GAY TRUTH

The purpose of this article is to examine the compatibility of Christianity with Libertarianism. Now I want to distinguish political libertarianism from theological libertarianism. Theological libertarianism revolves around the debate of human free will in regards to God ’s sovereignty.  Libertarian Free Will argues that man’s will is autonomous and is able to make decisions that are free in an absolute sense (i.e., undetermined). I believe a consistent biblical view of man’s will argues against man having an autonomous free will. This is not to argue that man’s will isn’t free. Man is free to choose anything he desires to choose. The only caveat is that man’s free will choices fall under the umbrella of God’s eternal sovereign decree. Political libertarianism doesn’t regard man in relation to God, but man in relation to man in the realm of society. Libertarianism argues that for human society to thrive personal freedom must be maximized and government control must be minimized

ACT electorates, as depicted at http://www.katygallagher.net/electorate.cfm Brindabella Molonglo Ginninderra (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The ACT may become the first Australian jurisdiction to legalise same-sex marriage, or put another way promote grievous immorality as righteousness. To say to God your laws and moral do not apply to us. The ACT Government will introduce legislation during the spring sittings of the Legislative Assembly to establish the Territory Same-sex Marriage Act. Same-sex couples in the ACT have been able to register their civil partnership since 2008, and last year a bill was passed to reinstate legally binding ceremonies. But the ACT Government wants to go further and give full marriage equality to same-sex couples. The Federal Government argues it has the sole responsibility for marriage laws, but ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell says he is confident the Territory has the authority to go further. Even though South Australia lost the vote last wee

Rainbow flag. Symbol of gay pride. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) During a large public survey on Homosexual marriage, when asked to rate the importance of same sex marriage as an issue, relative to five other topical issues, same sex marriage  ranked lowest in importance, even lower than the other social issue   of voluntary euthanasia. With 61% of the sample believing that the  same sex marriage debate is a distraction from more important  issues, and only 1 in 7 in strongly support of changing the Marriage  Act, there is a warning here for politicians to ensure that resources   and time are not diverted from other more pressing issues of  domestic importance. (6) The survey also shows that a significant proportion of those in favour of same sex marriage also share the same concerns as those not in   favour of same sex marriage, in the following areas: - How children are raised, with an acknowledgement that being raised by one’s biological mother and father is the norm which  should

While pro-family advocates have noted the incredible rate at which the homosexualist movement has gained the political upper hand in the last five years, others are voicing concern about the shrinking “social space” in the public discourse for those who still object to “ gay marriage .” Some pundits on the left and the center-right are warning that as the homosexual movement gains legislative ground, the freedom to object is narrowing and those holding out against it are increasingly under threat. The stunning advances made by the “ gay movement ” some are saying, is not a triumph for social freedom, but for an increasingly brutally enforced social conformism. Left-libertarian British journalist Brendan O’Neill warned  in a column in Spiked , that in 20 years of writing on political issues , “I have never encountered an issue like gay marriage, an issue in which the space for dissent has shrunk so rapidly, and in which the consensus is not only stifling but choking.” The

Last week, Rush Limbaugh said he thought the battle over marriage was lost as soon as rhetorical concessions such as “ same-sex marriage ” versus “ traditional marriage ” were made: The language game , the left really excels at changing the language to benefit them politically, and they do it in such a way that a lot of people on our side have no idea what’s happened until it’s too late and the issue is already lost, which this issue is. This issue is lost. I don’t care what the Supreme Court does, this is now inevitable — and it’s inevitable because we lost the language on this. I mentioned the other day that I’ve heard people talk about “opposite-sex marriage,” or you might have had heard people say “traditional marriage.” You might have heard people say “hetero-marriage.” I maintain to you that we lost the issue when we started allowing the word “marriage” to be bastardized and redefined by simply adding words to it, because marriage is one thing, and it was not established o

March 27, 2013 ( thePublicDiscourse.com ) - In our sometimes misguided efforts to expand our freedom, selfish adults have systematically dismantled that which is most precious to children as they grow and develop. That’s why I am now  speaking out against same-sex marriage . By the way,  I am gay . A few days ago I testified against pending same-sex marriage legislation in Minnesota ’s Senate Judiciary and House Civil Law Committees. The atmosphere at these events (I’ve also testified elsewhere) seems tinged with unreality—almost a carnival-like surrealism. Natural law, tradition, religion, intellectual curiosity, and free inquiry no longer play a role in deliberations. Same-sex marriage legislation is defended solely on grounds of moral relativism and emotions. Pure sophistry is pitted against reason. Reason is losing. Here’s the problem: The national discussion of same-sex marriage treats the issue like a game of checkers , where opponents can quickly gain each o

Here is the way same-sex marriage is “advertised” today: 1. Legalizing same-sex marriage will allow gay and lesbian couples to have the same hospital visitation rights , etc. as other married couples . 2. Legalizing same-sex marriage will put an end to discrimination by affording gay and lesbian couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. 3. Same-sex marriage won’t affect other types of marriages. What’s the big deal, right? THE FINE PRINT Here is the fine print below the advertisement, just a few of the implications of legally redefining marriage. 1. When it comes to the family , there is no qualifiable difference between a mom and a dad. Supporting same-sex marriage is saying the law of the land should reflect the fact that two dads are just as good for kids as a dad and mom. Gender plays no role in parenting. No civil institution should reinforce the idea that men and women bring different gifts and skills to parenting. No civil institution should uphold t

January 11, 2013 ( thePublicDiscourse.com ) - It is remarkable that the idea of same-sex marriage has gained ground so rapidly. Those most quick to accept the idea have been elite liberals, with ordinary Americans lagging behind but becoming more accepting of the idea. In the thick of the struggle over the law and politics of marriage, we can easily forget how novel is the idea of two men or two women marrying each other. This fact came home to me when I participated in a forum on the subject at Princeton University last spring. Present in the room were two lions of the liberal academy, each past the “threescore years and ten” of which the Psalmist speaks, each a distinguished scholar with many publications to his credit, each known for his devotion to liberal causes. Both gentlemen expressed the opinion that the cause of same-sex marriage was obviously just, that opponents of the cause were obviously reactionary and benighted, and that this was plainly the new civil rights stru