• • About the Team
  • About the Board
  • Mission/Vision/Core Values Statement

• • Family
    • Tips on Talking To Teens
    • Link to sites for pornography filters on computers
  • Gambling
    • Harmful Effects of Gambling
    • Nebraska Gambling
  • Education
    • Be A Voice
    • Integrating Faith in the Public Schools
  • Judicial
    • DOMA Challenged by ACLU
    • Homosexual Rulings
    • DOMA before the 8th Circuit Court
  • State Legislation
    • Nebraska Senators
    • NE Government Contacts
    • Nebraska Gambling
    • Ban on all Human Cloning
    • Legislative Bills
    • Candidates 2006
  • Federal Legislation
    • US Representatives
    • Federal Marriage Amendment
    • Federal Legislation
  • Life
    • I am Fearfully & Wonderfully Made
    • Ban on all Human Cloning
  • Marriage
    • DOMA Challenged by ACLU
    • Talking Points
    • Links to articles about marriage
  • Religious Expression
    • Legislative Guidelines for Churches
    • Integrating Faith in the Public Schools
  • DOMA UPHELD by 8th Circuit Court

• • Prayer Updates
    • End Abortion
    • Marriage Prayer
    • Judiciary Prayer
  • Prayer Networking
    • Purpose of the Intercessory Prayer Network
    • Join the Intercessory Prayer Network
  • Prayer Resources
    • Prayer and Fasting
    • Pray for a Soldier
    • Daily Prayer for Leaders
    • Pray for our Nation
    • Prayer Walking Basics
  • State Capitol Prayer Focus
    • Capitol Prayer Walking
  • Sign-up Form
  • National Day of Prayer

• • Audio Clips
  • Newsletter
  • Church Bulletin Inserts
  • Editorials
  • Radio Stations & Air Times
  • Special Audio Clips

• • Events Calendar

• • Sign Up Form
  • Donate Online
  • Contact Us Form

Marriage Talking Points

President Bush announced his support for a federal marriage amendment, calling upon Congress to pass an amendment to the U.S. Constitution which would define marriage as it has historically and traditionally been defined - the union of one man and one woman. He stated, "After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization." In spite of the fact that Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act eight years ago and 38 states have followed suit, Mr. Bush said that the laws were vulnerable to activist judges that are choosing to redefine marriage and that Americans are left with no other choice but to enact a constitutional amendment to protect marriage.

Last November the Massachusetts Judicial Supreme Court ordered the state to begin issuing same-sex "marriage" licenses. John Adams, the original author of the Massachusetts' Constitution said the United States Constitution "was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other". The Scriptures are clear, God ordained marriage and intended that our sexual behavior be contained within its boundaries. The Bible uses marriage as a wonderful illustration of the relationship between the Lord and His Church. That is why adultery, fornication and homosexuality are sinful behaviors denounced by the Scriptures. If we redefine marriage we will define immoral behavior as moral and wholesome.

If the definition of marriage were redefined some of the following changes would take place:

The definition of marriage is universal. Traditional marriage has consistently been encouraged and protected throughout recorded history. The marriage of a man to a woman, who love one another, stay married a lifetime and raise children into responsible adults is currently the recognized ideal goal of marriage. Traditional marriage provides the emotional, spiritual and ethical framework in which the next generation is raised. Within marriage is where the next generation is taught the norms of society and how to have wholesome interaction with both sexes. Since a high percentage of traditional marriages are struggling we should look for ways to strengthen this building block of society, not weaken it. The new definition of marriage would place the emphasis on two adults in a relationship and the raising of children would be de-emphasized. . Two men in a marriage relationship would be considered equal to traditional marriage, maybe better.

To change the very definition of marriage would be the largest, most far reaching social experiment this nation has ever undertaken. Nobody, least of all those in favor of this change, know what the results will be. Is it right to risk abandoning or even changing the basic foundation on which society is built when we have no idea what all the effects will be.

The public opinion of marriage would change. Norway had same-sex marriages imposed on it by the courts in 1993. The result is less frequent marriages, more frequent out-of-wedlock births, skyrocketing family dissolution, more broken families and more crime. The social costs are mounting as the government takes more responsibility for raising children. The surprising logic in Norway is; if marriage is only about a relationship between two people and not connected to parenthood than why marry at all. The stated goal of same-sex marriages in Norway was not about marriage but social approval of homosexuality.

The typical homosexual man is not a good role model for children.

• A study of homosexual men in the Netherlands, published in the journal AIDS in 2003, found that the average length of "steady partnerships" was not more than 2 years. However, the National Health and Social Life Survey stated that the vast majority of married men and women remain sexually faithful to their spouse.
  
  
• Only 4.5% of homosexual men in "committed" relationships were sexually faithful. The average homosexual man has eight "casual" sex partners per year. If same-sex marriages are legally recognized then sexual faithfulness in marriage will be dealt a serious blow.
  
• Homosexual men are at least 10 times more likely to have AIDS then the general population.
  
• Only 2 to 3 percent of men are homosexual yet about 30% of all cases of child sexual abuse is homosexual in nature.
  

This not about the majority denying a "right" to the minority. This is a small minority trying to force the majority to change a time honored and proven institution. Our society "denies" people their "rights" more often than homosexual activists would have us believe. There are restrictions on free speech, religious liberty and gun ownership and those are rights explicitly mentioned in the bill of rights while marriage is not. These restrictions exist because the common good outweighs an individual's claim to an absolute right. Society has protected traditional marriage because of its benefits to society.

Homosexuals are only 1-2% of the adult population. The 10% figure that homosexual activists have used for more than two decades is wildly overstated. 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups in a Friend of the Court brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court made this admission on March 26, 2003 in the Lawrence v. Texas case. In footnote 42 on page 16 of this legal brief, 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups admitted the following: "The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male and 1.4% of the female population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

Homosexual activists want us to believe that they are born with this sexual orientation. There is no credible evidence that supports the claim that homosexuals are genetically determined or immutable. Claims that orientation change is possible are supported by every piece of published research that was released from 1958 to 1994. The most recent study, in May 2001 at the American Psychiatric Association, Dr. Robert Spitzer, reported that his research demonstrated that at least some gays successfully changed to satisfying heterosexuality. Evidence confirms that homosexuality is a sexual behavior.

If marriage is a "legal" right, who can't get married? If any two people have the legal right to marriage, why not three people? The current lawsuit against the state of Nebraska to nullify the Defense of Marriage Amendment does include the rights of bisexuals. Bisexuals would like to marry one person of each sex. Why not two brothers? Why not two roommates or two business partners? On what logical basis could marriage be denied to anyone? Marriage could become a mere contractual convenience. The legal, social, financial and tax implications of this change are both unknown and potentially enormous.

It is doubtful that most same-sex couples want to marry. The New York Times in an August 31, 2003 article reported that in the first 2 months after Ontario legalized same-sex marriage fewer than 500 such marriage licenses were secured. The city of Toronto has over 6,000 registered same-sex couples. Mitchel Raphael, the editor of a Toronto "gay" magazine said, "I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people would challenge and change the institution and not buy into the traditional meaning of ‘til death do us part' and monogamy forever."

Society's concept of marriage has changed over the last fifty years. But not all change is positive. Consider some of the recent changes to the institution of marriage--and their consequences:

• The relaxing of the divorce laws has undermined marriage. As a result, there's been an epidemic of broken families and the consequences to children have been overwhelmingly negative.
  
• The sexual revolution has opened the door for immoral sexual relations becoming acceptable in society. As a result, there's been an epidemic of cohabitation, sexually transmitted diseases, abortions, and broken hearts, and the consequences have been overwhelmingly negative.
  
• The concept that childbearing should be confined to marriage has been undermined. As a result, there's been an epidemic of out-of-wedlock births, single parenthood, and fatherless children, and the consequences have been overwhelmingly negative.
  
• The pornography revolution, particularly with the advent of the Internet, has undermined the concept that a man's sexual desires should be directed toward his wife. As a result, there's been an epidemic of broken relationships, abused wives, and sex crimes, and the consequences have been overwhelmingly negative.

The weakening of traditional marriage has frayed the moral, ethical, social and spiritual fabric of America.

What will be the result if we redefine marriage?

We feel that the first response to the assault on marriage should be one of prayer. We are calling everyone to pray for our president and take to heart II Chronicles 7:14 which says, "If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land". Prayer and repentance are critical in this day.

We are asking individuals to contact the President and our U.S. Representatives to encourage them in passing a federal marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit, nebraskafamilycouncil.org, to obtain information on contacting representatives.