In rejecting Christianity will
 society re-define marriage?
Don Wildmon
AFA/AFR founder

April 2006 – In June, the Senate will be voting on a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being only between one man and one woman. In November at least a half-dozen states will be voting to put into their constitutions that same definition – marriage can only be between one man and one woman. 

Believe it or not, there are actually high-level officials in many denominations who are supporting the change to allow two men or two women to be married.  Have they not read the Bible? Of course they have read it. They simply don’t believe it. They believe their way is  better. By the way, it is the money supplied by the local church which keeps these officials supplied with funds to continue their efforts. Many church members would be horrified to learn that their offerings go to these leaders who want to destroy marriage as God has defined it. 

Let us suppose for a moment that homosexual marriage does become legal.  It is closer to becoming a reality than many believe. The world is changing around us, and we go merrily on our way pretending that such a change will not affect us or our children. “Doesn’t affect me. I don’t want to marry someone of my sex, but I don’t care if someone else wants to marry a person of the same sex. If two people are in love, they should be allowed to marry.” So goes the thinking.  The problem is that that thinking doesn’t go far enough. 

If two people of the same sex can marry, then why can’t three people of the same sex be legally married? Or four? Or two men and three women? Or any combination you desire to choose? Why can’t a man who loves his daughter marry her? If you allow two men to be married, then you have no reason to forbid any couples or groups from being married. 

All of this, of course, goes back to the standard on which a person (or a nation) chooses to base the concept of good and evil, right and wrong. There is truth, and there is relativism. Truth is constant. Relativism is something subject to change as the latest fad comes along. 

Our society has a new definition of God and love.  In the past we saw truth in the definition that God is love. For centuries we have operated on that basis.  But now, not satisfied with the restrictions that old definition imposes on us, we have turned the wording around. No longer is God love, but now love is god. 

There is a world of difference in those two definitions. Our future, and the future of our children and grandchildren, depends on which we believe.  undefined