Congratulations to my nephew, and my new "niece-in-law" Brooke--if such a relationship moniker exists! The two were joined by God in holy matrimony this past Saturday. The day was, in fact, bittersweet; Jason's grandfather passed away Friday night. But the family bravely kept its composure, and another strong Christian marriage is underway. Indeed, marital stability is something to be celebrated in my family: the only divorce recorded on either side, for as long as anyone can remember, is my own. As a result, our extended clan has been blessed with great stability, and a strong witness to the community.

My own marital failure back in the 80s, I must point out, has done nothing to "sour" me on the importance and centrality of that sacred covenant. In fact, as I approach the 14th anniversary of my second (and final!) earthly marriage, I am even more committed to the protection and proliferation of the institution than ever before.

Yet, the battle to redefine traditional marriage continues on a number of fronts. As the push for a sort of "homosexual matrimony" in California continues, some much-needed perspective is available from others who have already made the same mistake. It turns out that only 22 same-sex "marriages" have been registered in Spain since that opportunity was introduced in July, compared to the 35,000 heterosexual marriages that took place in the same period. At least one columnist there says, "Whatever happened to the so-called 5 percent to 10 percent of the Spanish population that were going to benefit from this new law?" Spaniards will learn, as we have in the states, that the 5 to 10% figure is a myth, created and perpetuated by some in the activist homosexual community. The actual number of people who think they are gay is likely much less than 2%.

But the homosexual agenda is not the only reason we must soon formally define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The Swedish organization "Feminist Initiative" has proposed abolishing marriage altogether, in favor of a "cohabitation law" that would be irrespective of gender. Also, British scientists have been given their government's permission to create human embryos that will have three genetic parents! This could eventually lead to the birth of children who carry genes from two mothers and a father, among other troubling scenarios. So, with individuals boasting 3 biological parents, and any number of adoptive parents...or, with households lacking any definition whatsoever as to just what determines a "family"...just how will the legal system someday sort through issues like final estates, child support, and property settlement agreements? The possibilities are staggering in variety and implication. But of course, that's just the practical side of the issue.

The faith aspect of the matter is most compelling. The Biblical mystery of "leaving and cleaving" described in Genesis is more than just poetic imagery. It's an actual, spiritual union that takes place in a realm we cannot yet see. This mystical union of one man and one woman is merely reflected in the physical plane, through the process of sexual union: God's chosen process for those, created in His image, to reproduce. If, indeed, it made no difference what group of humans would then nurture and raise that offspring, God would likely have simply cloned or hatched us. Instead...a family system was created...we were commanded to honor our parents, our birth order was given great significance, and our lineage became central to who were are--and indeed, who we might become.

 

Simply put…so-called same-sex  "marriage" is rejection of natural law, as well as a mockery of the central act of God's creation...and He will not be mocked. If our duly-elected representatives are willing to play politics with the social order, then it's time for them to be overruled or lawfully removed, before they can do any more permanent damage.   My nephew and "niece-in-law"--and their children--deserve a far better future than the one my generation is preparing for them.