Wednesday, August 06, 2008

The Protect Marriage Amendment--Why I'm Voting For It

The following was written for the Fall (September-November) newsletter of the First Baptist Church of Temple City, The Tower.


Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of his country.

I remember typing that sentence as practice when taking typing. In this Fall newsletter, I want to present this to you as your charge—now’s your time.

I would never, ever, endorse a candidate from the pulpit. Not only is it illegal, more important is the fact that’s it’s wrong—it’s an abuse of the pulpit.

I would, and now do, tell you how strongly I feel about the Protect Marriage Amendment, which you will have a chance to vote on in November. The same day America selects a new President, California will decide what to do about the future of marriage in California. And make no mistake: what California does will shape what happens all across America.

That’s why I intend to vote for the PMA on November 4. You will have to decide how you will vote. But this is how I’m voting, and I want to explain why.

First, I’m voting this way because how I vote must be informed by my faith. In a democracy, God holds me and you accountable for my part in the decisions made in my country. Here are some Biblical realities which inform the way I’m voting:

God intentionally designed and created us male and female.
(Gen. 1:27; Gen. 5:1-2; Matt. 19:4; Mark 10:6)

God intended sexual intimacy to be enjoyed only within the context of the male and female relationship. (Gen. 1:28; Matt. 19:5, Mark 10:7-8; Romans 1:24-32)

God intends marriage to be a committed, life long, covenant relationship between a man and a woman based on love, respect, mutual submission and personal sacrifice.
(Matt. 5:31-32; Matt. 19:3-11; Mal. 2:14-16; Mark 10:2-12; I Cor. 7:10-16; Deut. 5:18, 21; Eph. 5:21-33)

Jesus confirmed that God’s design is only to be fulfilled within the context of a committed marriage of one man and one woman. (Matt. 19:3-11; Mark 10:2-12).

Children are a blessing--God’s design is that moms and dads create and raise children. (Gen. 1:28; Psalm 127:3-5; Proverbs 22:6)

God’s design is to have dad and mom train their children to love, honor and obey God. (Deut. 4:1-9; Proverbs 22:6)

All sexual activity outside of God’s design (heterosexual marriage) is forbidden—it is morally impure and personally destructive—individuals will be judged by God for it. (Heb. 13:4; Romans 1:24-32; Romans 2:5-10; I Cor. 6:9-11; Matt. 5:27-32; Deut. 5:9, 18, 21; Exodus 20:14-17; Deut. 4:1-9)

Divorce is not God’s plan—God hates divorce. (Mal. 2:14-16; Matt. 5:31-32; Matt. 19:6-9; Mark 10:9-12; I Cor. 7:10-16)

God clearly forbids “same sex” sexual relationships—they are not part of His plan. (Lev. 18:22; Romans 1:24-32; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gen. 1:27; Gen. 5:1-2; Matthew 19:4; Mark 10:6)
There is tremendous safety and blessing in following God’s plan for marriage. (Deut. 5:10; Exodus 20:6; Deut. 4:1-9; Romans 2:5-10)

Second, I’m voting for the PMA because of the need to preserve marriage’s stabilizing role in society.

In all or nearly all human societies, marriage is the socially approved union between a woman and a man, conceived both as a personal relationship and as an institution, so that any children resulting from the union are understood to be emotionally, morally, practically and legally affiliated with both of the parents.

The history of marriage demonstrates that non-recognition of same-sex “marriages” does not stem from a particular religious tradition; it is universal. Even secular and aggressively atheist regimes (like the old Soviet Union) have never recognized same-sex “marriages.”

In fact, heterosexual marriage is found in nearly every human society and almost always as a pivotal institution. Homosexual marriage outside contemporary Western societies is exceedingly rare and has never been considered the equivalent of male/female marriage, even in societies that had a “tolerant” attitude toward homosexuality (like ancient Greece).

Marriage (real, God-designed heterosexual marriage) is good for men, and for women and for children. Marriage is good financially, from a health standpoint and from mental health standpoint.

Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps the most is a family headed by two-biological parents in a low-conflict marriage.

On the other hand, nations in Europe that have experimented with same-sex marriage discover that such so-called marriages pull down the overall value of marriage, and that marriage rates drop, and out-of-wedlock childbearing, already at epidemic levels in Europe, rises.

That’s why I’m voting for the Protect Marriage Amendment.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Is it more important to legislate people to do right or to love them into the kingdom?