Federal Court: Marriage Is the Union of One Man and One Woman
Posted on November 18, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
A surprise decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the traditional definition of marriage in the states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. State bans against same-sex marriage were previously ruled unconstitutional by lower courts, setting up the decision by the Sixth Circuit.
This decision is not only a surprise to advocates of same-sex “marriage,” but is also surprising to traditional marriage advocates that have watched marriage bans struck down by numerous Appeal Court decision around the country. What is not a surprise though is that this decision by the Sixth Circuit all but guarantees that marriage will once again come before the Supreme Court. There is a very real possibility that by next summer a Supreme Court decision on the definition of marriage could be reached.
Some have said that the high court is hesitant to issue a Roe v. Wade style blanket decision that would affect the whole country. That makes sense. The idea that a Supreme Court decision will somehow eliminate marriage as a divisive wedge issue for Americans is absurd. Just as the Roe decision did not eliminate abortion as a divisive wedge issue. Realistically, if the Supreme Court redefines marriage for the entire country I believe it will turn up the debate on the issue and firmly establish it as a central issue for decades to come.
As expected, reactions to the Sixth Circuit decision have been numerous and diverse. Byron Babione with Alliance Defending Freedom was quoted in the New York Times saying: Continue reading…
Planned Parenthood Letter: We Need Your Help After the Elections
Posted on November 17, 2014 in Life by Nathan Cherry
It’s no secret that conservative lawmakers swept through the country in the recent mid-term elections. It’s also no secret that those lawmakers are strongly pro-life. Though groups like Planned Parenthood try and deny it, the reality is that America is a predominantly pro-life country.
The trend toward life has been steadily increasing every year. On the state level more pro-life laws have been passed in the last three years than in the previous decade combined. The demand for an end to abortion on demand continues to grow and, were it not for the most pro-abortion president in history, we would see federal pro-life laws passed.
At the end of the night when it was obvious that pro-life lawmakers were headed to Washington to be a majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate, it is understandable that abortion advocates became very nervous.
So nervous is Planned Parenthood that they wasted no time in sending a “we really need your support right now” email to their constituents. It’s not a surprise that Planned Parenthood is nervous given the fact that without President Obama they would not receive the $500 million in tax dollars each year they currently enjoy. That’s our money folks…killing babies.
What is a surprise is just how blatantly false and deceptive the email Planned Parenthood sent was.
The first deception in the letter came when Planned Parenthood decided to question when unborn children are people. They wrote: Continue reading…
A Question About Marriage You Might Not Be Able to Answer
Posted on November 14, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
What is marriage?
That appears on the surface to be an easy question to answer. Perhaps you already have a clearly defined answer at the ready to share with anyone that might ask.
But if we go deeper in this discussion we will inevitably arrive at the root question of “where did your definition of marriage originate?”
Did you get your definition of marriage from your parents? Maybe it came from your church? Perhaps it comes from your understanding of social order and function. Regardless of where it came from we can be certain that our definition of marriage is influenced by its source.
But the question remains of where the definition of marriage originated? In the discussion of the definition of marriage two opposing sides believe they have the right to define marriage. But at the heart of the discussion is the question of where the original definition of marriage that has been firmly established in the history of society for centuries originated.
If humans first defined marriage then I suppose it would be easy to agree that humans have the right to redefine marriage. After-all, humans routinely redefine and alter various laws and societal codes of conduct as time progresses; so why not the definition of marriage? But, and this is critical, if the definition of marriage was ordained by someone other than humans then we must rightly agree that humans have neither the right nor the ability to redefine it. That leads us to the heart of the issue. Continue reading…
A Gay Man Wants to Help Christian Bakers After They Refused to Bake a Cake for Homosexual Wedding
Posted on November 13, 2014 in Marriage, Theology by Nathan Cherry
A story not quite as well-known as the baker from Colorado is the one of the Klein’s, bakers from Oregon. These Christian bakers found themselves in the middle of a national controversy for refusing to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding. In doing so they garnered the wrath of the state which found them guilty of violating anti-discrimination laws. The penalty for adhering to their religious convictions has been the loss of their shop, legal fees, and the possibility of a massive fine that could bankrupt them.
The Klein’s closed their successful bakery in 2013 in the face of legal issues surrounding their case. They decided to operate out of their home in order to be able to do business according to their religious convictions. But this family of 7 is facing bankruptcy as a result of a possible $150,000 fine from the state.
But now, an unlikely ally is coming to their aid and seeking to raise enough money to erase any fines and ensure the family business continues.
That ally is a gay man. Continue reading…
Should Terminal Patients Like Brittany Maynard Kill Themselves?
Posted on November 12, 2014 in Life by Nathan Cherry
At 29 years old Brittany Maynard was given a terminal diagnosis. The brain cancer was terminal and in April she was given 6 months to live. Maynard then decided to her family to Oregon to take advantage of the state’s right-to-die law; which allows a person to take lethal medication to end her life “with dignity.”
Maynard decided to end her life on November 1. After much media attention and national pleading she seemed to change her mind. But then news spread across the nation on Sunday, November 2 that Brittany had taken her life.
Maynard and others want to “die with dignity, on my terms, my time, my way.”
But I have a problem with this use of speech.
The problem is that they give the impression that only those who die in this way accomplish dying with dignity. But what about the soldier that loses his life protecting freedom and other people? Did he not die with dignity? I’m sure he didn’t die on his terms, his time, and in his way. I’m certain people don’t generally choose to die by a bullet or because of a bomb. So do our soldiers not die with dignity?
There’s an inherent idea within the “die-with-dignity” view that says only by killing oneself can a person truly die with dignity. The problem is that such language and ideas actually devalue a human life. This idea says that people choosing to endure an illness, disability, or other condition that leaves them not fully functioning have no dignity. So the cancer patient that endures that terrible disease with grace is viewed as needlessly suffering when she could simply end her own life. Continue reading…
Recent Survey Discovers the Most Popular Heresies Among Evangelical Christians
Posted on November 11, 2014 in Theology by Nathan Cherry
Right-click to download this info-graphic from the LifeWay Research/Ligonier survey.
As my church prepares to begin walking through the book of Ecclesiastes on Sunday mornings, I am already reminded of Solomon’s oft-repeated phrase: “There’s nothing new under the sun.”
That phrase comes to mind as I read the results of a recent survey conducted by LifeWay Research for Ligonier Ministries concerning the theological beliefs of evangelical Christians. These views, heretical at best, show the lack of theological training and how it has caused a host of ancient heresies to resurface today.
Here is a list of some of the troubling statistics:
– 22% said God the Father is more divine than Jesus, and 9 percent weren’t sure.
– 16% say Jesus was the first creature created by God, while 11 percent were unsure.
– 51% said the Holy Spirit is a force, not a personal being. Seven percent weren’t sure.
– 68% said that a person obtains peace with God by seeking God first, and then God responds with grace.
– 67% said people have the ability to turn to God on the own initiative. Yet half (54%) also think salvation begins with God acting first. Continue reading…
Do Kids Really Need Stay At Home Moms?
Posted on November 10, 2014 in Family, Marriage by Nathan Cherry
President Obama supports a woman’s choice.
Unless that choice is to be a stay-at-home mom, then he doesn’t want you to make that choice. He would rather you choose your job and earn more money than to stay home with your children.
That’s the main take away from his recent speech at Rhode Island College in Providence, RI recently. It sounds as though our president would like the government to discourage mother from staying home with their kids. As though money, career advancement, and those things the business world offers are more important than raising children. The President said:
“And sometimes, someone, usually mom, leaves the workplace to stay home with the kids, which then leaves her earning a lower wage for the rest of her life as a result. And that’s not a choice we want Americans to make.”
Historically, stay-at-home moms have been a foundational element to society. Mothers instill values and morals in children from a young age and set children on a course to success. In recent years our society and culture have emphasized the need for women in the workplace as an aspect of gender equality. This has led to a trend in mothers placing their kids in day care and early education programs so they could work. The lure of double income in the household has also led to similar trends. Continue reading…
What the Historic Mid-Term Elections Mean for the GOP and America
Posted on November 7, 2014 in Life, Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
To say that the 2014 mid-term elections were historic is an understatement. The first black senator from the south since reconstruction was elected when Sen. Tim Scott won his race in South Carolina. The first black, female, conservative woman was sent to Congress when Mia Love won her race in Utah.
Blue states such as Illinois, Maryland, and Massachusetts, elected Republican governors.
West Virginia sent its first-ever woman to Congress – and she’s a Republican!
The GOP made gains in the House of Representatives, giving them their largest majority since World War 1.
And the GOP took control of the Senate, firing both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi from their speaker positions.
President Obama made the statement that his policies were on the ballot during this election. He said America would be voting on his policies and leadership of our country at the polls on Tuesday.
America has spoken. America has soundly, loudly rejected the policies of President Obama and sent a clear message that we do not support his agenda. It’s a message that continues to ripple across the country.
But what does this historic win for conservatives mean for the Republican Party and for America? Continue reading…
Is The Supreme Court Leaning Pro-Life?
Posted on November 6, 2014 in Life by Nathan Cherry
There’s an argument in favor of legalizing same-sex “marriage” that says if legalized it will unite the country and remove a cultural wedge issue. One need only to look to the issue of abortion to know how absurdly false that claim is. The fact is, legalizing same-sex “marriage” will no more unite the country than the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision by the Supreme Court did.
Speaking of Roe and abortion, the Supreme Court has, in recent years, been a far more pro-life court than many have expected. Maybe it’s due to the advancement of science that was previously unavailable to the court. Maybe the court would have ruled differently had this science been available in 1973?
Or maybe it is the growing public sentiment supporting life that is having an impact on the court. As science increasingly reveals the humanity of the unborn the American public increasingly supports defending life at its earliest stages. As the American public makes their convictions known through elections, boycotts, and support for state level legislation, there is no doubt the Supreme Court is watching.
Evidence for the high court’s pro-life leaning can be seen in five recent rulings. As Life News reported in a recent article, 71% of Americans favor some abortions restrictions, and at least 205 state level abortion laws have been passed between 2010 and 2013; more than the previous decade. The high court seems to be following the same trend with rulings in favor of life.
Life News shared a summary of the most recent five Supreme Court cases regarding abortion and the fact that the court ruled in favor of life: Continue reading…
Government Demands Christian Support and Promote Gay Pride Parade (Video)
Posted on November 5, 2014 in Religious Freedom, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
What if you were asked to produce a message supporting something that violated your conscience, or religious convictions? Would you do it?
That is exactly the position the owner of a Christian t-shirt printing business found himself in when he was asked to print a t-shirt promoting the local gay-pride festival. When the Lexington, KY based Gay and Lesbian Services Organization asked Hands On Originals, a Christian-owned printing company, to print their gay-pride parade shirts, owner Blaine Adamson declined.
But, lest anyone believe this is a case of hate, bigotry, or discrimination, a few details need to be known. First, Hands On Originals has worked with gays in the past, even employing gay people at one time. A recent article at The Blaze notes:
“…Hands on Originals has both employed and served gays and lesbians, but that when it comes to the messages present on products, Adamson draws a line.”
So before anyone gets their shorts in a bunch over this let’s consider that Hands On Originals has a history of working with and employing gay people. It would be a stretch of the imagination at best to say that this is discrimination. Instead, as Adamson’s attorney ADF counsel Jim Campbell says, this is about free speech and religious convictions: Continue reading…