|
They won’t stop there.
We have Reverend Dobson, of Focus on the Family, to thank for calling attention to the fact that SpongeBob Squarepants, a sponge, has consorted openly with his “friend” Patrick, a starfish. These two have gone so far as to hold hands and appear in a video promoting “tolerance,” a Hollywood code-word for the nihilistic destruction of the family structure.
Dr. Dobson, however, has not gone far enough.
Sponges, secular so-called scientists claim, are in fact asexual. Other sea life is even worse. Oysters are hermaphroditic, switching genders willy-nilly according to their Satanic whims. It is small wonder that Leviticus proclaims the eating of shellfish to be unclean1. It is a shame that the godless Environmental Protection Agency insists on protecting these creatures from God’s judgment in the form of mercury emissions, all in the name of a few thousand babies whose mothers should not have disobeyed God’s holy commandments. Of course, gay-rights activists will try to cloud the issue. They will claim that any society that accepts the second and third marriages should accept their own unions. They will claim that they are providing families and parents to children abused and neglected by their own.3 They will claim that they do not seek special rights, but equal rights, because their employers must treat partner health benefits as taxable income unlike in a true marriage. It may seem perfectly reasonable, but it’s not.
The truth is that the gay rights movement is only trying to trick us with talk of civil unions and equal rights. If we grant them equality, what is to prevent them from calling it marriage?
In fact, several churches have already made that leap. Episcopal churches in the United States and Canada have blessed same-sex unions. The largest Protestant denominations, the Methodists and Presbyterians, have discussed doing so. There is even a 1.3 million member church, The United Church of Christ, which runs blasphemous ads proclaiming that "Jesus didn't turn people away. Neither do we.”
Their excuses vary. Some churches claim that since Christianity assumes that we all are in some way living in sin, it is Pharisaic to proclaim homosexuality to be the one sin that prevents one from joining the body of the church. Others complain that moneylenders and hypocrites were the targets of Jesus’ wrath, and that he never mentioned homosexuality. The United Church of Christ acts like faithful love and commitment should be rewarded, no matter who is involved.
Clearly, merely revising the Constitution to define marriage does not go far enough.2 We must pass an entire Bill of Restrictions which will forever settle this issue. Churches endorsing marriage that conflicts with biblical principles must be formally abolished by law. Call them whatever you want; just don’t call them churches. Unions not consecrated by a pastor of a true church must not be recognized. Hollywood productions, false sermons, and other speech which undermines the family as a basic unit of society must be restricted. This is the only way to defend the American way of life.
Back to home
|
Drew Sedrel is the Executive Director of the think-tank the American Center for Responsive Politics. The American Center for Responsive Politics is in no way affiliated with the Center for Responsive Politics, which is un-American. There is no direct financial link between Mr. Sedrel and the current administration.
1: Shellfish is unclean because of its lack of a Christian family structure. The Bible endorses the eating of herd animals, which live in biblically-based polygamist family structures in which one male breeds with several females. 2: If John Ashcroft were still Attorney General, perhaps revising the Constitution would be unnecessary, as his fine legal mind could surely find some Inherent Powers to defend us. I am unsure of the new man, though. Mr. Gonzales’ memos defending the use of torture rather disturbingly failed to cite the Spanish Inquisition as a precedent of the successful use of torture against heathens. 3: It is clearly preferable to reunite these children with their heterosexual parents Failing that, large state or church-based facilities with underpaid adults working in shifts to care for the children is clearly preferable to them having two mommies or two daddies. I am sure that my own experiences working in three facilities4 in two states where people seeking to abuse or conduct inappropriate relationships with children managed to find employment were simply an aberration.
4: Two faith-based, one government run. In none were the transgressors referred to law enforcement, as the confidentiality of the victim would have been compromised. I’m sure that’s all just coincidence, though, and any child would be happy to live in a dormitory with twelve others if it meant freedom from parents of the same gender.
|
