Friday, May 1, 2009


I have to admit that twenty years ago when I waded into the sexual morality fight I didn't think it would require this much patience. The title for this blog is "Love is Patient." It is patient. The Bible tells us that. It is the truth.

Love has always animated my efforts. It will always motivate me. I have a more difficult time with patience.

I love my country, and people who are trapped by an inhuman ideology, too much not to fight. The idea that "all sex is good sex as long as it is consensual" is truly an evil idea. We will either defeat it with the truth, or this idea will destroy us.

That may sound overly apocalyptic, but think about it. Read history. Do nations always survive? Do nations really swing from left to right? Or is there a direction to history? Is history going somewhere?

History and time are going somewhere. Things are both progressing and regressing at the same time, depending on what you consider. Technology has progressed. Morals in the United States have regressed at the same time. Power is progressing and concentrating while authority is regressing.

What I saw in the Senate debate about marriage yesterday was the concentration of power, absent a substantial interest in authority. The powerful men and women of Maine lectured us on civility, condemning the "extremes," while they deferred to the evil idea of sexual disorientation and enacted the truly extreme ... even insane ... notion of sodomy-based marriage.

I wrote more about that here.

Living as a Christian in America is going to take more patience than ever. It is also going to take more courage than has been required of previous generations. As the culture continues to coarsen the idea of loving ones enemies may disappear as a reality in the interest of survival. It is interesting to ponder the future for our culture if we learn to appreciate multiculturalism more than beauty, order, decency, righteousness and truth.

The advocates of multiculturalism may realize the essence of their idea, disorder. A lack of unity can produce only one outcome ... violence.

I am for unifying our culture around the ideals of Jesus Christ. What do you think a modern culture devoted to the values of Jesus Christ would look like? Would it pride itself on helping the poor while it slaughtered innocent babies in the womb? Would it crusade against global warming while it ignored demographic cooling?

Paul the Apostle has an interesting take on sexual confusion. I have written about it relentlessly over the years. Paul observes that homosexuality is a consequence of God giving us up. We get confused about sex because God is no longer present in our society. We have exchanged the glory of an immortal God for the worship of created things.

We must pray.

God, I hope you are listening and that Paul's observation that you "turn your back" doesn't mean that you have turned your back on Maine. I appeal to you to intervene. Thank you. In Jesus name. Amen.


  1. "sodomy-based marriage"

    So same-sex marriage between gay women is on your okay list?

  2. I guess that a gay man and a gay women can get married as they would meet the "one man, one women" rule. Stills mocks marriage, but it would be "legal". Or would you ask folks about there sexual orientation before marriage, or about if they have been arrested, child abuse, rapist? etc. Where will you stop when it comes to creating laws to "protect marriage" ????

  3. The critical assumption made by the first two posters is that homosexuality is a 'condition' or a 'trait'. This is not backed by real science. I think that where science would suggest that sodomy is "genetic" or "inherent" a Christian would suggest that sin is a natural human problem. However, the key is acting on desires and sinful impulses. That is the choice made by homosexuals. Having a tendency (due to experience, cultural exposure, etc.) does not justify the act. It is wholly wrong. In addition, to suggest that a person with homosexual desires can not make a choice whether or not to pursue those rather belittling. I would say that is more demeaning than suggesting they are sinning. At least Christians...give them that respect...the respect of choice. As such, the assertions made above are highly illogical...and borderline ridiculous. Peace

  4. Michael, I have a question that I'm not sure the Governor or anyone has really considered that seriously. Perhaps I'm being a little premature here, because I don't really know how the people's referendum works and whether or not it will take place BEFORE what the Governor signed goes into effect. But here in California, our state Supreme Court rashly allowed gay marriage for a few months knowing full well that this question was going to be on the ballot in November. Now that the voters of California have said NO to gay marriage, the court is having to decide what to do about the presumed 16,000 so-called same-sex marriages they mistakenly allowed during that interim They could dissolve them since they are now totally illegal or they could create a special exception for them because they relied on the legality of the court's decision when they married. No one knows what they're going to do. So, my question is whether or not the Governor has considered the likelihood that he or the court may have to decide the fate of any interim marriages conducted between when this new 'law' goes into effect and the people repeal it a few months later. Clearly, the California Court did not, though they could easily have stayed the implementation of their decision until after the election. Is that something we can ask the Governor to consider? It just doesn't seem fair to put any of these couples through the uncertainty they'd face after the vote, or the voters through the expense of having to pay for changing all the forms etc. when they're going to have to be changed back anyway. How do we communicate this clearly to the Governor so he'll consider staying this law from going into effect until after the vote? Please let us know.