Category: Public Policy
How to Protect Your Church: Supreme Court Marriage Ruling Could Mean Trouble for Marriage
Posted on June 8, 2015 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
The Supreme Court is preparing to rule on the issue of marriage. Potentially the court could decide that same-sex “marriage” is to be recognized across the nation regardless of state laws – effectively overriding current state laws. If this occurs one area that everyone will be watching to see how it is affected is the church.
Will the court ruling, if unfavorable, demand that churches recognize same-sex “marriage”? Will the ruling demand that pastors perform same-sex weddings against their religious convictions? Those questions are left unanswered at this time but many are taking proactive steps to protect their ministry.
Citizenlink has put together a short video with some information pastors and churches will find valuable in preparing for whatever ruling is handed down. In conjunction with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), Citizenlink is sharing resources designed to protect churches and pastors in the event of a lawsuit. I highly recommend that this information be shared with any pastor or church leader now, don’t wait.
Bradford, Washington, Lincoln, and W: Thanksgiving Proclamations Thanking God and Encouraging Prayer!
Posted on November 27, 2014 in Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
The very first Thanksgiving Proclamation was made by William Bradford in 1623. At least that is how history records it. I have no doubt the Pilgrims were quite thankful when they landed in the “new world.” But history doesn’t record an official proclamation until several years later when Bradford, the governor of the colony, said these words:
Education in Chicago: 5th Graders Learn About Female Condoms and See Pictures!
Posted on November 24, 2014 in Public Policy, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
I don’t care if people call this a “pet peeve” of mine. I will continue to be alarmed (and seek to alarm others) of the graphic nature of public school sex-education programs.
A recent report coming out of Chicago once again underscores the absolutely inappropriateness of the material being taught to 5th graders! Yes, 5th graders. Here’s some of the lessons being taught:
How to put on male and female condoms. (They are also being shown graphic illustrations of this procedure.)
How to use condoms for anal sex and encouraged in this practice.
They are being told the “Plan B morning after pill” is not an abortion pill.
They can get sexual and reproductive services without parental consent.
If you read through that paragraph without being shocked and angered that 10-year-olds are being taught such material, it’s time to reconsider your values.
The article reports:
Federal Court Makes Ruling Affecting Every Pastor in America
Posted on November 20, 2014 in Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
Pastors can breathe a sigh of relief today as the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court decision to strike down the minister’s housing allowance as unconstitutional.
Previously, the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) had argue that the housing allowance given to pastors was unconstitutional because it provided an unfair tax benefit to pastors, creating preferential treatment for religious messages. It was argued that the housing allowance violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment. The lower court, with Judge Barbara Crabb ruling, agreed with the FFRF and ruled the housing allowance unconstitutional.
Though the ruling only affected pastors in Wisconsin, Illinois, and Indiana, pastors across the country watched the case with serious interest knowing if the ruling was upheld it would soon spread.
The 7th Circuit determined that since the FFRF was never denied tax-exemption under the housing allowance tax code they had no standing concerning the issue:
In Light of the Supreme Court Decision Let’s Celebrate Endangering Health and Harming Kids
Posted on October 15, 2014 in Public Policy, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision to reject appeals from five states concerning the issue of marriage, thereby effectively legalizing same-sex “marriage” in those five states, I found a couple of other articles interesting.
Shouting just below the clamor of those rejoicing at the Supreme Court’s decision, and the advancement of same-sex “marriage” in general, is the common sense warning signs of the dangers of this lifestyle. First are the physical/health dangers inherent within homosexuality.
According to a recent “Morbidity and Mortality” report by the Centers for Disease Control, while gay men make up just 2% of America’s population, they account for nearly two-thirds of all HIV cases. A recent article states:
The Only Thing Christians Can Do Is Disobey
Posted on September 19, 2014 in Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
Christians have a responsibility to be obedient to civil government. Verses such as Mark 12:17 and Romans chapter 13 make it clear that Christians have a duty to be obedient to civil government because God has ordained government “for your good.”
Knowing that Christians have a responsibility to civil government makes it hard for some to understand why we resist and fight some laws. If, they suppose, Christians are to obey government, why fight the HHS mandate or the redefinition of marriage?
For those leading the charge in these particular areas of culture change it makes no sense for Christians to expend all their energy fighting the government when they should, as the Bible teaches, submit to and obey the government. Rather than risk the loss of livelihood or be fined for resisting and opposing laws mandated by the government, Christians ought to submit and obey.
While that is, technically true, it is not entirely true and stands outside the context of Christian responsibility.
Will Legalizing Gay “Marriage” End the Culture Wars? Don’t Be Silly
Posted on September 4, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
No, no, no, no, no. Hoping the Supreme Court legalizes same-sex “marriage” in all fifty states is not a good idea. Yes, the issue is undoubtedly headed back to the high court and, yes, the court will be forced to rule whether or not individual states have the right to define marriage for themselves. But, to want the Supreme Court to decide for us all what the definition of marriage should be is an absurd proposition.
I get it, the writer of this article saying that such a decision by the high court would be a great thing for the Republican Party is thinking along secular political lines. His end game is a strengthened GOP that doesn’t have to deal with an unpopular cultural issue. Nonetheless, not only do I think it is a political strategy nightmare, I think it’s a moral disaster of epic proportions.
The writer starts off his support for a Supreme Court decision by saying: “Like it or not, opponents of gay marriage are losing the battle…A substantial majority of voters now support it, 59 percent in the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll.”
Shock! State Marriage Amendment Stands Against Court Challenge
Posted on August 27, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
Imagine my shock when I read that a state’s marriage amendment defining marriage as the union of one woman and one man was upheld in a federal court.
It’s not that I think such amendments aren’t Constitutional, quite the opposite. In fact I believe that each state has the sovereign right to decide for itself what the definition of marriage will be. I believe the federal government should stay out of the debate between states and refuse to interfere in the decision each state will make. I believe the people of each state – not a court or a single judge – should make the decision.
So my shock has nothing to do with the constitutionality of such amendments. Instead, my shock is that a federal court would actually uphold the will of the people rather than trample all over it as so many have already done.
A post at ScotusBlog reports:
Do You Know What the “Gay Rights Platform” Is? If Not You Will Be Shocked!
Posted on August 11, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
The question is, “Do you know what that gay rights agenda is?
In an article for WND, pastor, writer, and human rights consultant Dr. Scott Lively has explained in great detail exactly what the gay rights agenda is, and how it is being accomplished. And he’s done so using their own writings.
Take for example the 1972 Gay Rights Platform. This platform was adopted in 1972 when more than 200 homosexual organizations met in Chicago to write and adopt it. Why should it matter to you? Because nearly every plank in this platform has been achieved. A platform that is more than 40 years old has been implemented with surgical precision. Check for yourself, read the platform and check off how many of their goals have been accomplished.
FEDERAL LEVEL:
1) Amend all federal Civil Rights Acts, other legislation and government controls to prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations and public services.
Atheist Groups Rejoice Over IRS Decision to Monitor Churches. But Should They?
Posted on July 31, 2014 in Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
Good news! The IRS has agreed to start monitoring churches more closely concerning political speech. Doesn’t that make you feel safe?
Apparently a lawsuit brought against the IRS by the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) has resulted in an agreement between the atheist group and the IRS to spend more time monitoring churches. After all, we can’t have churches giving direction to their congregations about critical issues, and where candidates stand on those issues. (Alliance Defending Freedom has sent a FOIA request to the IRS asking for these new policies.)
The lawsuit was first prompted in 2009 as a result of the nationwide ‘Pulpit Freedom Sunday” campaign started by Alliance Defending Freedom. This campaign was started as an effort to challenge the unconstitutional “Johnson Amendment” that was inserted into the IRS code back in 1954. The Amendment makes it illegal for tax-exempt organizations to engage in electioneering, broadly defined as endorsing one political candidate or another.