In an article from June 2012 in the UK, we read that, "A lobby group against gay marriage, formed by Ministers of Parliament and bishops, is embroiled in a row after one of its leaflets claimed that the logical argument for reforming the law would be equally applicable to the legalisation of incest and polygamy. The eight-page document, produced by the Keep Marriage Special campaign, whose supporters include the former bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Michael Nazir Ali, warns of the "consequential impact" of the reform. The leaflet claims: "If the only basis for marriage is the desire of the parties to get married then there is, according to the logic of this proposal, no reason not to open up marriage to more than just same-sex couples. Polygamy, polyandry and incest would all be permissible."
Conservatives and Christians have long predicted that if a government allows the basic definition of marriage to be redefined, it would lead to a downward slide of not only marriage itself but society as a whole. We are mocked for this position, but we see it coming true today in many countries and in many ways.
On National Public Radio a few months ago, a discussion was held between opponents of homosexual marriage and defenders of it. Speaking against gay marriage was Austin Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian legal consulting group. Mr Nimocks said,
"[O]ne of the reasons that proponents of marriage and maintaining marriage between a man and a woman believe that is because by so doing it stays as a child-centered institution and not one that's concentrated on the desires of adults. And if marriage is redefined to be about any two adults who are in love or committed to each other and it's about adults and not the kids that flow from procreative relationships, then from a policy standpoint you have to ask the question, then why can't three or more adults be just as loving and committed to each other?"
The people who would wish to redefine marriage would indeed ask that question, and they already have.
The debate moderator followed up to that by asking, "In a number of countries in the world where Islam is the dominant religion polygamy is permitted. So why wouldn't just on First Amendment grounds, the freedom of religion, polygamy then be something that people would pursue?"
After all, The "prophet" Mohammad married the 6-year-old 'Aisha. According to the Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65, “Narrated ‘Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old.”
What IS marriage anymore? If it is for procreation then how can a 6 year old conceive? If it is for pedophilia, then Islam has it covered well, don't you think? This was reported a few days ago in the UK Telegraph:
"Alarm as hundreds of children under age of 10 married in Iran"
"Iran has experienced a dramatic growth in under-age marriages that has seen the number of girls being wed before the age of 10 double in the space of a year, officially-compiled figures have revealed."
Defenders of homosexual marriage say that child-marriage (AKA legislated pedophilia) would not happen because gay marriage is not predicated on a religious liberty, but public policy and a civil "right." But that very redefinition is happening.
It is increasingly obvious that marriage is being redefined, and with it, fidelity, morality, family, and parenting. The California State Assembly has put forward a bill allowing a child to have more than two parents.
Christians are mocked and scorned for stating that such a redefinition not only pokes God in the eye, but that moving the God-given lines of His intended foundational block of society releases sinful man to include all sorts of heinous configurations into 'marriage'. Skeptical? Shariah Law has led to the legislation of child marriage in 6 countries. (source). Christians warned that homosexual redefinitions of marriage would also lead to polygamy and bestiality but of course we were soundly pooh-poohed. Yet, "comedian" Sarah Silverman's season finale of her television show featured her own marriage to her dog. This British woman married a dolphin. And we even have people marrying themselves, as documented in China and in the US!
So if marriage between one man and one woman is suspended, so as to include two men or two women, the self, or an animal, what is to stop the next minority group to challenge THAT definition, and advocate for codification of any number of participants, of any age, or between any species? Nothing. Indeed, South Africa is the only nation in Africa to constitutionally recognize homosexual marriage and SA also recognizes polygamy, too. Are these two redefinitions of traditional marriage linked? Of course they are.
So today we discover that conservative Brazil has allowed its first registered and official polygamous marriage.
Controversy in Brazil as first three-partner marriage is unveiled
"Controversy has been sparked as the first civil union between three separate partners was registered in Tupã, in the Northwestern region of Sao Paulo state, Brazil last week. The three-person union has shocked religious groups in the country, and sparked further concerns that the traditional family unit is being further eroded by the current day society. The actual declaration of the union between the man and two women was in fact made three months ago, but it finally became public this week." [HT Do Not Be Surprised]
The article continues, reporting, "Notary officer, Claudia do Nascimento Domingues, has explained that the three partners lived together and wanted to publicly declare their status in order to guarantee their rights. Checks were conducted to see if there was any legal impediment to the unions and the notary office has confirmed that none were found. Attorney Nathaniel Batista dos Santos Junior oversaw the legal process of creating the three-way declaration."
No legal definition had been previously necessary because who would have thought even a few years ago that marriage definitions would be under such attack? But such an attack makes logical sense. According to this excerpt from Focus on the Family's essay "The Divine Order to Marriage,"
"And the spark, the power of that union is meant to gloriously reveal the very image of God to angels and archangels and all the company of heaven and earth. That is why Satan fights tooth and nail to pervert and distort rightly ordered human sexuality, holy matrimony, the family, and fatherhood in particular. In fact, the amount of time and effort that Satan expends to destroy the image of God reflected in marriage, fatherhood and human sexuality is a barometer of just how incredibly important it is to God's plan and the expression of His glory."
His glory is the main point of the world, our lives, and the plan of salvation. His glory is exhibited in His name, His majesty, His holiness, His works, His power, and His ordinances. (Deuteronomy 28; Nehemiah 9:5; Job 37:22; Psalms 93; Psalms 104:1; Psalms 145:5; Psalms 145; Exodus 15:1; Exodus 15; Psalms 19; Psalms 111; Exodus 15; Jude 1:7).
"Yea, they shall sing in the ways of the LORD: for great is the glory of the LORD." (Psalms 138:5). His glory is expressed through a traditional marriage, united under covenant with Him and persevering in love and submission throughout the decades. Stay true to your spouse, for in so doing you are at once showing God's glory and striking a blow against satan!
The Lord in His power directs every atom, every person, every angel, every demon, and every animal on earth (and in heaven). He created all ...
I fell in love the way you fall asleep: slowly, and then all at once.” ― John Green, The Fault in Our Stars Isn't that an evocative a...
Yesterday I looked at a popular HGTV personality, Joanna Gaines, and her testimony . She and her husband Chip are stars of a new show that a...