At some point, marriage equality supporters will become bigots

Marriage is, by nature, discriminatory.

In order to define marriage, you have to exclude people.  Otherwise, there would be no way to define it.  Just like a country that can't define its borders, when marriage is not defined, it soon becomes meaningless and ceases to exist.

That's why the term "marriage equality" is a fantasy.

The thousands-of-years-old definition of marriage is a covenant for lifelong fidelity and commitment between man and woman.  That definition excludes people- it excludes a man and another man who want to get married, as well as three or four or five people who "love" each other and want to get married, and family members who want to get married.  It excludes marriage between a human and an animal, a marriage of a person to himself, and just about anything else.

But to have marriage equality, we have to allow all of those things.

At some point, the people who are proponents of gay marriage, which are not using the term "gay marriage" but rather "marriage equality" to give it a more compassionate sound, are going to have to become bigots.  They will, at some point, have to tell consenting adults that they do not have the right to be married.

For example, two brothers over age 21 want to get married.  They wave the "marriage equality" flag and demand their right to be married.  What do we do?  Do we become bigots and tell them no?  Or do we allow them to get married?

How about a woman who loves her cat so very much that she wants to marry her cat?  Believe me, it will happen (after all, California is still part of the US). Do we become bigots and discriminate against her, telling her she can't marry an animal?  Well, all she has to do is wave the "marriage equality" flag.  She can even quote President Obama who says that all people have equal rights under the law.  Therefore, she marries her cat.  Otherwise we deny her her "rights."

How about a group of ten people who fall in love and wanted a ten-person marriage?  Out comes the "marriage equality" flag again.

So the question is- at what point do we all become bigots and deny people their rights?

We have two options.  One, we allow anyone and everyone to get married.  No definition, no exclusions, marriage equality for all.  The result?  Marriage dissolves completely and becomes as worthless as Weimar Republic money.

Two, we begin to discriminate and become bigots, telling people that some people can be married and others can't.

This is where the "marriage equality" fight is headed.  The same arguments that the pro-gay marriage people are using to demand the rights of gays to marry can be used for any and all other groups as well.

Marriage is discriminatory.  A country without borders ceases to exist.  A cell without a cell membrane ceases to exist.  An institution such as marriage that does not have clearly defined borders and is not discriminatory ceases to exist as well.  Like Syndrome said in The Incredibles, "When everyone is special, no one is special."

So, the question for "marriage equality" supporters is this- at what point do you become a bigot and deny someone the right to marry?  What is your line?

If your line is "marriage is between two people"- you have become a bigot against polyamorous relationships.

If your line is "marriage is between three or less"- you have become a bigot against the foursome who wants to get married.

If your line is "consenting adults"- you have become a bigot against a man who wants to marry a child, as well as the man who wants to marry his horse.

If your line is "anyone and everyone at any place at any time under any circumstances can get married" then you have just opened the door for mass chaos and the eventual destruction of the basis for civilization- the family.

So, at what point will you become the bigot that you are accusing traditional marriage supporters of being?

It's getting less and less safe to be wealthy

I've been reading with alarm the news stories coming out of Cypress- the government is totally broke and is considering seizing privately earned money from citizens.  Unless I am wrong, the deal is that the government is taking from people that have accounts larger than 300,000 euros.

It's not safe to be wealthy anymore.

More and more people are feeling entitled to what wealthy people have earned.  Our president has stated again and again how wealthy people have to "pay their fair share."  Congress just raised the taxes on the wealthiest Americans from 36% to 39%.  France raised its highest tax bracket to 75%.  Now Cypress has taken the next step and has actually seized money that had already been taxed- money that was earned and deposited in a bank because the person believed his money would be safe there.

This bothers me for two reasons.

One, I hate the sense of entitlement that pervades our planet.  It is growing at an astronomical rate- people feeling like something they didn't earn is due them.  People thinking that the world owes them something.  People wanting things that others have worked for.  I hate the entitlement mentality, because it shows a complete and utter lack of character.  It caters to the least common denominator.  It's the "I haven't done a single blasted thing to better myself, but someone over there has more than me, and therefore I deserve it too" cesspool of thought that creates discontent, envy, jealousy, and covetousness.  It is pandered to and stoked by politicians who promise things to voters (I need your vote, so I'll take it from the "richies" who obviously stole it from you, even though you didn't work for it and didn't earn it, and give it to you) and has become almost a way of life here in America.

Two, I have never seen anything that started with the wealthy END with the wealthy.  The people who are cheering the sacking and pillaging of the "rich people's" wealth don't realize that they are next.  They are like sheep at the end of the line going into the slaughterhouse, cheering the slaughtering of the ones at the front of the line. They don't realize they are next.

If the wealth of "rich people" is now something the government is entitled to, you can be sure that the wealth of the "poor people" will be something the government is entitled to next.  You can mark my words.

People often ask me why I speak up on issues like this.  They point out that I am not a millionaire, I am not wealthy (by American standards, that is) and none of this affects me.  They are right- none of this affects me RIGHT NOW.  However, I believe "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."  I don't want my private hard-earned dollars seized by the government.  It's wrong.  Therefore, it's wrong for the government to do it to others.  I don't care how much money they make.  I wouldn't want a bunch of third-world people cheering that my wealth was being confiscated (because I am as rich compared to them as the "wealthy" are compared to me).

Wake up, America.  You do not deserve a single thing you didn't work for.  You do not deserve a single thing that someone else has worked for.  If you want it, work for it.  Taking something you didn't earn is known as theft.  Right now, it's being re-branded as "fairness."  And if you don't wake up, you'll find a whole lot of "fairness" in your bank account where your hard-earned dollars used to be.

Why I believe in Santa and the Easter Bunny

I recently took my kids to see "Rise of the Guardians."  I loved it.  I loved it so much that I bought the DVD for my son for his birthday.  Last Sunday, it was cold and rainy, so after church we sat down as a family and watched it.  For those of you who haven't seen it, it's a story about Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Mr Sandman, and Jack Frost fighting the Boogeyman for the hearts and minds of children.

As I was watching the movie, I realized that my antennae were up, because two very important Christian holidays, Christmas and Easter (represented by Santa and the Easter Bunny) were being talked about.  There was no mention of Jesus, either at Christmas or Easter.  There was a veiled reference when the Easter Bunny says, "Easter is about new life, new beginnings.  It's about hope," but that's about it.

I've been as ticked off as anyone about the secularization of Christmas and Easter, and I have probably been guilty of going too far off the deep end in criticizing what those holidays have become.  However, as I watched Rise of the Guardians, I realized something.

Santa and the Easter Bunny are fun.  LOTS of fun.  When I was a kid, I loved Santa and the Easter Bunny.  I thought they were fabulous.

Now that I am a grown man, and have grown much deeper in my faith, I STILL think they are fabulous.  I think they are a lot of fun.  Does the presence of Santa or the Easter Bunny diminish the sacredness of those two days, or diminish my respect and admiration for my Lord and Savior?  Not in the slightest.

As a matter of fact, I think just the opposite happens.

I remember my grandmother telling me something long ago when I was a boy who had just found out from friends that Santa wasn't real.  She looked at me and said, "Well, I believe in him.  He's so very good.  He's someone who finds ultimate joy in giving gifts to others and demands nothing for himself.  The world could use a few more people like him."

 Many times in a society, values are communicated to our children by fictitious characters that embody the values we want to pass on.  Paul Bunyon was created as a celebration of the work ethic and pioneering spirit of the American frontier.  John Henry was invented as a celebration of the indominitable heart of man versus machine.  Santa Claus was invented as a celebration of the spirit of giving, love, and selflessness.  The Easter Bunny was invented for the same reason- to celebrate the value of giving and blessing others with no thought of compensation or gain.  These are values essential to a society.

They are also a lot of fun.  Tons of fun.  They bring joy, laughter, wonder, and brightness to a very dreary, drama-filled world.

I have realized something within me by watching Rise of the Guardians.  You know what it is?  Sometimes I'm no fun at all.

I think it happens to all of us as adults.  We get so concerned and frustrated and angry when we sense that the sacred is being stripped from our society.  We get so depressed when we see our culture moving away from what is right and true.  That's legitimate.  However, that doesn't give us license to stop being fun.

I am as concerned about doctrinal purity as anyone, but in my quest for that purity, sometimes I allow any sense of fun, joy, wonder, and simple silliness to go out the door.  When that happens, we stop being fun.

Santa and the Easter Bunny are about as fun as it gets.  Seriously.

This is exactly the point of the movie.  When children stop believing in the Easter Bunny and Santa and all the other fun things in this life, they are left believing in fear and despair.  When belief in the good things and good values leaves a society, belief in the evil and dark things replaces it.  Our beliefs determine our outlook, our attitude, our amount of joy, our amount of despair, and just about everything else about us.

Maybe some of us Christians need to allow a little bit more fun in our lives.

Like I said before, does the absurd and joyful belief in Santa and the Easter Bunny diminish what Christmas and Easter are truly about?  If you let it, sure.  For me, however, it doesn't.  I stand amazed at the birth of the Son of God and His Resurrection.  Santa and the Easter Bunny?  They're just a lot of fun.  A whole lot of fun.  I smile as I write this, because Easter is just around the corner.  I'm looking forward to Easter egg hunts and stealing candy from my kids' Easter baskets, also known as parent tax.

He is risen, risen indeed!  Now put the antennae down and go enjoy the fun.

What we don't need is more important than what we do need

A friend called me today to tell me the great news.  His wife had gotten a job!  To this family, this was a dream come true, and I was very happy for them.

Then he began telling me all the things that this new job would do to their family.

-Kids would go to daycare.  Nothing wrong with daycare- some of my best friends use daycare and the kids are doing great.

-Between his and his wife's schedules, there would probably be only one family meal per night:  previously, they ate together about five nights per week.

-Would have to stop going to their small group (which they loved) at church because they were going to be too busy.


Now, I have no problem with both husbands and wives working.  My wife works three days a week as a nurse, is very good at it, blesses people with her wit, work ethic, and tremendous competence, and her office would suffer if she ever left.  However, the question that each American family must ask is:  why?

Why do both parents work?

Some people say, "We both have to work to pay the bills."  That may be so, and that is up to each individual family.  However, I would argue that parents are both working because they are convinced that the things they don't need are more important than the things they do need.

Say what?

I'll say it again- I believe that Americans are convinced that the things they DON'T need are more important than the things they DO need.

Look at the things that the above couple sacrificed in order to have a higher standard of living.  They sacrificed time with children- time that allows the transmission of values, morals, faith, and love from one generation to the other.  They sacrificed family meals and togetherness.  They sacrificed Christian fellowship with people they really care about and really care about them.

We as Americans have become convinced that the things we DON'T need are more important than the things we DO need.  I asked my small group last night to estimate the percentage of things in their houses that would be considered "necessities" and "luxuries."  By necessities, I mean things that are essential to survival- things that are true needs.  As a guiding criteria, I mentioned that anything that people didn't have 20 years ago, and survived just fine without, would not be considered a "necessity."

Of all the people in the room, no one had a ratio smaller than 10/90.  90% of all that we owned would be considered non-essential.  Now, luxuries are not evil in and of themselves.  I enjoy air conditioning in the summer and like my microwave oven; I like my bed that I sleep in and my hot running water; I like having two cars and enjoy having a cell phone.  However, I would be a fool to think of those as necessities, because 90% of humans on this planet live every day without them and they do just fine.  I like them, but I don't need them.

So, if these things are not inherently evil, what's the big deal?

The big deal is that in the pursuit of things we don't need, we've sacrificed the things we do need.

A Pew research study that came out several years ago showed that fathers spent an average of 5 minutes speaking with their children on a daily basis.  Couples spent an average of 11 minutes per day talking.  That is not enough time to convey love.  That is not enough time to transmit values to the next generation.  The average American work week has increased steadily since 1970, with all of us knocking ourselves out so that we will have enough money to buy the things we don't need.

There is nothing wrong with both parents working . . . .  as long as you don't sacrifice the things your family needs most.  Your family will do just fine without the newest gadget that didn't exist five years ago but now your kids desperately need.  Your family will do just fine without more house than you need, or more car than you need, or more decorations than you need.  Your family will do just fine without eating out every night or taking expensive weekend vacations every month.

Your family WON'T do fine without time, love, patience, and the transmission of values from one generation to the next.

It's time for Americans to start realizing and prioritizing what we actually need.  If that means a lower standard of living, so that you give your family what they truly need, you've made a good decision.  You will be someone's ancestor- what will your descendants say about you?  I certainly don't remember things that my parents bought for me, but I certainly remember the morals and values that were passed on to me.  Those are the things that matter for eternity.

Don't be deceived into thinking that the things you don't need are more important than the things you DO need.

The Best Change You Can Make Today

 . . .  is in your attitude.  Many years ago, Chuck Swindoll wrote this, and it is just as true today as it was back then.  Maybe even more so today, because bad attitudes continue to drag us down into depression and hopelessness.  A good attitude is really the only thing that matters.

Attitude

"The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, than education, than money, than

circumstances, than failures, than successes, than what other people

think or say or do. 

 

"It is more important than appearance, giftedness, or skill. It will make or break a company ... a church ... a home. The remarkable thing is we have a choice every day regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. 

 

We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude ... I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me, and 90% how I react to it. And so it is with you ... we are in charge of our Attitudes."-Chuck Swindoll

The Preacher and the Bicycle

Any time I am tempted to take myself too seriously as a pastor, I come across something like this:

Dear Abby: Regarding your letter about the Ten Commandments, I am reminded of the church minister who told his deacon that someone had stolen his bicycle and he suspected that the thief was a member of his congregation.

The next Sunday he decided to preach a sermon about the Ten Commandments because he felt that when he got to the commandment that says, "Thou shalt not steal," the thief would be shamed into returning the bicycle.

The next Sunday, he was preaching his way through the Ten Commandments, but about halfway through his sermon, he abruptly switched his sermon to another topic.

Later his deacon asked him why he had changed his sermon.  "Well," the minister said, "when I got to the commandment that says, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery,' I remembered where I left my bicycle."

Why does America hate boys?

In the last several weeks, we've heard a few stories of boys getting suspended for mimicking guns in school.  The most recent one was where a seven-year-old boy ate a pop tart into the shape of a gun.  He was suspended for two days.

Besides the obvious stupidity behind such a punishment, there is a darker thing going on.  The fact that the boys were mimicking guns is merely a symptom.  This isn't about guns.  This is about masculinity.

Our society is dead-set on pushing masculinity out of our culture.  The youngest victims of this war are our boys.  These very young soon-to-be-men, at the first hint of expressing their natural masculinity and emerging manhood, are ridiculed, punished, medicated, or "re-educated." 

If you look at images of men in the media, most are buffoons.  The Big Bang Theory (honestly one of the funniest shows on right now) shows men to be immature geeks, one not able to cut the cord from his mommy, one OCD, one unable to talk with women, all whiners, and all unable to accomplish what previous generations of men have accomplished by their early 20s- marriage, fatherhood, and self-sufficiency.  Dads are routinely mocked as incompetent (if they are even present), and any hint of chivalry or masculinity is derided as knuckle-dragging sexism.

The men who are held up as "good men" are ones that are rather effeminate and docile.

This shows a dangerous trend in our country.  With many, if not most, boys growing up in homes without a father, they are left without a model of what a man really is.  Combine that with natural expressions of masculinity, such as making guns out of pop tarts or PB&J sandwiches (something I did as a young boy all the time) being severely punished in schools, and then add to it the images of buffoonery in the media about men, is it any wonder why our boys are growing up with major issues?

I used to make guns out of sticks and stones.  My friends and I went on imaginary adventures where we armed ourselves to the teeth with armor, swords, guns, helmets, capes, and just about anything else a warrior would wear.  We would wander into the woods fighting imaginary creatures, slaying dragons, and being the hero of the day.  No one taught us this.  We did it naturally.  It was a natural and healthy expression of our emerging masculine nature.  We were allowed to be boys.  I grew up in an America where it was actually okay to to be a boy- adventures and weapons and risk and being a warrior were encouraged as healthy expressions of childhood.

Not any more.

Now those things are discouraged and punished, as if they were a threat to society.  I would argue that the biggest threat to society are men who don't know how to be men.  The biggest threat to society is not a boy who makes a "gun" out of a pop tart; rather, it is the male who has been told that everything about him is wrong and bad, forcing him into a docile and feminized role in life.  Meanwhile, these men are incapable of anything that previous generations of men have been able to do- commit to marriage, fulfill the masculine role that women need them to fulfill, raise children and encourage them, provide for the home, and stand on his own two feet.  I would argue that it is THAT phenomenon, rather than a boy with a sword, that is tearing apart our country's fabric.

The biggest problem with the war on masculinity, however, is the fact that "God made them male and female."  He designated men and women to be different.  Our culture is trying to tell boys and girls that they are the same.  They aren't.  They are naturally different.  Boys need to know that their desire to be dangerous is part of being made in God's image.  As author John Eldredge wrote, God created the wild places of the earth.  He created the wolverine, the kodiac bear, the great white shark, and the scorpion.  God is not a docile God.  The Bible describes God as a warrior.  And little boys, being made in the image of God, are warriors as well.

I believe that American culture hates masculinity because masculinity can't be controlled.  A man who understands that he was made in the image of God, the God who created wildness and risk and adventure, can't be constrained.  American culture is increasingly risk-avoidant, prizing safety and security at the risk of freedom, so naturally boys and men who are made in the image of God are a serious threat.  So instead of encouraging masculinity, we medicate our boys to turn them into creatures whose behavior resembles that of their female classmates.  We suspend boys for being boys in school.  We force them into a feminine mold, telling them to prefer safety and security over risk and adventure and wildness.

The result is a bunch of sullen, distant, angry men who have no idea what it means to be masculine.  This has been bad for the family, bad for society, and especially bad for the church.  We don't need men to be feminine.  We need men to be masculine.  Punishing a boy for making a "gun" out of a pop tart sends the message that being a boy is evil.  It's time for our society to wake up and realize what the societal structures are doing to our sons.  We already see the results of it.  

Why Christians should stop asking permission

I have a frustrated teenage daughter in my home.

She's frustrated because she loves tennis, and the high school tennis season started last week.  Here in Kentucky, the weather has been cold and rainy, and therefore, no practice. 

However, something hit me yesterday.  It wasn't a nice day- 36 degrees- but it wasn't rainy.  She was told that practice was cancelled.  She was upset.  I said, "Since when do tennis players need permission to play tennis?"

She looked at me funny.

I said again, "Since when do you need an adult's permission to go play a sport you love?  Just because your coach cancelled practice doesn't mean that you can't go play.  Get some of your teammates out there and play the sport you love.  You don't need a coach's permission to do something you love."

Wasn't that the way it was when we were kids?  We didn't wait for an adult to tell us we could play sports.  We just went out and played.  However, I see an alarming trend in our young people- it's like they can't take the initiative to do it themselves.  They literally sit around and wait for an adult-organized event so they can play a sport.  Unless an adult tells them "we have practice today," or "we have a game today," they aren't playing.

Then I realized this was bigger than just kids and sports.

I read an article today how universities are banning Christian groups from campus because the groups don't meet the universities' "non-discrimination policies."  Basically, the universities are telling Christian groups that they have to allow non-Christian students to lead the Christian groups to be recognized as legitimate campus groups.   The Christian groups obviously can't have non-believers in leadership positions, so they naturally are upset.  Because they won't comply with the policy, they are no longer eligible to be recognized or received university funding.

Yawn.

Why does this even bother Christians?  I mean, yes, I understand that people are upset about the marginalization of the Christian groups and their slow removal from society.  I get that.

The early church in the book of Acts had it much rougher, and they did just fine.  Better than fine, actually.  Acts 2:47 said that people were coming to Christ every day.  News flash- they weren't allowed to meet either.

Since when do Christians need university approval to meet?  We aren't some club or organization.  We're the church.  If the government or other authority tells us we can't meet, we meet anyway.  If the government or university tells us to be quiet, we preach anyway.  When did Christians start thinking that we need to be recognized by some state entity in order to do the work we have been called to do?

Christians should stop asking permission, as if we needed anything other than the Word of God.

So what if the university doesn't allow them to meet?  Meet anyway.  That's what the guys in the Bible did.  That's what millions of persecuted believers around the world do anyway.

So what if the university doesn't provide funding?  Does the church need secular funding to love people, study the Word, preach the gospel, worship, etc?  Absolutely not.  The church is the church.

I just wonder when Christians started thinking we need permission from the authorities to be the church.

Just like my daughter thought she had to wait until the coach scheduled a practice for her to play tennis, the Christian organizations think we have to be approved by the authorities in order to meet.

Christians should stop asking permission.  Go be the church.  Meet in a dorm room.  Meet in the cafeteria.  Meet in a classroom.  Meet in a church nearby campus.  Meet in the home of an adult Christian in the community who goes to the church you attend.  That's the way it was in the beginning.  That's the way it is around the world.  Don't wait for the permission from a non-Christian source.

Go be the church.