Holy Matrimony
(see video below)
(see video below)
For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (Genesis 2:24)
Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginningMADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has
not been this way. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries
another woman commits adultery.”
(Matthew 19:3-9)
So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.
(Ephesians 5:28-33)
“Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready.” It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. Then he said to me, “Write, ‘Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.’” And he said to me, “These are true words of God.”
(Revelations 19:7-9)
Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginningMADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has
not been this way. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries
another woman commits adultery.”
(Matthew 19:3-9)
So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.
(Ephesians 5:28-33)
“Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready.” It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. Then he said to me, “Write, ‘Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.’” And he said to me, “These are true words of God.”
(Revelations 19:7-9)
Understanding the True Nature and Dignity of Marriage
Today, there is so much confusion about the Nature and Dignity of Marriage. This should not be surprising considering the number of marriages that end in divorce. The video below highlights the civil reasons for why Marriage is defined as between one man and one woman. Marriage involves persons and persons are given a sex (male or female). Marriage involves sexual union. Marriage is more than merely the celebration of the love between two people. It is a communion of persons and thus those persons must be capable at least in principle of become one or united. The definition of marriage is rooted in the biological facts of nature. The male reproductive system compliments the female reproductive system for obvious reasons. Marriage is an institution which God instituted for the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of children. Since children come from the union of a man and a woman, it is only logical to conclude that children have a right and need for a mom and a dad. Yes, today there are many exception. But, the exception do not change what nature clearly defines.
Should the government presume to have the authority to redefine what nature has handed to us? Is deciding against nature because some say it's not fair, a wise premise to act from? When children say it's unfair that they can't eat chocolate, do the parents give in and allow the children to eat? Governance must be grounded in what is truly beneficial for societies wellbeing. The law should treats all people the same, BUT it does NOT treat all behaviors the same. Governments should enact laws that protect against the discrimination of people. Yes! But, these laws DO discriminate against BEHAVIORS which are harmful to society. Would the redefinition of Marriage benefit or harm society?
Natural Marriage -- 1.) Pro-creates children 2.) Best raises children 3.) Protects women 4.) Civilized men 5.) Lowers crime, poverty, and welfare - which reduces government spending. There are always exceptions to the rule such as infertility, domestic abuse, a parent dies... BUT, these are exceptions NOT the rule. We cannot validate the redefinition of Marriage based simply on exceptions to rule. Is it unfair that one man is faster than another. Should we change the rules to the game of football because some are slower? Should we outlaw shoulder pads or tackling because a few have spinal deformation? Law must be objectively in concert with the Natural Law. For example, gravity is not up for redefinition and never will be. Why? Because it is what it is! The same is true about the sexes: a man and a woman are, in principle, alway able to have children. Their bodies are compatible. Again, in principle, a man and a woman can potentially pro-create. Two men or two women can NEVER procreate. It is principally impossible. There is NO PROCREATIVE POTENTIAL present in two men or two women. The science of biology gives sound evidence as to why this is so.
Therefore, in order to redefine Marriage, the government must removed from the definition of Marriage the principal potential to bear children. For the government to legally remove this critical dimension from the definition of Marriage makes absolutely no sense, especially since the govement is supposed to promote what is beneficial for the perpetuation and stabilization of society. The only relationship that can potentially create children is that of a man and a woman.
Is the Legalization of same-sex "marriage" an act of tolerance or anti-discrimination? Is it a step forward in civil rights? Where it has been promoted, schools start to promote same-sex "marriage" as a part of their curriculum. Private business owners are considered to be bigots and intolerants. Already today, there are men and women that consciously disagree with same-sex "marriage" who are being legally penalized. They are being asked to choose between their conscience or their business (or at least be fined for discrimination). Our taxes dollars fund same-sex marriage which has NO social benefits other than validating sex partners. People should not be fined for following the laws of nature which also happens to be in correlation with their conscience. Religious liberties are under attack.
Is this an EQUALITY issue? Is this a civil rights issue? Is this similar to racial discrimination? The law already treats everyone equality. The treats all people the same, BUT it doesn't treat all behaviors the same. Race is NOT a behavior, same-sex "marriage" is! Natural Marriage and same-sex "marriage" are two different behaviors with two different outcomes, therefore the law rightfully treats them differently. Only the union of one man and one woman should be promoted because it ALONE is the foundation of a civilized society. That's not bigotry, that's biology!
Should the government presume to have the authority to redefine what nature has handed to us? Is deciding against nature because some say it's not fair, a wise premise to act from? When children say it's unfair that they can't eat chocolate, do the parents give in and allow the children to eat? Governance must be grounded in what is truly beneficial for societies wellbeing. The law should treats all people the same, BUT it does NOT treat all behaviors the same. Governments should enact laws that protect against the discrimination of people. Yes! But, these laws DO discriminate against BEHAVIORS which are harmful to society. Would the redefinition of Marriage benefit or harm society?
Natural Marriage -- 1.) Pro-creates children 2.) Best raises children 3.) Protects women 4.) Civilized men 5.) Lowers crime, poverty, and welfare - which reduces government spending. There are always exceptions to the rule such as infertility, domestic abuse, a parent dies... BUT, these are exceptions NOT the rule. We cannot validate the redefinition of Marriage based simply on exceptions to rule. Is it unfair that one man is faster than another. Should we change the rules to the game of football because some are slower? Should we outlaw shoulder pads or tackling because a few have spinal deformation? Law must be objectively in concert with the Natural Law. For example, gravity is not up for redefinition and never will be. Why? Because it is what it is! The same is true about the sexes: a man and a woman are, in principle, alway able to have children. Their bodies are compatible. Again, in principle, a man and a woman can potentially pro-create. Two men or two women can NEVER procreate. It is principally impossible. There is NO PROCREATIVE POTENTIAL present in two men or two women. The science of biology gives sound evidence as to why this is so.
Therefore, in order to redefine Marriage, the government must removed from the definition of Marriage the principal potential to bear children. For the government to legally remove this critical dimension from the definition of Marriage makes absolutely no sense, especially since the govement is supposed to promote what is beneficial for the perpetuation and stabilization of society. The only relationship that can potentially create children is that of a man and a woman.
Is the Legalization of same-sex "marriage" an act of tolerance or anti-discrimination? Is it a step forward in civil rights? Where it has been promoted, schools start to promote same-sex "marriage" as a part of their curriculum. Private business owners are considered to be bigots and intolerants. Already today, there are men and women that consciously disagree with same-sex "marriage" who are being legally penalized. They are being asked to choose between their conscience or their business (or at least be fined for discrimination). Our taxes dollars fund same-sex marriage which has NO social benefits other than validating sex partners. People should not be fined for following the laws of nature which also happens to be in correlation with their conscience. Religious liberties are under attack.
Is this an EQUALITY issue? Is this a civil rights issue? Is this similar to racial discrimination? The law already treats everyone equality. The treats all people the same, BUT it doesn't treat all behaviors the same. Race is NOT a behavior, same-sex "marriage" is! Natural Marriage and same-sex "marriage" are two different behaviors with two different outcomes, therefore the law rightfully treats them differently. Only the union of one man and one woman should be promoted because it ALONE is the foundation of a civilized society. That's not bigotry, that's biology!