It is a historical fact that those nations who normalized, legitimized, and legalized aberrant sexual behavior, such as homosexuality, met with certain doom! One can like that fact or not, but it doesn't change history one iota. Any country that seeks to make sodomy part of its mainstream culture has a death wish.
A high standard for public servants has always been essential to maintaining the trust and confidence of the citizenry. Our second President, John Adams, said, "Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean the character and conduct of their rulers."
Before selecting military and even civilian personnel for many classified or secured jobs, our country will conduct extensive background investigations into the moral character of potential candidates. The same is true for many positions in the business world and in law enforcement. Even head coaches of high school and college sports teams are expected to maintain unblemished moral integrity.
Is America now prepared to lower the standard for the most sacred and most fundamental institution of all, holy matrimony, in order to accommodate moral deviants? Are we now willing to put the public stamp of approval upon depraved and abhorrent lifestyles? It appears that many people in both major parties are willing to do just that.
Homosexuality, by very definition, is an act of fornication. If homosexuality is granted legal, legitimate social status, we will have repudiated two thousand years of Western Civilization and will no longer be capable of maintaining normalcy for sexual mores within our society.
Furthermore, the fundamental essence of the homosexual lifestyle demands that homosexuals must recruit, because they cannot reproduce. Therefore, to normalize sodomy threatens, not only our country's moral integrity, but also its very existence!
Again, one needs to only look at history to realize the absurdity of any nation turning its back on traditional, monogamous, heterosexual marriage as the bedrock foundation of its society. Virtually every great nation and empire of antiquity that attempted to normalize and legalize sodomite behavior experienced a certain and sudden demise. There are no exceptions! Unfortunately, America's slippery slope toward Sodom and Gomorrah is already in progress and, unfortunately, it is being facilitated by both major parties in Washington, D.C.
Both John Kerry and G.W. Bush try to create the impression that they offer the American people a distinctly different vision from each other. However, the reality is, in many issues, including the one we are now discussing, there is virtually no difference. Both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush oppose same-sex marriage but support "civil unions" for same-sex couples.
Yet, for all practical, legal purposes, there is no difference between marriage and civil unions. Kerry and Bush are merely playing word games with the American people. They want to appease both the homosexual lobby and mainstream, moral America. Once again, they are talking out of both sides of their mouths.
The only area of disagreement between Bush and Kerry on the homosexual issue is a proposed Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Bush favors such an amendment; Kerry does not.
Let me here emphatically say that the marriage amendment is NOT the answer to this problem! It is absolutely the wrong thing to do!
For one thing, the federal government has no authority to define marriage. It has already been defined---by God! To allow the federal government to begin defining marriage can only lead to more and increased problems.
Once again, federal courts are pushing the envelope in this country. It is the courts that are attempting to redefine the traditional definition of marriage. There has not been, and probably will not soon (if ever) be a State that by due process (the ballot box or vote of the legislature) has successfully redefined marriage as being between same-sex persons.
Beyond that, Congress has already passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that prohibits same-sex marriage. And it became law when President Bill Clinton signed it. Now all Congress needs to do is tell the federal courts to keep their grubby hands off it, which they have they power to do under Article 3, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution.
Passing a marriage amendment would actually make a bad problem worse. By passing a federal amendment, it would almost certainly guarantee that the federal courts would be able to interpret it any way they chose. Seeing the way federal courts are misinterpreting just about every constitutional amendment already written, why would anyone believe that a new one is going to fare any better?
I can almost guarantee this audience that if a marriage amendment was to pass, some federal court would rule that polygamy, or even incest, is "constitutional," and then another whole can of worms would be opened. A constitutional amendment invites additional judicial encroachment upon the institution of marriage and subjects it to any and all governmental abuse.
Instead of promoting a constitutional amendment, President Bush should uphold his oath of office under Article 4, Section 4, that says, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican form of Government."
That means, the President has the authority to insist that any and all matters not specifically prescribed to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved to the States and to the people (see the Tenth Amendment). If individual states want to attempt to legalize homosexual marriage, let them try it lawfully: through their elected representatives and governors.
I would dare say that not even the State of Massachusetts or the State of California could pass a same-sex marriage law. And even if they did, DOMA actually prohibits other states from recognizing any such state law.
Defending the family also involves getting the federal government out of areas in which it has no business, such as education. It is not the federal government's responsibility to educate our children. It is the job of parents to educate their children.
Our public education system is a mess! Mainly, this is due to the vast, overreaching intrusion into education by the federal government. And instead of reducing the federal government's role (and cost) in education, President Bush and the Republican Party passed the No Child Left Behind Act, which is the largest and most invasive education bill in the history of the republic!
In 1994, Republicans were swept into the majority of both houses of Congress on the promise of eliminating at least five federal departments, including the Department of Education. Ten years later, not only have they not eliminated the Department of Education, they have increased its authority and cost by record levels! As a result, the federal government is more involved, more intrusive, more costly, and more problematic to the area of education than it was when Democrats were in control. How can Christians, conservatives, and constitutionalists continue to support such a party?
© Chuck Baldwin
This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2004/cbarchive_20040514.html
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
Chuck Baldwin Live Donate Form
I also have many books and DVDs available for purchase online. Go here:
Chuck Baldwin Live Store
To subscribe to my weekly columns, click here:
Subscribe to Chuck's Column
Related
|