June 26, 2013
Contact: Jeff Walton 202-682-4131, 202-413-5639 cell
“Regardless of court rulings, churches and others, now more than ever, must defend and strengthen traditional marriage.”
-Kristin Rudolph, IRD Evangelical Program Coordinator
Washington, DC—The Supreme Court has issued its rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s voter-approved Proposition 8 defining marriage as one man and one woman.
The Institute on Religion and Democracy has a paper by Alan Wisdom extolling the social value of traditional marriage and taking stock of the debate about its future in U.S. society. The marriage paper poses the question: “Our society’s view of marriage, centered on mutual emotional satisfaction, is already far from classic Christian teaching. Now pro-homosexuality advocates are seeking to radically redefine marriage, reducing it to a relationship between any ‘two people who love each other.’ Amidst all this conflict, is it worth the cost for Christians to continue to defend this embattled institution?”
The paper examines biblical passages related to marriage, as well as the history of the church’s approach to marriage. It presents social science evidence showing the weakened state of marriage today, but also the benefits that marriage brings for both adults and children. It addresses sensitive issues such as cohabitation and same-sex marriage. The paper can be viewed free of charge on the Institute’s website at www.TheIRD.org/marriage
Kristin Rudolph, IRD Evangelical Program Coordinator, commented:
“Traditional marriage serves an important role as a building block for a flourishing society. There is an urgent need for churches and others to defend traditional marriage.
“Faithful church teaching contrasts with forces of cultural accommodation that would redefine marriage out of existence. Standing up for traditional marriage is an important responsibility in a confused culture needing spiritual and moral direction.
“By many measures, marriage has weakened in our society. Fewer people marry. More people divorce. More co-habitate. Increasing numbers follow a pattern of ‘serial monogamy.’ Those who suffer most are the next generation of Americans. Children suffer when adults are encouraged to pursue their own satisfaction over the good of their offspring.
“U.S. Christians have three options. They can yield to the trends devaluing marriage. Or they can admit defeat in society but try to maintain traditional teachings inside the church. Or they can swim against the current and insist that both church and society must uphold marriage. We believe that only this last option is faithful to the Scriptures and conducive to the long-term good of society.
###
Comment by apcroft33 on June 26, 2013 at 1:09 pm
As of today, Roe v Wade now holds the position as the SECOND worst Supreme Court ruling.
Five Ivy League slobs think they are wiser than God. Pretty presumptuous.
Comment by benmwelliver on June 26, 2013 at 5:26 pm
“This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil” (John 3:19).
Comment by paynehollow on June 26, 2013 at 6:55 pm
Or they can swim against the current and insist that both church and society must uphold marriage. We believe that only this last option is faithful to the Scriptures and conducive to the long-term good of society.
So, what are you suggesting? That, even in the face of increasing popular disagreement with the traditional opinions about marriage, that we should accept the views of a religious minority against our will?
Do you think that, if the majority disagrees with a law, that the minority ought to enforce it anyway, because they know best what God wants? Or, are you willing to abide by the laws of the Republic, even when the majority disagrees with you and our representatives back off the traditional opinion on marriage?
Trust me, as an anabaptist peacemaker, I know what it’s like to be in the extreme minority. But even so, I do not wish to implement my religious views on an unwilling/disagreeing public. It gets down to making your case, convincing people that your position is NOT the immoral, irrational one based on ancient religious biases and emotions, rather than sound reasoning and good moral justice.
~Dan Trabue
Comment by ericvlytle on June 26, 2013 at 8:54 pm
You’re correct about many of the comments sounding “irrational” and “immoral.” The words “repetitious” and “whiny” and “self-righteous” and “condescending” also come to mind.
For those who have animus against “ancient religious biases,” one option is to abandon Christianity. It’s real old. In fact, it’s eternal. that’s the main attraction.
Comment by verntolbert on June 28, 2013 at 7:07 am
Paynehollow, you claim that the “view of a religious minority” should have no influence. Your form of theo-leftism is also a religious minority in the culture. So why should the views of the theo-left have any influence – except that, just by sheer coincidence, the theo-left’s views happen to perfectly match the views of people who have no religion at all. How convenient to have a religion that never asks you to take a firm stand against the mob.
Funny how the left always goes on and on about “love” being the supreme Christian virtue, but how much love is there in dismissing evangelicals as some contemptible “religious minority” that has no right to voice its opinions? Personally I’m happy to belong to this religious minority, there is certainly no virtue in belonging to a mob of conformists.