14
Nov
08

Homosexual Marriage Shot Down: “Separation of Church and State”?

We are the soldiers under God’s command
We hold His two-edged sword within our hands
We’re not ashamed to stand up for what’s right
We win without sin, it’s not by our might
And we’re fighting all the sin
And the good book — it says we’ll win!

Soldiers, Soldiers, under command
Soldiers, Soldiers, fighting the Lords battle plan

The above lyrics by the band Stryper may seem cheesy 80’s on their own, but have great bearing on Christians in our current culture war environment.

As most have heard Proposition 8, the California bill which would ban gay marriage, passed. This was a great upset to the homosexual marriage (I don’t use the term “gay” because I doubt many of them are very HAPPY right now). There have been outcries of anger and frustration from pro-homo marriage groups and many protests have taken place. But there is some serious hypocrisy in all of this.

First of all, there is one single group that is taking the brunt of the frustration and anger: people of religious faith. I use such a generic term because there have been fierce protesting at not only Protestant churches but at at least one Mormon church. While I highly disagree with Mormon theology and believe that they are in essence preaching “another gospel” (Galatians 1:8), I do agree with their pro-straight only marriage stance. Gotta agree with them there!

On the Bill O’Reilly Radio Factor program recently I heard a sound clip of about 1,000 demonstrators who had gathered in front of a New York City Mormon church on W. 64th street to protest the church’s funding of a anti-homosexual marriage effort in California which has now succeeded in helping to overturn the rigts of homosexuals to marry in that state. The protesters were chanting “Stop the Mormons, Stop the hate, separation of church and state!”

Separation of Church and State?

This was mass ignorance on an incredible scale. Raise your hand if you can tell me where the phrase “separation of church and state” comes from. And if you say from the Constitution you will have earned a trip to the wood shed. It is NOT in the Constitution. It was in a personal letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association explaining to them that there is a wall erected between church and state and that they can rest assured that the government will never establish an official denomination. The Danbury Baptists were worried about their right to be Baptists. That’s it. That’s all there is to it but our courts and liberals have made “separation of church and state” mean something it was never meant to and has convinced most people that it is part of some legal document somewhere. It was in a letter. One letter. Not a single government document carries the phrase.

Furthermore, this Mormon church simply gave money to an effort they supported. It was their money to do with as they saw fit. It was the people of California who voted for Proposition 8 and it’s ban.

Violent Protest at a Protestant Church

A protestant church in Michigan was also the victim of fierce protests when an activist group invaded the church during a worship service and began tearing up the place. When was the last time you saw Christians act this way? We are often criticized for the Inquisition, but over the past 20 or 30 years we have been the victims of a secular Inquisition.

What About the Black Voters?

It was pointed out by Bill O’Reilly how the real heroes in the passage of Prop 8 were the African-American voters. Of the black voters that voted on the bill, 70% voted in favor of Prop 8 (i.e. in favor of banning homosexual marriage). This is interesting because homosexual marriage advocates cite a 1960’s ruling in Virginia which overturned a ban on interracial marriage. Homo activists declare that the current issue is related. Well, it isn’t related. One has to do with your race, the way you were born; the other is related to a life choice. Yes, a choice. Yet why are these activists not attacking Black churches or protesting in Black neighborhoods? It would be seen as utterly politically incorrect for them to do so and for such liberals being PC is the highest virtue.

I support the rights of Americans to peacably assemble. If Prop 8 had gone the other way and homosexual marriage was legalized in California you would be reading protests from me. However this was not a church thing. Yes, there were doubtless many Christians who voted for the ban, but in the end it was the people of California. But noooooo….it’s so much more fun (and PC) to pick on the people of faith. It’s so much easier to bash them with the “separation of church and state” hammer. But it is a feather hammer. It has no teeth (if you’ll allow me to mix metaphors). So don’t let these people scare you. Continue to stand up for and vote for your convictions and your allegiance to traditional values. I don’t have many opportunities to say this: Hats off to the voters of California!

Josh H.

Advertisements

9 Responses to “Homosexual Marriage Shot Down: “Separation of Church and State”?”


  1. 1 angi
    November 14, 2008 at 11:23 pm

    I get incredibly tired of hearing the same old “separation of church and state” argument, because you’re exactly right. It was a letter from Thomas Jefferson, it was not in the Constitution itself. People also have a tendency to declare that “separation of church and state” comes from the First Amendment, but that’s not entirely correct either – “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” The actual meaning is a FAR CRY from the definition people like to give it when attempting to serve their cause.

  2. November 15, 2008 at 6:57 pm

    @Angi: All Liberals mean when they cry “separation of church and state” is that Christians need to shut up and color.

    A Communist or Socialist America WILL fall, but not before hundreds of people have been made to live in poverty and oppression and not before hundreds of them will have met their demise at the hand of the State.

    Sic Semper Tyrannis!

  3. November 15, 2008 at 11:36 pm

    Thanks for bringing out the origin of that statement.

  4. November 16, 2008 at 12:15 am

    @Jason: You got it, brother! That has been a pet peeve of mine for time immemorial. And it’s good to hear from you again; it’s been a while.

  5. 5 Angie
    November 17, 2008 at 5:23 pm

    Sadly, it’s the lack of REAL education in this nation’s education system that lends to the existence of mass stupidity, coupled with willful ignorance and just plain malice. The “right to marry.” Where, exactly, is marriage defined as a right in the Constitution – gay, straight, or otherwise? I have to say, it’s kind of hard to deny a “right” when no such right exists. Unless, of course, one chooses to define marriage as a “contract,” which entering into contracts IS protected by the Constitution – but then they are no longer “marriages” in the traditional (i.e., religious) sense but civil unions. Of course, civil unions just aren’t good enough, are they? Not when they have the opportunity as the minority to “enforce standards of sexual morality” (something *I* was accused of, after being called “ilk,” of course) onto the majority (followed by some ranting about “democracy,” failing to grasp the notion that the United States is a REPUBLIC, not a democracy per se, shooting themselves in the foot with that same argument since in a “democracy,” the MAJORITY rules, not bows down to grovel at the feet of the minority…). I swear, sometimes it’s like most of the country suffers from “borderline intellectual function” (formerly known as mild mental retardation, before the PC crowd beat the medical community into redefining it into less “perjorative” terms).

  6. 6 Cory G
    December 13, 2008 at 5:57 pm

    Why does the phrase, “Separation of Church and State” have to come from the Constitution in order to be a valid request? We want separation of church and state, we are not quoting anything.

    People are tired of being told what to do by a ridiculous collection of stories and letters put together by Roman Emperor Constantine and the Catholic Church nearly seventeen-hundred years ago.

    @Angie, I agree with you 100%. There is no right to be married. Marriage is a religious thing and should be kept at the church level. The government should be banned from interfering with marriage period. No laws regarding the pairing up of people should be on the books. And no tax breaks either!

  7. December 13, 2008 at 6:43 pm

    Cory g: thanks for commenting. If you want separation of church and state then lobby for a bill to be interoduced. But tge reason i am upset is the courts have been using that phrase from Jefferson’s letter to make judgments for decades now.

    Why does it have to be in the constitution to be valid?? Seriously? It’s only the bedrock of our government.

    Constantine? Catholic church? I am pretty good at history but you lost me there.

  8. 8 Cory G
    December 14, 2008 at 1:56 am

    @Josh (Quote: Constantine? Catholic church? I am pretty good at history but you lost me there.) That is how the bible as you know it came about. The Council of Nicaea, was made up of Catholic Bishops and was ordered to take place by Constantine.

    (Quote: Why does it have to be in the constitution to be valid?) You chopped my quote to change its meaning. Not cool.

    If you read what Jefferson wrote in its entirety you will see that he was asserting that separation between church and state is in the constitution. Think of your doctrine of the blessed trinity. The word trinity is not in the bible, but it is what mainstream christianity claims the bible teaches. So when you read what Jefferson wrote, he first quotes the constitution and then affirms its meaning.

    I leave you with the quote:

    “”Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. “”

    Ref: http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

  9. December 14, 2008 at 1:32 pm

    Cory, I never want to quote anyone out of context here. I really thought that’s what you were saying. But your Trinity analogy cleared it up. I understand your point now.

    However that does not change the fact that either Congress needs to pass along that expresses the “separation of church and state” sentiment or the Court needs to stop using a mere letter to make judgements against the Christian faith (and that’s the only way it has ever been used…against Christians.

    The Council of Nicea: Yes, I am familiar with that historic council.

    Yes, let’s indeed look at this issue in its entirety and not stop simply at Jefferson’s letter but also the letter to which it responded, namely the letter from the Danbury Baptists who were concerned that government would force them to be a particular denomination. Jefferson assured them that this would not happen.

    But we are splitting hairs here. Regardless of our you feel about Christianity or homosexual marriage, Cory, the actions of these protesters are indefensible. They had no right to harass these church-goers.


Comments are currently closed.

Subscribe


Subscribe to Posts

Subscribe to Comments

Add to Technorati Favorites Technorati

Categories

Read the Old Stuff