The Obama Administration Comes Out of the Closet on Marriage

Barack Obama declared throughout the 2008 presidential campaign that “marriage was between one man and one woman.” During that same period, he expressed strong support for homosexuality and the right of homosexuals to civil unions and other benefits.

Many of us were confused by his stance. Was he trying to walk the fence–pleasing homosexuals on one hand by strongly supporting and encouraging their sexual rights–but also trying to capture Judeo-Christian voters by speaking up for traditional marriage? Or was he truly conflicted in his mind about whether homosexuals should be allowed to alter the five thousand year definition of marriage?

We do not know the man’s heart.  But now we do know that he stands opposed to all forty-four presidents before him on the issue of marriage.  We also know that he is neither a Christian or a Muslim on the subject.  As I have stated for two years, in policy, he is a secularist. His position on marriage is not only anti-Christian, it is against the moral teachings of every major religion in the world.

Furthermore, we know that he is desperate to activate his base in order to win the 2012 presidential election. Because on February 23, the Obama Administration came out of the closet on marriage by saying they would no longer defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

By doing so they have thrown down the gauntlet on the most important moral issue of the 21st century.

This is a stunning development–worthy of our prayers and attention. For five millenia wise and civil societies have built their social fabric on the God-given concept that the joining together of a man and a woman in the blessing and protection of marriage is essential to stable societies and the nurturing of children.

Only one worldview–atheism/secularism–which accepts no moral absolutes–has ever rationalized the crucial nature and definition of the marriage relationship.

The secularists in Europe have made vast inroads on this issue over the past forty years. Homosexual marriage has been growing steadily in popularity there. Now America, once the world’s most Christian and free nation, is following the European path to dissolving the sanctity of marriage.

We now know that the 2012 US Presidential election will not just be about our economic woes or uncertainty in the Middle East.

The issue of marriage will be front and center.

Marriage must be saved.

The secularist assault on morality must be stopped.

The New York Times said about the president’s about-face: “Although President Obama drew much criticism from gay righ advocates during his first two years for dragging his feet on their most important issues, they now see him shifting his positions as he looks at the 2012 elections. The president has calculated that the benefits of responding to his base out weigh the risks of upsetting conservatives who wouldn’t vote for him anyway. The president’s views on homosexual marriage are ‘evolving.'”

This is why the response to the Obama Administration’s coming out of the closet on marriage brought such swift and powerful reaction from the people of faith.

I am a board member of the National Association of Evangelicals–the largest consortium of Christian leaders and churches in America. Following the Obama Administration’s about-face on marriage, NAE President Leith Anderson issued this statement to our members:

“We are at a crossroads in the fight to defend traditional marriage.  Attorney General Holder’s announcement on Feb. 23 that the administration will no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in federal court is a break with the time honored tradition in which the Justice Department works to uphold laws passed by Congress.  Congress now needs to step in and hire its own lawyers to defend traditional marriage—IF we can convince them to do so.  Congress must act within 30 days, or it will lose the right to defend DOMA in the courts.”
 
“Traditional marriage is fundamental to healthy families and a healthy society. This is a critical moment!  Let’s flood Congress with calls and letters, asking them to act now to defend traditional marriage.  The NAE has a new website where you can go to find the names and addresses of your legislators:  www.nae.net/advocacy. You can write them directly from our site!  I encourage you to take a minute to do so right now.” 
 
I am grateful of Leith Anderson’s leadership. I encourage to respond to his trumpet call to action.
 
The highly respected Heritage Foundation also chimed in on the need to save the institution of marriage. Here is their sobering message:

“This Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder sent his own version of a “Dear John” letter to the Speaker of the House, informing him that President Barack Obama’s Justice Department will no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in federal court. The letter clearly states that the decision was personally made by the President himself, who, supposedly just this week, came to the conclusion that DOMA violates “the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment” of the U.S Constitution. This purely partisan act is completely consistent with both President Obama’s unprecedented politicization of the Justice Department and the same-sex marriage movement’s end-run around for democracy.”

“DOMA was enacted by overwhelming majorities of both houses of Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996. DOMA has two core provisions. First, it defines the words marriage, spouse, husband, and wife wherever they appear in the U.S. Code as referring only to the union of a man or a woman. Second, it defends the right of each state not to be forced to accept the redefinition of marriage in a handful of other states as a result of state court decisions or laws. Nearly 40 states have enacted state-level DOMAs, and 31 have embraced traditional marriage in their state constitutions. No state’s voters have ever voted to the contrary.”

“President Obama knows all of this. He also knows that his Administration’s litany of failures (unemployment above 8 percent, Guantanamo still open, exploding debt, etc.) has weakened him politically. By now asserting that there is no rational case for defending marriage as the union of one man and one woman, President Obama is echoing the claims of same-sex marriage advocated who portray the defenders of traditional marriage as irrational and bigoted. Nothing could be further from the truth. As Heritage Foundation Senior Research Fellow Chuck Donovan explains, defense of traditional marriage is not only rational but a cornerstone of civil society:”

    “‘Marriage is the cornerstone in an archway of values that form the constitution of the family and the foundation of civil society. To its advocates as an institution with a pre-political meaning, it is not an entity created by the state but rather one recognized by the state. It is not about one family, but the coming together of two families, whose role in begetting and bearing children make them not merely part of a community but the creators of community. The community they create is not time-bound, but existing across generations.  … What is at stake is the whole task of society to ensure that as many children as possible are raised by their mothers and fathers.'”

“There is one silver lining in the President’s decision to call the vast majority of Americans who believe in traditional marriage bigots: Congress now has the opportunity to offer a real defense of marriage in court. Up to this date, the Obama Administration’s fraudulent defense of DOMA in federal court has been characterized by even supporters of same-sex marriage as “collusive litigation.” Congress should defend its rights as a co-equal branch of government under the United States Constitution and fight for marriage.”

“This does not mean that Congress needs to vote on DOMA again. DOMA is still good law. It does mean that Congress needs to act to make sure DOMA has effective and aggressive defense in court. Members of Congress, should seek to intervene in the case to assure that DOMA gets the vigorous defense that should be afforded to all federal statutes for which reasonable legal arguments may be offered—and that the President is refusing to provide.”

As Heritage points out, not only has the president turned his back on traditional marriage–the backbone of American society–but he has also chosen to selectively enforce the laws of the land–a direct affront to his oath of office. This greatly weakens the traditional strength of our three branches of government.

The Obama Administration wants to dictate to the US Supreme Court and Congress.

The Family Research Council also decried the administration’s position:

“Family Research Council condemned the decision today by President Obama that the U.S. Justice Department will abdicate its responsibility and no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. The Defense of Marriage Act, (DOMA) enacted overwhelmingly by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, is currently under attack in the courts.”

“Family Research Council President Tony Perkins made the following comments regarding the decision: ‘This decision by President Obama and the Department of Justice is appalling. The President’s failure to defend DOMA is also a failure to fulfill his oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States. What will be the next law that he will choose not to enforce or uphold?’

“‘Marriage as a male-female union has been easily defended in court and overwhelmingly supported by the American people. There is absolutely no excuse beyond pandering to his liberal political base for President Obama’s decision to abandon his constitutional role to defend a federal law enacted overwhelmingly by Congress.'”

“‘With this decision the President has thrown down the gauntlet, challenging Congress. It is incumbent upon the Republican leadership to respond by intervening to defend DOMA, or they will become complicit in the President’s neglect of duty,’ concluded Perkins.”

If you do not believe that we are truly in a fight for the heart and soul of our civilization, then you need to think again.

The battle for slavery was the great moral issue of the 19th century. We won–after a bloody Civil War. Abortion was the greatest moral evil of the latter part of the 20th century. We are getting close to reversing it–and saving the lives of millions of children.

In the 21st century, the pillar of marriage is weak, crumbling, and about to be re-defined. This will produce disastrous consequences to us, our children, and our grandchildren if we allow its demise.

I ask you pray, make phone calls, and rise up to strengthen and re-establish the institution of marriage in your nation. Start with your own. get active in your state and nation.

The Obama Administration has come out of the closet on marriage.

We must repent of our apathy, seek God’s forgiveness, and through his strength and guidance–put this looming danger back into the shadows where it properly belongs.

“Well Done Faithful Friends of Marriage & Family”

REFERENDUM 71 COUNTY VOTES       

APPROVE COUNTIES ARE GREEN (52.95%) REJECT COUNTIES ARE YELLOW (47.05%)

I want to thank and encourage all those who worked for the rejection of Referendum 71 in Washington State during the recent election. We lost that battle by a small margin, but what you accomplished is lasting and will bear great fruit.

There is Someone far greater than I who says to your heart “Well done, good and faithful servant. You were faithful in a few things. I will put you in charge of many things. Enter into the rest of your Master” (Matthew 25:21).

The things we do for a Higher Purpose are never in vain. They create faith and character in our own lives, they positively impact the lives of others, and they lay the foundations for future victories and accomplishments that will glorify God and benefit people.

We lost this particular battle, but the war is not over. There will be many other victories and defeats along the way of our short lives here on earth. In the end, good will triumph and every tear will be wiped away. Until then, we need to be steadfast and continue to seek his kingdom and his righteousness.

Some thought we shouldn’t have entered this particular battle. I humbly disagree. There were many battles, I’m sure that General George Washington would have preferred to sit out during the American Revolutionary War such as the battles for New York and Germantown. They ended in defeat. But God used those skirmishes to prove and refine the army to persevere toward the ultimate goal of winning the war. Some battles you don’t choose–it’s just right to stand up for liberty in all situations and places.

There will always be battles we win and some we lose. We must always keep our eyes on the bigger picture–in this case, the war for our society and culture. In a fallen world, we may even lose the larger war for periods of time (think of Israel’s Old Testament roller coaster of renewal and decline), but the final triumph of good over evil is as certain as the dawn.

We must always persevere knowing that right–in Christ–is the Ultimate Victor.

We accomplished a minor miracle in the Referendum 71 battle–collecting over 125,000 signatures in a matter of weeks. Well done!

We mobilized up to 200,000 people to get involved in the great cause of preserving marriage and protecting children. A small grassroots awakening has begun, and if we continue to keep our fires lit and expanding, then a bon-fire of blessing can burst onto the scene. Well done!

Many of you practiced your civic and ethical duty by putting up signs, handing out leaflets, contributing to media adds, and waving signs at sidewalk rallies and small parades. The Slavic churches reminded us that freedom is a precious thing to retain and nurture in any society. They led the way in a number of our communities and by their actions taught the truth that “freedom is not the ability to do want you want, but the wisdom to do you ought.” Well done!

Some of our compatriots sat out this particular issue because they’ve bought the popular idea that any kind of sex is okay if there is “commitment and love.” I’m proud of you that you see the fallacy of that argument–that consenting adults doesn’t make it okay. From a five thousand year moral consensus standpoint, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, pedophilia, and bestiality are all wrong.  They are destructive to adults, hurtful to kids, and separate us from God. On the contrary, you understand the real definition of love which is: “Doing what’s best for another person from God’s point of view.” That doesn’t include any of the above actions under any circumstances. For your clarity of vision, well done!

Thank you for your attitude that you showed in this debate. I know that the media and others try to paint the picture that you are bigoted, narrow, and unloving in trying to preserve one-man-one woman marriage. They say you are homo phobic. Now I’m sure that somewhere on the American fringe some homo phobic people exist. But I’ve personally never met one–and I know that description doesn’t fit you. You simply care deeply for people, believe in the institution of marriage, and especially don’t want to see children wrongly influenced or suffer in any way due to the break-up of the traditional home. As our flyer explained “every person needs a mom and a dad.” You believe that passionately and want everyone to experience its reality and blessing.

Thank you also for loving those who are engaged in homosexual acts and may never understand your heart for them. Many of them are your friends, just as you have friends that fornicate or commit adultery, or lie or steal. You don’t wish any of them ill, you simply want them to turn from their destructive behavior and experience the grace and power of God to live a changed life–just like you have done. Some of you even persevered under some harassment and death threats made by hardened members of the homosexual community. You responded with kindness and prayed for your persecutors. Well done!

You kept the debate civil and focused. This issue was not ultimately about domestic partnerships, but at chipping away at the sacredness and uniqueness of marriage.  You saw through the deception and propaganda and took a stand for what’s right–in meekness and gentleness. Because of my own public profile in the campaign, I had homosexual activists dialing me up on my cell phone. One such trans gender leader named “Susan” who once was “Phil” was amazed that I didn’t hate homosexuals nor was trying to take away anybody’s rights. I simply believed in marriage between men and women and loved people enough to point them in the right direction. She/he and I had a productive hour’s conversation and agreed to meet for coffee to talk further. You also reached out in caring ways. Well done! 

As you know, we won the battle for public opinion in 29 of Washington’s 39 counties. If it weren’t for the Goliath of King County, we would have scored a solid victory for marriage and children. But we have allowed a large Greater-Seattle population move the state of Washington in a socially radical and secular direction. It is now up to us build a wall of prayer throughout the Emerald City stronghold, pour the love of Christ into its streets and neighborhoods, and bring people to faith and moral sanity within this large blue island in a red sea. That will take time, great effort, and supernatural power.

But I believe you can do it. Nothing is too great for the Author of marriage and family.

Be encouraged for the stand you’ve taken.

Well done!

Now on to the next battle with faith, hope, and love.

 

 

Things Are Not as They Seem

Sometimes things are not as they seem. They appear to be one thing, but in reality they are something far different from how they project themselves.

The United States is currently facing two immense cultural battles that fit in this category of intended deception. What’s an “intended deception?”

That’s the dictionary meaning of a LIE. So what are some areas where we are being lied to–where things are not as they seem?

HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE

 Seattle’s staunchly liberal newspaper, the Seattle Times, which is in business because it wasn’t as blatantly liberal as the now-defunct Seattle P.I.,  is in the forefront of pushing the acceptance of homosexual marriage in the state of Washington.  

On November 3, Washingtonians will have the opportunity to REJECT Senate bill 5688 through Referendum 71 which would elevate homosexual marriages to equality with marriage through expanded domestic partnerships. On the support side, the Times has been running one-to-two articles a week for some time championing the homosexual cause. An October 4, 2009 front-page lead article on the issue was entitled “Stakes High in Fight over Gay Rights.” To their credit, the article fairly quoted people on both sides of this monumental 21st century debate.

The Times’ Opinion Page was another story. It’s lead editorial said, “The Times recommends Promote Families: Approve Referendum 71. The article went on to applaud homosexual “unions” with the following semantical posturing:

  • They called homosexual-led “families” simply “ordinary people with ordinary family lives.”
  • They said SB 5688 was about “equal treatment for all Washington residents going about their private lives.”
  • They said their cause was about “responsible adults in committed relationships.”
  • They said passage of the new law was about “loving couples–our relatives, friends, and neighbors–who own property,, operate businesses, and take care of their children.”

I think you get the idea. This is all about loving, committed, ordinary folks who, by the way, simply want to change the five thousand definition of marriage–and have the state pay for it in benefits.

But on this paramount issue of our lifetime, “things are not as they seem.”

Homosexual marriage is not about family, marriage, love, or commitment. It’s about using legal means to permanently change the moral code that undergirds our civilization. It’s about full acceptance and promotion of homosexual behaviour–which according to every religion on earth is immoral, unnatural, and destructive to people–both in this life and in the next.

For five millennia–and especially two thousand years of Western culture, wise civilizations have accepted the truthful premise that the only responsible form of sexual behavior, designed specifically by our Creator and Savior was between a man and a woman in a covenant relationship we call marriage. All other forms of sexual choice are immoral–and include fornication (sex by unmarried people), adultery (sex with some else’s spouse), homosexuality (men with men or women with women), pedophilia (adults with children), and bestiality (humans with animals).

Homosexuality is not singled out in this list. It is just one form of sexual perversion–“making crooked something that is straight”–which is where the words “pervert” and “straight” originate. The only difference in our world today is that it is the homosexuals who are demanding that civilization change its tried and tested moral code and allow them to be viewed as “normal.”

But homosexual behavior is not normal. It’s lowers your lifespan (to an average of 42 years), it is one of the most promiscuous forms of sexuality (four times that of heterosexual perversions), it doubles your chances of depression, it is often grossly ugly and vile in its forms, and in terms of a person’s relationship with God–separates them from his forgiveness and grace through a refusal to turn away from sexual sin. Never mind that homosexuals cannot produce children, and so they must get them from others–often breaking up real families when one of them comes “out of the closet.”

No, this issue is not about “loving, normal couples.” It is about permanently condoning and legalizing immoral behavior. And because I love people, I cannot accept the lies that will destroy people and our civilization in the name of tolerance.

That’s why I’m encouraging all Washingtonians to not accept this charade of fairness and decency and vote to REJECT Referendum 71. 

GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE

The Obama administration is pushing radical legislation in our nation that would permanently alter the way health care is received and practiced in the United States. The progressives and their allies would have you believe that this issue is about:

  • Compassionately providing health care for all American citizens.
  • Cutting the costs of health care and not adding to the nation’s deficit.
  • Providing better healthcare than the current system which is the best in the world.
  • A right to qualitative healthcare that we all deserve and should demand.
  • Not providing for abortions, giving coverage to illegal citizens, nor increasing rationing for health services.
  • Not limiting benefits for Seniors via cuts in Medicare.

But again–when it comes to the truth about the health care bills now being voted on and discussed in the United States Congress, “things are not as they seem.”

Though I’m sure some well meaning people might believe the ideas listed above, the real force behind the move to government health care is the power to control–not the desire to provide. This health care debate is all about government power to squelch freedom in our beloved nation.

Here’s the plain and simple truth:

  • Government run health care will decrease innovation and service and greatly multiply deficits.
  • It will not be better than private care–it will enforce mediocrity on all.
  • There is no right to healthcare–only to life (they can’t murder you), to liberty (they can’t enslave you), and to happiness or property (they can’t heavily tax you.)  Everything else is a privilege and differs among human beings due to their gifts, choices, and circumstances in life.
  • The bills being considered will include abortion (they say it’s just a medical procedure), provide for illegals (it’s all about votes!), and will lead to rationing (there aren’t enough doctors who will remain at their posts).
  • The only way the government option (control) will work is to sqeeze $500 billion dollars out of Medicare.

The essence of this debate is not about health. It’s tyranny versus liberty, control versus choice, government further perverting its role from being rightful protector of God given rights to assuming the role of God in “providing” an all powerful Nanny State to its slaves, er, citizens.

There’s that word perversion again. Perverting marriage and perverting government’s role in our lives.

Things are not as they seem.

I pray to God that our eyes will be opened.