Comments on: As Marriage Goes, So Goes the Nation

By: Ewan

Ewan — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:15:05 +0000

Exactly Garth. One might also say – as the church goes, so goes the nation.

Ewan McDonald, Victoria.

By: Garth Penglase

Garth Penglase — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 02:58:44 +0000

So true, David Clay & David Skinner.

I would add that the onslaught within supposedly Christian churches on the covenant of marriage through support for no-fault divorce (“well, if it really isn’t working for you, we’ll support you if you want to leave”) and political correctness in encouraging all forms of families (“we’ll you really shouldn’t but if you feel that way then we don’t want to judge you”) to be acceptable is in itself the single main reason why Islam will prosper in the Western world while ‘modern’ Western-style self-focused Christianity, being rotten from within, will suffer its demise.

God often referred to his chosen people Israel as an adulterous nation when he was angered by their blatant disregard for his commandments, and brought them low until they turned from their selfish ways to him again. The New Testament also laments/warns against the rise of the ‘adulterous generation’ saying that such like had no place in His Kingdom.

Christians are supposed to be the defenders of morality against the onslaught of the world and its wickedness. Unless we again learn the importance of ‘indissoluble monogamy’ (J D Unwin of Cambridge University) within the family – as David Clay says “the first institution ordained by God” – established as a direct example to God’s love for his people, then godless liberal Christianity will hurry the internal destruction of our society.

From the world’s perspective, what have Christians to offer when they look so much like us? Where’s the salt and the light? All I see is “sugar and spice and all thing nice”.

As marriage goes, so goes the nation… our nation, like so many other western nations is going down the spiritual toilet.

Garth Penglase

By: David Skinner

David Skinner — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 17:05:21 +0000

Joanna Bogle’s statement, ‘Sexual relationships are, in the current parlance, ‘”all about choices,” raises obvious contradictions. The gay lobby claim that they do not have a choice, with regard to their orientation – due to evolution they are immutably programmed to be what they are. At the end of 2006, in Brighton, UK, local taxpayers footed a bill of £901.50 for a Christmas party for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender workers of the city council and to which heterosexuals were banned from attending. Under the new Sexual Orientation Regulations special events like this from which heterosexuals are barred are probably covered by an exemption. Government guidance says:
“The Regulations do not make it unlawful to do anything by way of meeting people’s special needs for education, training or welfare on grounds of their sexual orientation, or providing ancillary benefits in connection with meeting such needs.”
Special needs, in English education, has always referred to those with disabilities. So is homosexuality a disability, for which there are indeed cures?
But then the next moment this argument, that homosexuals are born that way, is jettisoned in favour of the human right to have absolute freedom of choice to be whatever one wants to be. Are we then soon to see, due to scientific advances, the choice of changing into chimeras, parahumans and transhumans, or even into cuckoo clocks and chest of drawers? The only choice I see here is the choice to turn lies into truth and truth into lies.

As I have previously indicated, London Zoo, this last Sunday, discriminated against heterosexual families by charging them the full entry fee (gays were given a 20% reduction) and denied special areas of the zoo, that had been given over entirely to the gays.
www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=17350051&method=full&siteid=62484&headline=pink-panthers–name_page.html

By: John Angelico

John Angelico — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:51:57 +0000

I’m amazed that DH Lawrence had a high view of marriage…my superficial understanding is that he was hedonistic and rebellious, the writer of almost pornographic novels. A quick scan of his biography on Wikipedia (for what it’s worth) doesn’t alter that by much…
John Angelico

By: David Skinner

David Skinner — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:25:23 +0000

So important was marriage to Jewish life that the prophets continually linked it to the divine covenant. The family was more important than the nation. The backsliding of the Jewish nation was often described in terms of adultery. For the last forty or fifty years western European civilization has accommodated, as easily as a pair of well -worn slippers (facilitated by the free supply of contraception to school children) adultery, either in the mind or in deed.

The acceptance of homosexuality follows as night follows day. And why shouldn’t homosexual relationships be socially acceptable? After all, the heterosexual community is no longer concerned about purity.They have been free, ever since Alfred Kinsey produced his bogus report on sexuality in the 60s, to pour contempt on marriage by normalising adultery. If heterosexuals have been free to give full expression to their sexual appetites, making their bodies simply instruments of consumption and pleasure, to reduce marriage to the means to companionship, the means to taxation privileges, medical aid benefits, adoption rights, but more strategically, the pathway to social standing and seal of approval that it carries – to respectability, why should not the homosexual have a piece of the pie, especially if some gay marriages relationship can make many heterosexual relationships look shallow, shabby, selfish affairs by comparison. Surely they too have a right to happiness?

But the question arises, if the heterosexual community has failed to honour the marriage bed, why should we believe that the gay community is going to fair any better, especially in the absence of the calming effect off the female on testosterone-charged males?

The reality is that gay community does not really want to replicate traditional marriage. When the gay community are offered marriage there is not exactly a stampede. The evidence shows that marriage does not suit the gay life-style. What they want is the acceptance and recognition, the goods and services associated with marriage – but not the essential nature of it. But it is heterosexual-like marriage which is easiest to sell to the wider heterosexual community – albeit with female ‘man-maids’, or Cinderella ‘pumpkin’ carriages pulled by white horses with pink feathered plumes.

If sexuality has no intrinsic purpose, as defined by the Jews, in giving a nation stability, cohesion, growth, and the opportunity to demonstrate sacrificial love, as demonstrated for two thousand years through Christian marriage, the message will be built into the law itself that there is no objective moral order and that it is merely a human invention that one is free to redefine and change like playdo, or even to discard altogether.

Lady Hale , a British Law Lord (who, for many years, was the key person driving the Law Commission’s anti-marriage agenda) said back in 1980: “‘Logically, we have already reached a point at which…we should be considering whether the legal institution of marriage continues to serve any useful purpose.”

Finally, heterosexual families who might have unwittingly visited London Zoo with their unsuspecting children, yesterday, Sunday 16th, and who would have paid no small entry free, would have not only have had the privilege of viewing a new and exotic species but also of being discriminated against in the delivery of goods and services on the grounds of their heterosexual orientation. But it is all towards creating equality. Isn’t it?
www.zsl.org/zsl-london-zoo/whats-on/gay-sunday,213,EV.html

David Skinner, UK

By: MurrayA

MurrayA — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:58:53 +0000

All I can say is what many are now saying, even non-Christians: this is the death of Britain, and of Western civilization in general. One should read this report in conjunction with Peter Hitchens book, “The Abolition of Briatin”, 2001. The Britain which built an empire, produced so many great people and great institutions, authored great literature, and from which came spiritual giants such as William Tyndale, John Bunyan, George Whitefield, the Wesleys, has now sunk into a sewer of corruption and degradation. Indeed more, for it is one thing to tolerate such debased lifestyles; it is quite another to pass laws forbidding anyone to call it sin, and give it equal status in law along with legitimate marriage.
Murray Adamthwaite

By: David Clay

David Clay — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 11:25:25 +0000

How long can the West survive under such conditions? Probably not long, that is until the Muslims take over. While I certainly don't advocate Islam, at least there some outward or verbal appreciation of family values. Unfortunately, many Muslim families put to shame many in Christian circles. Yes I know about all the abuse in Muslim circles etc. (check here), but they do hold to the form of the family much better than many Christians, and of course the rest of Western society. Marriage and the family was the first institution ordaned by God. We tamper with it to our detriment. Timely article Bill. David Clay, Melbourne