It is imperative that the will of the American people to protect this vital institution from arbitrary redefinition be acknowledged in our Federal Constitution. Until such time, all states are called to preserve marriage 'between one man and one woman' through state constitutional amendments.

The battle to preserve the covenant of marriage only between 'one man and one woman,' is an issue central to the future of America's survival. The obligation of the marriage, as instituted by the Creator, is two-fold: fidelity and fecundity. [1]

Same-sex marriage, and other 'de facto unions,' part of a new ideology of insidious and hidden evil, attempts to pit human rights against the family and against man. Even if the majority of the people supported same-sex marriage and civil unions [and they don't] making them the equivalent to traditional marriage [and they are not], the majority would be gravely wrong. [2]

Traditional marriage is, however, under attack by a small minority of people and judges who are usurping their role and authority by making new same-sex marriage policies from the bench instead of interpreting the law.

The institution of marriage between one man and one woman comes before any recognition by public authority. [3] Civil authority should consider it a grave duty to acknowledge the true nature of sanctified marriage and the family. [4]

For the past eleven years and for the next several years, fierce battles have and will exist in cumbersome state-by-state constitutional referenda to ban same-sex marriage. The larger question, however, is not whether each state's Constitution will be amended but rather 'who will amend it and how will it be amended.'

Widespread ignorance exists on the immorality of same-sex marriage

Widespread confusion and misinformation on the issue of same-sex marriage abounds. Growing secularism shows increased hostility toward Judeo-Christian dogmas of faith.

Pro-homosexual civil rights organizations such as The National Center for Lesbian Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, and Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders are representing cases on behalf of gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender [GLBT] groups in courts throughout the country under the guise of anti-discriminatory suits.

Another group calls themselves a 'loyal Republican family.' The Log Cabin Republican organization has thousands of members in dozens of chapters nationwide including a full-time Washington office and a federal political action committee. Since the late l970's, the platform of homosexual Republicans has gained influence at highest levels not only within the Party itself but on Capitol Hill and inside the current Bush administration. Ever since President George Bush announced his first term support for a Federal Marriage Amendment [FMA] banning same-sex marriage and civil unions, Log Cabin Republican leaders worked hard against his re-election and passage of the FMA. The Log Cabin, however, has not been able to defeat the much larger number of pro-life/pro-family grassroots Americans, insuring the Party's platform to remain largely pro-life.

Wielding more obfuscation, the Democratic Party has a national GLBT group called 'The National Stonewall Democrats' within its political organization. The Stonewall Dems [the same group that assails the Boy Scouts of America] vow to defeat all state amendments that support traditional marriage by misrepresenting moral truths of same-sex marriage; i.e., calling same-sex marriage an 'equality issue,' a 'civil right' for homosexuals. Shannon Bailey, President of the Stonewall Dems promised in August:

"We will keep hammering the message, telling our stories, and giving people time to absorb them...we're engaging with families and houses of faith...on the marriage issue and talking about equality."

As state constitutional amendment referenda progress over the coming years, church leaders of every denomination must speak and write boldly in favor of traditional marriage between 'one man and one woman.' This battle will require courageous clarity to teach the 'objective disorder' of same-sex marriage. If church leaders neglect to do so, Americans will fail to voice God given moral truths in the voting booth. [5]

However, the sanctity for sacredness of marriage is not for Christians alone — it is for everyone, even non-believers.

"Lex injusta non obligat" [6]

Generally speaking, churches and other non-profit 501(c)3 tax-exempt organizations are prohibited from endorsing political candidates. Laws may vary by locality, but usually churches can support ballot measures such as federal and state constitutional bans on gay marriage. In questionable cases, legal counsel should be consulted.

Here are some examples of what a church or parish can do to get involved: speak on the Catholic Church's infallible teachings on marriage; [7] speak on the biblical definition of marriage; [8] teach on Sacred Scripture's condemnation of homosexual acts "as a serious depravity;' [9] distribute 'Voters' Guides; hold voter registration drives; print bulletin inserts; bring in guest speakers; arrange parish meetings to discuss same-sex marriage issues and submit absentee ballots.

In recent years, Pope John Paul II and relevant Vatican Discasteries have addressed with great clarity various questions relating to homosexuality. [10]

Cardinal Ratzinger and The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on March 28, 2003 addressed the great and troubling moral and social phenomenon of marriage and unions between homosexual persons in a document entitled "Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons."

Since this question relates to natural moral law, the document is addressed to all persons, not just believers, committed to promoting and defending the good of society.

In addition, Pope John Paul II on January 10, 2005, unequivocally condemned gay marriage in a strongly worded annual message addressed to the world meant to define the position and agenda of the Roman Catholic Church:

"Today the family is often threatened by social and cultural pressures that tend to undermine its stability; but in some countries the family is also threatened by legislation which at times directly challenge its natural structure, which is and must necessarily be that of a union between a man and a woman founded on marriage. Family must never be undermined by laws based on a narrow and unnatural vision of man." [11]

[See Part Two, Part Three, Part Four]

NOTES: