THE RIGHT HAS IT WRONG!

I’ve been hearing from too many on the right, in their attempts to defend against the same-sex marriage movement, a call for government to stay out of the marriage business. The thinking seems to be “Let the democratic process play out by letting the people decide by the conventional democratic process on a state-by-state level how marriage will be defined.”  Wrong! This is absolutely the wrong argument. Marriage is not the product of popular consensus. It is an institution devised, defined and overseen by God himself—the God in whom we declare place our trust!
 
Government didn’t create marriage. Federal or state governments cannot, therefore recreate marriage in any form.  The only obligation and responsibility government has concerning marriage is to recognize it as God has defined it, and protect it as a foundational principle for the “pursuit of happiness.” But unfortunately, you won’t hear this argument from today’s populist leaders. So it’s up to the clergy of this nation to once again lead the way to American revival.  One cannot separate American peace and prosperity from American morality. The very Father of our country taught us:

“The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.”
 

 The U.S. Supreme Court should simply declare that marriage is not a construct of human government, but rather an institution ordained by God, codified in natural law, and verified through human experience as the union of one male and one female unrelated by blood. It is the duty of nations as well as of men to recognize it as such, and to prefer it for the betterment of civil society above other social arrangements.

DO WE NEED THE CONSTITUTION?

There has been much talk lately about whether we even need a Constitution or whether the Constitution just “gets in the way of progress” as posited by Georgetown Law Professor, Michael Seidman, in his essay recently published by the New York Times called “Let’s Give Up on the Constitution.”

It’s important for people of faith, and people who love liberty, to understand the unseen force driving Seidman’s line of thinking.

Seidman argues that our Constitution was written by privileged white men of another era whose thoughts and opinions have little to do with contemporary American life, therefore we should discard their work, and make up our own as we go.

His argument highlights a basic perspective typical of the secular left, rooted in Darwinian evolution. The thinking is, “We have evolved to a higher order, so we no longer need, or are well served by the thoughts of an inferior generation.”

Seidman and his ilk believe the highest authority is the contemporary mind of man. Therefore any document, rule or principle must submit to the interpretive authority of the modern man who reads it, and then It means whatever he says it means. This was clearly demonstrated by Chief  Justice, Charles Evan Hughes,  who said the Constitution means whatever the judge says it means. He couldn’t be more clear.

The conservative mind is a bit more humble, believing that there is a wisdom in the mind and heart of God that is superior to that of any man of any era. Our Constitution was an attempt to codify unchanging Biblical principles to establish a sense of “ordered liberty.” The principles set forth in the Constitution serve as an objective standard, an anchor keeping us moored to unchanging Judeo-Christian principles to guarantee continued peace, liberty and prosperity through generations. Our Constitution is the “how” to secure those inalienable rights put forward in our Declaration of Independence.

If we break away from the moorings of the Constitution we become susceptible to the whims of human nature which history has proven is capable of justifying unimaginable cruelty and even genocide in the name of “progress.”

If the Constitution can mean anything, whatever an “evolved” man thinks it should mean, then it will mean nothing, and we will regress to totalitarianism and barbarism already evidenced in baby-killing abortion, and the acceptance of hedonistic homosexuality. World history indicates that these are not progressive but rather regressive in human culture.

Do we need a Constitution? Absolutely, or be set adrift and ultimately condemn future generations to experience man’s inhumanity to man and social regression.

On "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

George Washington would be rolling in his grave at the news of the attempt by this administration and Congress to normalize homosexual behavior in the armed forces.

General Washington literally drummed men out of the army who practiced homosexuality. He knew that the strength of the military was more a function of their unseen moral character than it was of their visible military might. Our founders understood that morality was defined by the Bible, and our laws and public policy must be consistent with Biblical principles. The Bible sets the boundaries for ordered liberty. It is the objective standard that has provided peace, prosperity and stability for over 400 years. The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is an attempt to call “moral” what God has called an abomination. Homosexuality, as well as any sexual practice outside of holy matrimony is immoral, and as stated on the walls of the Missouri Senate chamber: “Nothing is politically right that is morally wrong.”

We must call on the new Congress convening in January to re-establish once again the primacy of our Judeo-Christian standard of law and morality, and reaffirm the standards clearly set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice which strictly forbids homosexuality and adultery.

To do anything less would mean losing the favor of God and emasculating our military.

Obama Pours Salt in America's Wound

President Barack Obama’s recent behavior concerning the building of a mosque near the sight of the World Trade Center attack gives us further insight into the very core values of this first un-American American President.

First of all, he honored the Muslim religion by hosting a Ramadan dinner at the White House where he emphasized their legal right to build a mosque at the site of the World Trade Center attack by Islamofascists, while choosing to be silent on the “wisdom” of such a decision, thus leaving the scales tipped in favor of building the mosque. This is nothing less than pouring salt into a national wound from which we are still healing.

Mayor Bloomberg and others who favor building the mosque ostensibly to show that we are better than Islamic countries, because we tolerate their religion while they outlaw ours, reveals a critical near-sighted ignorance of the religion of Islam. The world-wide Islamic community will see this, not as a statement of American tolerance, but rather as American weakness, and Islamic supremacy.

And finally, we must correct the record concerning the idea that our founders regarded all religions equally. The Judiciary Committee Report of 1854 answered the question: “What is the establishment of Religion?” Their answer:

“At the time of the adoption of the Constitution the general sentiment was that general Christianity should be encouraged but not any one sect.”

Remember Give-me-liberty-or-give-me-death Patrick Henry? He said,

“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ; for this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom to worship here.” (Emphasis mine)

It’s clear our founders believed that the principles of general Christianity were superior to those of other world religions, and that Christian principles would allow the greatest amount of liberty, peace and prosperity possible. I think a quick survey of world cultures would affirm that belief.

So, Constitutional rights notwithstanding, we must defend and promote those American values that have produced the greatest nation in the world or we will lose it. It must begin by replacing those in leadership who do not share traditional American values, including President Obama, as I see it, the first un-American American President.