My first tornado was a Technicolor “special effect”
a televised version of the 1939 classic, The Wizard of Oz.
The Benson house
was still intact, but the movie left me emotionally reeling as a
That dark whirling cloud that flung Dorothy and Toto through the sky
bedtime dreams for years. It just seemed so incredibly real.
Like the heroine of that beloved film, I have often
wished that I could “click my heels” and be
magically transported back to the
more virtuous environment of the early 1960’s. Over the past
our nation has been “swept out of Kansas”
by the cyclone of moral relativism and summarily dropped into
makes sense anymore. At least, nothing in terms of moral codes of
Case in point—homosexual “marriage.”
Bush’s call for a constitutional amendment banning gay
unions, thousands of
same-sex couples have flocked to California and other such states
York, Oregon and New Mexico) in order to pursue legal sanction for
relationships. One of the more notable examples comes from the media
Rosie O’Donnell. She and her girlfriend, Kelli Carpenter,
flew to San
Francisco in order to
“tie the knot.” In an effort to fan the flames of
her agenda, O’Donnell
commented, “I think the actions of the president are, in my
opinion, the most
vile and hateful words ever spoken by a sitting president.”
She continued, “I
am stunned and horrified. I find this proposed amendment very, very,
shocking. And immoral…”
Immoral?! Immoral?! Did I miss something here? Exactly
when did the statute of limitations expire on the wickedness of this
fornication (cf. Isaiah 5:20)?
Brethren, while we have a Divine mandate to extend kindness to every
citizen, we cannot and must not—under any
circumstances—endorse this course of
action (i.e., homosexuality).
And why not, you may ask? First of all, because
homosexual behavior is contrary to God’s will (Romans
1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10;
Period! But second, because same-sex unions promote even greater moral
For instance, in the event the United States
government legally sanctions
homosexual “marriage,” how can it then deny
polygamist marriage too?1 Think
that sounds “out in left
field?” Don’t believe it for a minute. Study the
following excerpt from a Fox
News Live broadcast dated February 27, 2004. The discussion
Family Research Council’s Genevieve Wood and radio host
discriminate against all sorts of people. We don’t let people
people, we don’t let a man marry two women, or a woman to
marry two men and we
don’t allow group marriages.
is not on the table here.
Yes it will
be. My friend, yes it will be…
No it will
not be. It is an invalid slippery slope argument. That is invalid.
That is not
true. Let me explain to you why. How would you write a law that only
marriage to two people? Why would it be just two people? You are
against a group of people out there—and believe me, there are
people who think
polygamy is a good idea, who think group marriage is a good idea.
are a small minority, but they’ll come forward and say
“we have a right to get
married, too. You are discriminating against us.”
come forward you come back on FOX and you go against them. That is not
No you come
back on FOX and tell them why you would discriminate against them.
are basing your entire thing on discrimination.
here is whether or not a civil institution—marriage which has
nothing to do
with religion and the 2,000 rights granted therein are going to be
denied to a
group of people based on gender. That Massachusetts Supreme Court says,
you deny it to polygamists? Why would you deny it to any other group of
who say it is a civil institution?
I am not
entering that debate with you because it is not on the table.
okay with polygamy too?
I am not
going to get into an issue that we are not discussing. We are
and lesbian marriage, not polygamy. If you want to have another segment
While gay-rights activists flood the airwaves with
their vile propaganda, what they’re not talking about are the
their policy. As you can see, they steadfastly refuse to address the
polygamy. Why? Because they can’t. To be consistent, they are
discriminating against polygamists AND THEY KNOW IT. The reason why
hearing the homosexual community talk about this is because it opens a
veritable “Pandora’s Box” for their
illicit cause.2 Same-sex unions
legitimize other forms of aberrant, amoral
conduct; they usher in even more radical and harmful departures from
biblical pattern of marriage.3
Brethren, “we’re not in Kansas
anymore.” The Wizard of Oz was
fantasy, but rampant immorality is an all too tragic reality. Our homes
danger of being tossed about by the winds of political correctness.
marriage runs contrary to all that is right and decent and threatens to
the traditional family structure. It is long past time that we
collectively stand our ground and voice our opposition to this ungodly
(Ezekiel 33:2-11; James 4:17).
no place like home...” (Proverbs 27:1; Genesis 2:24).
likeliest effects of gay marriage is to take us down a slippery slope
legalized polygamy and “polyamory” (group
marriage). Marriage will be
transformed into a variety of relationship contracts, linking two,
more individuals (however weakly and temporarily) in every conceivable
combination of male and female. A scare scenario? Hardly. The bottom of
slope is visible from where we stand. Advocacy of legalized polygamy is
growing. A network of grassroots organizations seeking legal
group marriage already exists. The cause of legalized group marriage is
championed by a powerful faction of family law specialists. Influential
bodies in both the United
have presented radical programs of marital reform. Some of these
quasi-governmental proposals go so far as to suggest the abolition of
The ideas behind this movement have ready achieved surprising influence
prominent American politician. None of this is well known. Both the
public spokesmen for the gay marriage movement treat the issue as an
advance for civil rights...” (Stanley
Kurtz, “Beyond Gay Marriage,” The Weekly
Standard, July 26, ‘03, Vol. 8,
touted half-page of analysis from an unpublished paper that supposedly
validate the 'conservative case' for gay
marriage—i.e., that it will encourage stable
marriage for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike—does no such
in Scandinavia is
in steep decline, with
children shouldering the burden of rising rates of family dissolution.
mainspring of the decline—an increasing sharp separation
between marriage and
parenthood—can be linked to gay marriage” (Stanley
Kurtz, “The End of Marriage
The Weekly Standard, Feb.
2, ’04, Vol. 9, Issue 20).
society is unsatisfied with and abandons God’s absolute
standards, then it is
only a matter of time until we become victims of our own subjective
door has been cracked open with regard to the definition of marriage in
allowing homosexuals to marry, so now a polygamist in Utah,
who has five wives, is appealing
bigamy convictions brought against him on the basis of this court
man’s lawyer is arguing that the decriminalization of
homosexual sex is no different
than polygamy” (Steve Higginbotham,
“Yesterday’s Fringe, Today’s
Green Street church of Christ Weekly Newsletter, Vol. 23, No.
2, Jan. 12,