Enough Already! Pennsylvania Marriage Laws in Jeopardy
February 26, 2010
“Remember this day the next time someone tells you that gay marriage is about love and tolerance, that it won’t have any consequences.”
That’s Brian Brown, executive director for NOM, and his reaction to the government telling the church how to run its charities. Catholic Charities of D.C. was forced to let a third party run their adoption agency because of the legalization of same-sex “marriage” in the District of Columbia.
They didn’t want to be forced to close their doors and hurt the many children the adoptive agency helps. That’s exactly what happened to the Catholic Charities in Boston, where they were forced to either shut their doors or compromise their religious beliefs because of the legalization of same-sex “marriage” in Massachusetts.
Same-sex “marriage” is not about love. It’s about a radical redefinition of the basic social institution of our society and negatively affecting public policy.
Is it good public policy to force adoption agencies to close their doors because of their religious beliefs?
Is it good public policy to attack the religious freedoms of our churches? (Even if a church is not forced to hold same-sex weddings in its sanctuary, evidence is NJ shows that a state can revoke its tax-exempt status for holding a definition of marriage contrary to the state’s definition.)
Is it good public policy to teach our children, as young as kindergarten, about homosexuality and about families with two daddies and two mommies? Who stops the teaching of homosexuality in schools if teachers simply can point to the legalization of same-sex “marriage”?
Marriage itself is not about love. It’s about bringing together husband and wife to protect and care for the next generation; essential to the well-being of any society.
That is why Pennsylvania needs to protect our marriage laws. Recently same-sex couples in our state went to local courthouses and demanded a marriage license. They were turned away, but promised future legal challenges to get activist judges to declare our marriage law unconstitutional.
Please- Email, Call and/or Visit your Senator today and tell them to support SB 707. Tell your Representative to support SB 707 once passed by the Senate. For more details, visit www.pa4marriage.org or call 717-657-4990.
March 1st, 2010 at 1:31 pm
I agree with the statement that this is a battle for the stability of our culture and the future safety and protection of children and families. The family (and marriage in general) is the basic structure of all human cultures. The same-sex marriage movement seeks to radically redefine our society.
March 1st, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Our Pennsylvania law states marriage is between a man and a woman. If a same sex couple applies for a marriage the application should be denied. End of story. There should be no possibility of challenging the denial.
March 1st, 2010 at 2:00 pm
God says, Marriage is between one man and one women, Romans 7:2 and Ephesians 5:31. Please read the BIBLE. It is A Law!
March 1st, 2010 at 3:28 pm
The definition of marriage is between a man and a woman and is a natural and Biblical law. There is no deviating from nature and what it has ordained based on “discrimination”. Those of us who are God fearing people want this natural law upheld in its original form.
March 1st, 2010 at 4:04 pm
I totally agree what Geraldine Walton said: Marriage is between one man and one woman. No other way.
March 1st, 2010 at 5:08 pm
Pass SB707
Protect marriage laws of Pa
March 1st, 2010 at 5:19 pm
Do not give up because of the latest, cleverly constructed threat…pray and continue to fight against evil. Since when does the Law tell Roman Catholics how to practice their Faith? We would be complicit in God’s eyes if we took the easy way out of this unpleasant spiritual war. Our founding fathers clearly protects the freedom OF religion;
March 1st, 2010 at 5:25 pm
Can kids really handle one more social experiment? Legalizing same-sex marriage is essentially denying kids by law a Mother or a Father. Divorce created an absent parent and we see where that’s led us, don’t you? Do we wish to further decay the situation? Kids shoulder too much already.
March 1st, 2010 at 10:33 pm
There is a very disturbing and erroneous sentence contained within this article. The sentence which reads, “Marriage itself is not about love,” is of a grossly fallacious nature. Marriage is most assuredly about love. The Bible, when addressing men in the book of Ephesians, instructs the following: Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.
Jesus Christ gave His life so that sinners may receive salvation. There is no greater love than to give your life for another. And men are instructed to follow this exact pattern of love when relating to their wives. To say that marriage is not about love is an error of the highest sort.
March 2nd, 2010 at 1:16 pm
It seems that “no” is only a word to be challenged. As a child, when my parents, teachers, and authority figures told
me “no”, I had no right to challenge their authority, providing I knew the rules/laws of the situation. People seeking to change these laws regarding same sex marriage merely don’t like the rules and refuse to obey God’s laws. Consequently, they believe the laws should be changed for their agenda, not God’s or the people who will be affected.
March 2nd, 2010 at 9:45 pm
The family,i.e., husband and wife with or without children, is the most important building block of civilized society.
The attempt of same sex couples seeking marriage licenses is an attack on the very fiber of civilized society. I strongly oppose any proposed legislation trying to grant a marriage license to same sex couples.
March 3rd, 2010 at 11:48 pm
If gay marriage becomes legal, look for this announcement on the society page, “Mr & Mrs. Somebody proudly announce the coming wedding of their twin sons – TO EACH OTHER.” Of course that would be incestuos and at first glance illegal, but since no children could be produced anyway, then no birth defects could be caused by the incestuos marriage. That argument leads to a woman’s “right” to marry her male sibling. You know NOW won’t stand for any legal restrictions on a woman’s rights. On and on it goes. Support state and federal constitutional amendments that define marriage as between one man & one woman. God help us if we don’t.
May 19th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
It seems that “no” is only a word to be challenged. As a child, when my parents, teachers, and authority figures told
me “no”, I had no right to challenge their authority, providing I knew the rules/laws of the situation. People seeking to change these laws regarding same sex marriage merely don’t like the rules and refuse to obey God’s laws. Consequently, they believe the laws should be changed for their agenda, not God’s or the people who will be affected.
May 28th, 2010 at 6:58 am
If gay marriage becomes legal, look for this announcement on the society page, “Mr & Mrs. Somebody proudly announce the coming wedding of their twin sons – TO EACH OTHER.” Of course that would be incestuos and at first glance illegal, but since no children could be produced anyway, then no birth defects could be caused by the incestuos marriage. That argument leads to a woman’s “right” to marry her male sibling. You know NOW won’t stand for any legal restrictions on a woman’s rights. On and on it goes. Support state and federal constitutional amendments that define marriage as between one man & one woman. God help us if we don’t.