HIKING UP THE SLIPPERY SLOPE

Betsy's Page has posted an apologetic by Jonathan Turely for the legalization of polygamy.

Yikes! Provocative, Betsy? Distorted, is a better word. Who would have thought the polygamists would be scrambling for their own redefinition of marriage even before the sodomist finished their attack.

The pattern of rationalization by liberals is so predicable. Gain an inch, take a mile. This should not be a surprise to anyone, particularly for those who recognize that sexual perversions are a predicable indicator of the times in which we live.

Turley cites biblical and koranic examples of polygamy as evidence of God's approval of the practice. That is totally bogus. Yes, fallen men and women practiced all sorts of sexual perversions, however, in each case the practitioners suffered the consequences of their stiff-necked rebellion from God's teachings.

The pattern of marriage was established by God with the creation of the first couple. Guess what? It wasn't two men, or two women, or any number of multiples that God created. It was one man and one woman. The pattern was set. The physical union of one man and one woman symbolized the ultimate union of relationship between God and man, his unique creation.

That is marriage. Period. Any other living arrangement is not marriage. Two men - not marriage. Two women - not marriage. Multiple men or women - not marriage. Man and dog - no way.

Turley's article is precisely why the vast majority of Americans strongly support a Protection of Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. Sadly, our elected federal representatives lack either the understanding or the courage to make it happen. And it is just one of the many reasons why the reelection of President Bush is so critical.

That we are actually having to fight this fight on the federal level illustrates the serious damage done to the Union. This is not the United Citizens of America. It is the United States of America.

I am an American through my state (NC) citizenship and the US Constitution was purposely designed to protect my rights as a citizen of my state. Those rights are not given by the state or federal government. My rights were given to me by God and it is government's responsibility to protect them.

One of those God-given rights is marriage. Remember, the founding documents of our nation say that right is granted by God. Like I said earlier, God had a specific design in mind when he instituted marriage. Is a polygamist's right to marriage protected by the Constitution? Absolutely. As long as the marriage conforms to the God's design. One man with one woman. Obviously, anything else just isn't marriage.

Tragically, activist judges have now declared that my rights defined in the Constitution are actually granted by the Judiciary rather than God. Therefore, they now adjudicate from a relativistic worldview rather than from a biblical worldview. You can argue all you want about whether America was a Christian nation, however, a quick read of the original documents proves the founding fathers saw reality through the Judeao-Christian worldview of that day. Is that still the predominate worldview of America. Yes. Unfortunately, that is not true for the majority of the Democrats, the MSM, or the Judiciary (and I might add, a remarkable number of public school teachers.)

Now if you're looking for something to be provoked about, try that!