Monday, May 11, 2015

Defend Marriage-- Marriage Pledge: Rooted in Marxism and Bound for Failure

A friend of mine asked me my opinion on the Marriage Pledge over at

In short summary, due to the Supreme Court Decision (coming this summer) regarding Sodomite marriage on the Federal level, a group of Christian activists, which appears to be headed by James Dobson, are coming out to oppose Sodomite marriage, calling for a pledge "to stand together to defend  marriage for what it is, a bond between one man and one woman, intended for life, and open to the gift of children."

I had not heard of this before; at least, I had not read or heard much about it. I have not studied this issue in depth, and have no desire to. I do not have time for that. But I really do not think I need to spend a lot of time. We have seen this before, just in other forms and variations. Phony (with maybe a few well-meaning) Christians attempting to "make a stand" for a righteous cause. Usually these attempts are to defend the very last beam that has yet to collapse, on a building that has no hope of survival. These folks have no intention of truly saving the building and even defend the previous beams being hacked out years ago.

I hope that someone over at Faith and Heritage; or another of our viewpoint writes something a bit more detailed and thought out than what I will have for you here. Here, you will get opinions from the top of my head; but opinions that are rooted in experience and the truth of God's word, nevertheless. But then again, this is a blog, not a professional website. And if I am wrong about any of this, let me know. I am not unable to be persuaded.

My mind is spinning a thousand miles an hour on this thing. There is so much to say about it. There are so many different angles to cover regarding just what these supposed freedom fighters are doing. Do I start with the fact that James Dobson is a corrupt gatekeeper and cannot be trusted? No, I will not get into that here. There a dozens of similar items you could point out of why this whole thing is wrong and why it will fail. It may even be designed to fail.

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt as much as I can. I want to believe that these promoters of "defending marriage" are doing what they believe is right and good; that they have good intentions. But I am more apt to believe that they are simply conspiring to gain more attention for their organizations and increase their donation amounts. I will not go into detail about that either.

The folks you see standing up to "defend marriage" now will be the same guys (perhaps their children and organization successors) 30 years from now, speaking against a law to normalize pedophilia. And the ironic thing, in that day, will be that they will argue from the starting point of the obvious wrong of our previous generation, who opposed Sodomy. As Nathanael Strickland at Faith and Heritage pointed out:

"[T]he conservative church thinks that it can embrace miscegenation, but not homosexuality, “civil rights” for non-whites, but not feminism, and racial Marxism, but not gender Marxism. . . . If [Galatians 3:28] is saying that Christ erases all physical racial differences, then the verse must also mean that Christ erases all physical gender differences too.  If “skin color” is accidental and meaningless, then why should “genitalia” be any different?  There is no logically or morally consistent way to oppose homosexuality or feminism while supporting miscegenation or racial egalitarianism. . . . After all, there is no male and female – only Christians and non-Christians – so why would you want to set up artificial distinctions like “gender”?

Let us examine what these folks are not willing to promote and embrace:

1) They are not willing to make Sodomy illegal. And they definitely are not willing to defend the law of God that Sodomites should be put to death.

2) They are not willing to defend a Christian's right to refuse service to Sodomites in regular business. This corresponds with the fact that they would consider it absurd to defend the rights of a Christian who refuses service based on any reason. They agree it is okay, good, and righteous to rob a man of his right of free association.

Dobson and Co. want to stand with Marxists and God haters in embracing "non-discrimination", but want this issue to be an exception. This is a losing position to take. You cannot claim to be against a Marxist principle regarding marriage, while at the same time defending those same Marxist principles consistently in all other areas of life.

These are the type of people who fight to "get God back into the public schools", when in fact, they should be rather fighting to eliminate public schools. But there is no telling that to Dobson and Co. They presuppose that public schools are a necessary good. In like manner, they assume that Marxist principles of equality are good, and that the law of God being enforced in society is bad. These are not Christians in practice, folks.

You can see that these men up there claiming to be standing for the truth, even particularly the truth of Jesus Christ (as a few of them have stated), have more in common with the Marxists they claim to be opposing on this issue, than they have in common with our Christian forefathers who actually stood for the law of God in society.

3) They are unequally yoked with unbelievers (2Corinthians 6:14):

"We stand together in defense of marriage and the family and society founded upon them. While we come from a variety of communities and hold differing faith perspectives, we are united in our common affirmation of marriage."

On a side note, is it not interesting that this pretty much the exact philosophy of Christian White Advocacy groups? Join yourselves in fellowship with God-haters to defend "the cause"; when the real cause ought to be Christ's exaltation in all things (Colossians 1:18).

Back to topic. The people who spoke at the meeting (which was on C-Span, and which you can view here, appear to have been very carefully selected. You had to make sure to get a couple of people of color so that you could appeal to "anti-racism" doctrine. The one black man made sure to strongly emphasis that what Sodomites were asking for was in no way comparable to the [Marxist] "Civil Rights" cause of the past.

Of course, the left knows that this is BS nonsense and that the issues go hand-in-hand. The issue is the Jacobin principle of equality. The only way to be consistent is to oppose both forced integration, and gender Marxism. The left rightly calls out the inconsistent Christians as hypocrites in this area.

You also had a speaker named Janet Boynes (a female Negro), apparently a former Lesbian who now holds a ministry of helping Sodomites escape their chains. And I speak no-ill of what she is trying to do, from what I heard her say. But what a shame that she was probably the best and most wholehearted of all the speakers there.

There is so, so much more to say. So much more. But unfortunately I will have to leave that up to someone else. Perhaps someone can springboard off of this blog post and write something more thoughtful and planned out. Here is what I wrote on the contact form of the Defend Marriage website:
Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ. I want to make this short, because I know you likely receive a lot of emails. I want to say first of all, thank you for doing what you are doing, in this manner; at least you are doing something. I praise you for that. I praise your courage and your willingness to speak out. Too many Christians are failing to speak for the truth. I admire your call for civil disobedience to that which violates the law of God.

But I am disappointed because it is not the law of God you are seeking to uphold, but rather "natural law" which you stated in your conference is rooted in "reason" rather than the word of God. If we are to win this battle it must be without compromise. You are fighting a defensive battle rather than offensive one. Because of this, this cause is sure to lose, and in a sense, I hope it does; because maybe it will drive home the message to you to change.

We must take a stance on the entire law of God. You are arguing with the presupposition that "equality" and "non-discrimination" (which are Marxist doctrines) is a moral good. This is folly to the uttermost. The law of God demands that Sodomites are put to death by the Civil Magistrate, and American law reflected this in its founding. But you are too compromised to take a stand for the entire truth of God's word. You embrace the world's ideology in whole, yet reject the natural outcome of this ideology, which is the widespread force of participation in Sodomy.

No, you will not win this battle until you stand for the entire truth, as the word of God teaches. Jesus Christ must be Lord over all of society in all ways, not just in the "definition of marriage".

There are many other things I could say, but I will refrain for now. The Lord Jesus give you wisdom and courage.

No, I did not mention a few of the things I mentioned on this blog post because such people are so immersed in Marxism and I did not want them to dismiss my entire writing based on them hearing the entire truth. At the very least, I hope to bring them a step closer to being consistent with the truth and to actually defending the Lord Jesus Christ and God's law. I wish I could say the same, that I believe that is what they are doing on this issue. But the historical evidence is so overwhelmingly against that idea. Save us, Lord Jesus, and raise up some true, courageous leaders among us. Amen.

Swiss Kinist