Debate is about truth, love
The truest sign that a cultural war is alive and well in America is the ongoing debate over the definition of marriage. Minnesotans will decide in November whether constitutional protection is necessary. Millions of American's dined at Chick-fil-...
The truest sign that a cultural war is alive and well in America is the ongoing debate over the definition of marriage. Minnesotans will decide in November whether constitutional protection is necessary. Millions of American's dined at Chick-fil-A last week in support of the restaurant's stance. And now news reports tell us the Democratic Party platform includes support for homosexual marriage for the first time.
Marriage has and always should be defined as between one man and one woman. While a cabal of activists engage in this cultural warfare, our ancestors must certainly be weeping over this flagrant disregard of objective truth that has stood for millennia.
Marriage is being attacked by radical courts, legislatures and homosexual activists, whose goal is to redefine marriage as genderless. Even some "Bible-based" churches are afraid to defend the true definition of marriage, lest they offend someone.
But marriage should continue to be defined as between one man and one woman for basic and simple reasons found in the world's best-selling book, the Bible. It's the guide for objective truth and unquestionable teachings on the definition of marriage in numerous passages. Perhaps the most familiar is from Mark 10:6-9, which says: "But at the beginning of creation God made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one." This divine teaching does not leave room for human negotiation. Changing the definition of marriage is as ludicrous as suggesting that stealing should be redefined.
Without marriage, there would be no family. God teaches us that children are meant to live with a mom and a dad by defining the purpose of marriage, as well as his "approved" conditions of sexuality. In Hebrews 13:4, the only "approved" condition of sexuality is within a marriage and in Genesis 1:28 and Jeremiah 29:5-6, we're taught that one of the primary purposes of marriage is procreation. Modern research affirms the best environment for raising children is a home with a father and a mother. Obviously, for many reasons, that is not always possible. But for heaven's sake, why, as a nation, would we not strive for what has been divinely (and scientifically) defined as best for children?
My argument for the traditional definition of marriage often evokes vitriolic name-calling by those who disagree. Why is it assumed by proponents of same-sex "marriage" that I am hateful because I am against same-sex marriage? Actually, it's quite the contrary. God teaches us to love everyone and I do, including my lesbian sister. But my love for her and all of God's children doesn't supersede the fact that marriage was and is intended to be between a man and a woman.
Let us never succumb to the political agenda to redefine marriage. Call it a legal partnership, a civil union or compact. But it is not marriage. Objective truth and our only moral compass, the Bible, will never change.
Hennen, talk-show host and author, can be heard from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. weekdays on AM 1100 "The Flag" and www.FlagFamily.com . Email Scott@ScottHennen.com .