work together where conscience allows."
Abortion bans in Colorado and South Dakota were rejected and an assisted suicide measure was approved by Washington state voters.
"We must pray that God would change President-Elect Obama's mind and heart on issues of our crucial concern," Mohler urged. "May God change his heart and open his eyes to see abortion as the murder of the innocent unborn, to see marriage as an institution to be defended, and to see a host of issues in a new light."
RSS
It honestly and truly scares me how radical some Christians are. If not a secret race-based under tone that irks their viewpoints, then it is a sad nonacceptance of the reality of change. Get an education, get some social values, and get over it: the world was NOT created in 6 days, the bible is NOT to be followed literally, Obama is NOT the anti-christ, he will not purposely invade the homes of white women and slaughter the children in the womb, he will not make all things gay and fabulous, and he is not a muslim, nor an islamic supporter. He is a good man, and will be a good president; as would McCain if he was elected. Both hold values on key issues, only on opposite sides - but with the same passion. All these accusations that I have seen on CP comments represent an unfortunate epitome of the Christian intellect. I mean no harm, but most anti-Obama comments are so frivolous I can not help but shake my head.
To put all 'Christians' in one republican category and write as though they all believe Obama will end the world is absurd. No wonder the world continues its moral decay while people fight over such unnecessary things.
God must judge all sin, internal sins of the flesh as well as external sins of neglect of those who cannot help themselves. Jesus said if you love me keep my commandments. We as Believers must die to self, take up our cross and follow Our Lord where He lead us.
How about most of Europe? Japan? SE Asia? India? Not to mention the obvious: Kenya and the rest of Africa. They are all celebrating - especially that that fool Bush is headed out!
Obama will not abandon Israel. But I hope he will not continue to help them finance their terrorism against the Palestinians. Israel treats the Palestinians the way we Anglos treated the native Americans: as sub-humans.
hlerwin, you're right you can't and especially since you reject a majority of the Bible's teachings yourself!:)
"Today, you can bask in the realization that there are billions of people around the planet who loathed our country last week but are now in awe of its capacity to rise above historic fears."
And you'll realize that most of those are Islamic countries. I bet Israel's not celebrating....
Second post -
I agree with two sentiments I read in today's newspaper:
(1)
In Arizona, where same-sex marriage was already against the law, the victory for Proposition 102, which amends the State Constitution, was met with a shrug by some. "I think the country was like, 'Look, you get Obama. Call it a day, and go home,'" said Kyrsten Sinema, a Democratic state representative who led opponents against Proposition 102. "And, frankly, I'll take that, she added.
and
(2)
Today, you can bask in the realization that there are billions of people around the planet who loathed our country last week but are now in awe of its capacity to rise above historic fears.
END QUOTES
I am neither an ethnic minority nor gay, but I am confident that at the end of a 4- or 8-year Obama administration, all American ethnic minorities will be more empowered than ever, and gay people will have the right to marry whomever they wish.
I am a Christian (perhaps not passing the litmus test of many Christian on this Web site), but I know I cannot require all Americans to live by my religion's holy book.
For the record, I don't think people who are for one thing are necessarily for the other. They are two separate issues, though they have a similar basis in their root cause and justification.
Thank you for that post. I hate it when some christians assume if you are for gay marriage you are also for abortion. I, for one, am not as I think it damages the life of the mother forever as well.
I believe that the ban against gay marriages should never be considered on the same plane as abortion. One is a private matter of love of a small group of people, but the other is the deliberate intention to take away life by the remaining 95% of straight folks. All the losses were abortion issues which is not good news at all.
www.psa91.com
Christians are too busy following what other people are doing in their bedrooms....why aren't we feeding the poor, the hungry, the widows and the orphans. Half the world is suffering in extreme poverty and environmental degradation and we are worried about whether two people who love each other should have the right to marry?? What would Jesus think about we who have usurped his surname and run around persecuting others for being who they are? I think He would be ashamed and I wouldn't want to be ANYWHERE near any of those "Christians" when the roll is finally called up yonder. Open your eyes, people. There is a hungry world out there and God is watching. Do something useful with your time and energy. Don't waste it on a small percentage of folks with whom you disagree. Whether their marriage is right or wrong is ultimately for God to decide, not you. You were NOT put in charge. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to love one another and love God with all your heart. Anything less is unacceptable. And if others think that Christians are a bunch of high-minded folks who persecute others, then we have a much bigger problem to deal with than who's getting married down the street.
Dr J
PS - you were just reported to Christian Post, they can track your IP address and delete you should you choose to continue
Mike22685 - What ever caused you to be attracted to men sexually, you can be delivered from it. God can take care of what went wrong that resulted in you being attracted to men sexually and restore to you the innate desire for women that He designed your body to have. If He offered it to you, would you be interested or would you reject it?
God is love but He also is a God of judgment. Die in your sins and you will perish.
Mike,
You're blinded to truth and bitter.
God is love, but He is so much more. God has life in Himself (John 5:26). God is self-sufficient (Psalm 50:8-13 ). God is forgiving (Psalm 85:2). God is eternal (Psalm 90:2). God does not change (Malachi 3:6 ). God is faithful, righteous and just (Dt 32:4). God demands obedience (1 John 5:3). God will judge (Romans 2:16).
Oh, and if you think I'm in a corner, you're more blind to truth than I thought. I'm not in a corner. Homosexual sex is a sin, even the desire is shameful according to God. It's not me who will face God and try to claim it wasn't clear in His word that homosexual sex was a sin - its you. And I truly wish mercy upon you when you do so.
Mike,
Actually, I added nothing to the text. That's simply a different translation, which does a dynamic translation (which means translates the idea rather than word for word). The message is identical to the literal text - it is talking about sex between men and men or women and women being a sin.
Bottom line - no gay marriage in California. Get over it.
Alcoholics don't choose to be alcoholics but the they DO choose whether to take that first drink. Same thing.
Mike - who you would or wouldn't prefer to marry is of no moment. The majority do not have to change social constructs regarding marriage which are thousands of years old, just to appease the deviate desires of a very small, abeit loud, minority. The same rules apply to all so it's not discrimination.
Alcoholics and drug addicts don't choose to be addicts. But they DO choose to act upon their desires. God is clear that being drunk is wrong.
Ephesians 5:18 Don't be drunk with wine, because that will ruin your life. Instead, be filled with the Holy Spirit
In the same way, homosexuals choose to act upon their desires, and God is clear that to do so is sin.
Romans 1:26-28
26 That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. 27 And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved. 28 Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done.
Penitent, gays do not choose to be gay, and so therefore why would I marry a woman? I am not at all sexually attracted to women. Your argument makes no sense whatsoever.
Sorry jew but you're just wrong here. With interratial marriage laws the whte man had a right the black man didn't - the right to marry a white woman. The discrimination between whites and blacks was purely and patently racial. With gay marriage prohibition the rights of gays and straights are the exact same. Either can marry the opposite sex and neither can marry the same sex. Each has the exact same right with regard to marriage. You are using a facile analysis of law in an attempt to expand the concept of discrimination.
yes, plus the difference with interracial marriage is that as long as it is one man and one woman united as one for life it fits God's design for marriage as well.
Oh, yes I am a Jew, I must respond. The framework is not separate as you indicate. Upon the founding of the country, a church met on government property in the US Capitol for many years. The separation was keeping government from meddling in church matters, not keeping the church out of government matters. The church was an integral part of the society, honored as such. There are Biblical inscriptions on virtually all of our monuments from that day and for over a hundred and fifty years after. We have seen those who oppose religious expression try to modify history and the Constitution in our day, but the history is there. Religious expression as an integral part of the society, and yes, and the government. The government, on the other hand, prevented from meddling in church matters. That is what we inherited and have proceeded to confuse, destroy, and deny.
Yes_I_am_a_Jew,
"I don't see how you're distinguishing interracial marriage from gay marriage."
Race is an immutable human characteristic. Homosexuality is mutable behavior. If you allow the latter, then you must allow other forms of behavior as a basis for marriage, such as polygamy, incestual relationships, etc.
ThePenitent, again, you're just wrong. I don't see how you're distinguishing interracial marriage from gay marriage. The US Supreme Court has held a number of times that there is a fundamental right to marry inherent to each citizen who is of legal age to do so. This right was not enumerated with modifiers attached such as gender or race.
The bottom line is that you're playing coy with the law and rights, which is reprehensible. If you want to say that gays don't deserve the right to marry or enter into domestic partnerships then just say so. Don't, disingenuously, claim that they have the right to marry but only to a member of the opposite sex. It's as if you're eliminating all religions other than Islam, making their practice illegal, and still claiming that there's freedom of religion.
Yes_I_am_a_Jew,
If your view is correct, then murderers have a constitutional right to murder. I'm sure you disagree with that because you believe that murder is immoral. This is also the issue with gay marriage. The fact is that no laws are morally neutral; they're all examples of someone's moral views being legislated. So, yes, the morality of the faith/religion/worldview which is dominant in society is the one that becomes law.
The framework of our government is NOT "that religion and governance are relegated to separate spheres". Where do you get this idea? Passing a law is not the same thing as establishing a religion. If these spheres are supposed to be separated, then why did the Founding Fathers as members of Congress vote to print Bibles for the Indians? Why were there church services
held in the Capitol for years around the turn of the 18th century?
No, the logic is sound. A black man can say he is being denied the right a white man is (or vice versa) in the case of banning interracial marriage. However a gay man has the exact same rights a straight man does - the right to marry any woman who will have them.
So far I've had luck reaching some kind of consensus on other articles so I'll do my best on this one.
ID4234, the point is not that you cannot take your faith into consideration when voting. The point is rather instituting your faith as policy, which is binding upon others outside of your faith. Clearly there are some law abiding, tax-paying citizens who are homosexual, which is their right. The framework of our government is such that religion and governance are relegated to separate spheres and as such it is both inappropriate and unconstitutional to legislate solely based upon religious ideals. To do so would be to de facto establish a religion via the state and that's not allowed.
ThePenitent, unfortunately your logic is flawed. Let's recast your assertion in a different time and place. Suppose we're in the midst of the civil rights era and you're in an interracial relationship. You want to marry the person you love but there's a law against interracial marriage. You complain that your right to marry the person you choose has been violated. Someone, using your logic, replies that you have the same rights as everyone, namely the right to marry a person within your race. Hardly seems to be an acceptable answer in that context, just as it isn't an acceptable answer in this context.
Actually, there is nothing discriminatory about the amendment which passed. (Prop 8) - everybody has exactly the same rights under the amendment. All males can marry a woman and all women can marry a man. No discrimination. To argue otherwise is like saying child molest laws discriminate against pedophiles.
Mike,
Christians have every right to vote their convictions and to vote Biblical values. We are to love all people but that does not include condoning what the Holy Book makes clear is unacceptable in the sight of Holy, Righteous God. We can't do that even if it would be convenient for us to do so. We are people of the Book. And we have the same voting rights as others.
Mike,
I agree that being gay in the sense of having homosexual attractions is not a sin, however acting on those attractions in the form of lust or behavior is a sin. This seems to be the clear teaching of Scripture, wouldn't you agree?
Loving, I am not trying to justify my sins as being gay is not a sin. I am annoyed that discrimination has been written into constitutions, something our founding fathers would be disgusted at. If the supreme court rules something is unconsititutional so you rally millions of dollars to try and make it so, you are abusing the system and playing on mob mentality.
Mike, Listen up. Do not try to justify your sins. I have my own struggles, but at least I am not trying to justify my sins. I know how hard it is to repent of sins. How difficult it is to admit the fact that I am a sinner! But please be saved, when God's grace is still available for you.
"We must pray that God would change President-Elect Obama's mind and heart on issues of our crucial concern," Mohler urged. "May God change his heart and open his eyes to see abortion as the murder of the innocent unborn, to see marriage as an institution to be defended, and to see a host of issues in a new light."
Amen! This is my prayer too and I encourage all my Christian brothers and sisters to join in this prayer as well.
mike22685, yes, it's ashame that those laws that would have limited the murder of unborn babies were defeated.
This brings to mind the famous Holocaust poem "first they came for..."
Christians have spent millions writing discrimination into state constitutions, and someday they will get their own. What goes around comes around, and I hope they appreciate their civil liberties while they still have them.