When Marriage Comes Under Attack


When Marriage Comes Under Attack

Late last Friday, New York’s state legislature decided to radically redefine marriage. In a less than transparent process, New York became the sixth state in the nation to call marriage something other than the union of one man and one woman – and only the third to do so by legislative action. There are thirty states, including Arizona, with constitutional amendments protecting marriage.

We are publishing a series of posts on the Foundations blog this week and next about why it’s so important to stand for the true definition of marriage. We’ll look at what the Scripture says about marriage, whether this is really a “civil rights” issue, and the impact on our religious freedom. Check out the first post of the series by CAP’s Communications Director Aaron Baer: “Why Protect Marriage.

Celebrating Our Independence

While you celebrate our nation’s independence this 4th of July with family and friends, I hope you take time to reflect on the blessing of living in this great country, and the responsibility that comes with it.

That responsibility starts with exercising our freedom and right to vote our values. City elections throughout Arizona are less than two months away on August 30. Be sure you and your friends are registered to vote, and consider talking with your pastor about holding a voter registration drive at your church in the coming weeks. CAP has everything you need to get started registering voters. We’ll also be publishing a city election Voter Guide at azvoterguide.com in the coming days.

City elections can have a profound impact on the entire state. Our opponents specifically target these elections because it’s much easier for them to influence the outcome and then advance their agenda. We cannot afford to be silent in these local elections. If you haven’t already done so, check out this blog post by CAP’s Blackstone intern Angelina Nguyen about how one city’s bad policies can have an impact on everyone in the state.

Summer Break

5 Minutes for Families will be going on a short summer break through the month of July. Be sure to follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and watch the Foundations blog for updates from us during this time. I’ll be back with more updates and news you need to know that impacts your family in August. Happy Independence Day!

About Center for Arizona Policy

Comments

  1. Phillip the Great says:

    They didn’t redefine marriage, they undefined it.

  2. Mike Triggs says:

    Arizona may be one of the last hold outs. But
    In a couple of years your children and grandchildren will look back on history with the same disgust I feel at how your ancestors used religion to justify slavery or to prohibit people of different races to marry.

    It is so simple…if you don’t want to get married to someone of the same sex, don’t do it. No one is forcing any man to get married to another man or any woman to get married to another woman. And from what I can see, no church is required to marry anyone. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

  3. wanumba says:

    Civil unions any state can make – a legal designation that establishes legal responsibilities. Marriage is a religious tradition under an authority higher than the state. To have the state dictate to ALL the religions in this nation that they MUST conform to the demands of the state, or face punitive actions seems to be a full attack on the conduct of freedom of religion. One is not free to practice one’s religion in peace when one is being confronted with the full force ot the authority of the state to change or abandon any traditional practice or belief.

    Hindus marry for seven lives. How does this play out amongst Hindu conduct of marriage or is all the focus on forcing ONE particular religion to disobey its own teachings and traditions? This isn’t inheriently racist, in that Hindus are not afforded equal status, not considered worthy of being consulted as equal players at the national marriage table? A Hindu marriage does not conform to a CHristian marriage, but no Hindu demands Christians alter their ceremonies, and if one wants to be married as a Hindu, one must profess feality to Hinduism first, and conform to the teachings. A Christian cannot just walk up to a Hindu and demand to be married as a Christian in their temple. It’s hard to even image this scenario occuring – the person demanding would be considered in a category of rudeness and neo-colonial egotistical inconsideration not often encountered on the planet. No believing Hindu would demand to be married according to Hindu traditions inside a Christian Church or by a Christian pastor. Plenty of Hindus attend CHristian marriages and plenty of CHristians atttend Hindu marriages as welcome guests and behave accordingly with respect and stick to honest well-wishing for the new couple, so the fact that the marriages are not conducted the same doesn’t mean maintaining good terms bewteen all parties can’t be achieved.

    Traditionally,throughout history, the only time a disrespectful scenario would manifest would be a deliberate action of a conquering overlord forcing the conquered to submit to the new rule.

  4. wanumba says:

    ……………………………………….
    Mike Triggs says:
    July 1, 2011 at 4:57 pm
    Arizona may be one of the last hold outs. But
    In a couple of years your children and grandchildren will look back on history with the same disgust I feel at how your ancestors used religion to justify slavery or to prohibit people of different races to marry.
    ……………………………..
    MY ancestors did not own slaves, did not use religion to justify it and my ancestors fought against it. MY ancestor was captured right AFTER the Civil war and held for seven years in slavery aboard a ship, forced to work as crew, thrown in chains with the other shanghied crew when the ship was in port.

    MOST of the people you talk to of a day don’t have ancestors who owned slaves, but are constantly falsely maligned.

    Group identity smearing is no justice. No justice no peace.

  5. Mike Triggs says:

    Wanumna – You are fortunate to be able to say that your ancestors didn’t own slaves. You must admit that a good number of God Fearing Christians turned a blind eye to the ownership as used the Bible to justify it.

    I’m not sure where you are from but there is a good chance you come from one of the 29 states that prohibited inter-racial marriage. At the time the US Supreme Court struck down Virginia’s law and ruled the practice unconstitutional public opinion in those states opposed the decision by a substantial margin. The fact that the majority felt that way didn’t make the practice any less repulsive or unconstituonal in the eyes of the court. I trust that ultimately the court will rule the same on gay marriage. It may not be soon. But the time will come.

    I’m all for civil unions IF the same rights are afforded gays and lesbians as married couples. Until then, separate is not equal.

    • wanumba says:

      Well you’re batting .1000 on wrong, based on your pre-suppositions based on very offensive unsupported stereotypes. You can’t have ANY meaningful dialogue if you base your arguments on blatent untruths. Starting like that, how do you expect to have credibility on any other assertation you make?

      There’s a lot of unequality in this world, always has been, so we have to prioritize on what’s really important. If you are not starving, being beaten, being sold, hung up, begging on the streets because you’ve been banned from work, chased out of your home, farm, business and nation, then it’s more than just tolerable, it’s downright comfortable. So you WANT something, but if you can get everything you need DESPITE not having it, then you really don’t have a problem, do you?

      When in the same period of history, at the very same time, men are crucified until they are dead, their wives and and children sold into slavery, then in comparison, the whinging for same sex marriage seems a luxury of the very very very safe and secure. Instead of being thankful for it and the society and brave men and women who made that possible to be so safe, there’s nothing but complaints,and smearing of people who’ve done nothing wrong.

      • wanumbla,

        So, you’re basically saying that because other people have it worse, that people who don’t have it as bad should just shut up until everything elsewhere gets better. Have another coffee.

        Mike,

        wanumba will pull his “absolute moral authority” card whenever he gets backed into a corner, so it’s best just to let him blather on and ignore him (or you can turn it into a drinking game). My favorite was when he claimed to be an expert on DDT because he used to spray pesticide in a greenhouse somewhere.

  6. Mike Triggs says:

    Thanks Klute – Noedine Crub sent me a note saying about the same thing. Had to laugh when NC called her “Wrongnumba”. The homophobes are a little like the racista of yesteryear, “I’m not a racist….but some of my best friends are colored.”

    The exact same reasons were given for why people of different races shouldn’t marry. For Pete’s sake, Clarence Thomas and the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell would have been prohibited from being married prior to the Loving v Virginia case.

    • wanumba says:

      btw. “Her” is Horst’s fetching, come hither GPS system who talks to him, GARMIN, not me.

      The priest who officiated at our wedding was gay. He didn’t seem to mind hanging with us all that day, ate at the proverbial table, was there before, middle and didn’t leave until everyone else left, and had a very nice time. Kinda down and out, he appreciated the work and visited with everyone.
      But by your rigid standards, we shouldn’t have even been seen speaking to him, much less hire him to officiate to provide traditional vows at such an important event. I haven’t done anything wrong, but you’ve pre-judged me and the many many people just like me based on deeply held negative biases.

      And noooowww you’re off talking hoo-hoo and kaleli about “colored people.” ALL our friends and acquaintences and co-workers are “colored people” so no one we know uses those words… just white provincial Liberal peeps who are NOT used to this category”colored people” being around 24/7 and say it behind their backs.

      So, you’re STILL batting .1000 on wrong, based on your pre-suppositions based on very offensive unsupported stereotypes. You can’t have ANY meaningful dialogue with ANYONE if you base your arguments on blatent untruths.

      Instead of correcting yourself and being willing to re-examine your preconceptions and from where you learned them, you continue on with more dialogue-poisoning stereotypes. No justice, no peace. I haven’t told you a single falsehood. I am not flattering you to get something from you, unlike a lot of people. Have you given me the same consideration – and to all those many people like me who do not deserve in any measure being maligned?

  7. Mike Triggs says:

    I have not a clue what your btw comment is all about. Horst GPS Garmin…you are talking in a language I don’t understand. I’m probably too old. And if I referred to you as “Her” and you’re a “he” I do apologize

    I think I remember why I leave the posfing on SA to other.

  8. wanumba says:

    No problemo. It was on another topic thread, and threads get old faster than we do. heh.

  9. Elmer Bringleson says:

    Isn’t it funny that when Marriage is under attack it’s always the fault of the gays! It’s never the fault of husbands who cheat on their wives. Or the guys who knock-up one woman after another never marrying or taking responsibility for any of them.

    The real problem is the one man and one woman who choose not to honor the vows they took before God, family and friends.

    But it is so much easier and fun to Blame the gays rather than focus on the real threat to marriage.

    Don’t you love the hypocrisy of it?

    • wanumba says:

      Oh, so who is blaming for the faults of “hetero” marriage? Usually it’s gays who hold up failed hetero marriages as sort of an “infallibility card loss” to argue that since too many heteros don’t know how to be married, who are they to say “no.”

      It should be noted that the divorce stats suffer from being skewed by serial divorces by a smaller group of people while most original marriages actually remain intact. One set of parents we know personally are classic: they have 5 marriages and 4 divorces between them. The people they married to and divorced, each brought multiple marriages and divorces of their own to the stats. They are, in a nutshell, a textbook example of what not to do,and a warning as to how stats can lead people into drawing the wrong conclusions.
      Their children took note, took caution, and all have been married to the same spouses, counting in decades now.

      Just because a few people are incompetent at particular task, and can’t seem to figure it out over multiple attempts doesn’t mean that the parameters of the task aren’t valid. That’s a “fallacy,” not “hypocrisy.”

Speak Your Mind

*