Speaking up for traditional marriage

Fifty years ago, homosexual practice was illegal. Today, it is widely accepted, and the general attitude is that you mustn't say anything about it. How does such a complete change come about in 50 short years?

There is no doubt that the homosexual lobby has had a definite agenda. Let me mention some of its aims.

One has been to force society to accept their lifestyle as normal and healthy. The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention statistics say that sexually active men and boys aged 13 to 24 were over 1,000 times more likely to become infected with HIV than their heterosexual counterparts. There have been rapid increases in syphilis and gonorrhea in the homosexual community. These facts are played down.

Another has been to get the homosexual agenda into schools. Hundreds of primary and secondary schools in the UK are introducing courses produced by the leading homosexual lobby group Stonewall.

A third has been to attack churches and re-interpret Bible teaching.

Another has been to see same-sex marriage legalised. Same-sex marriage is not really marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. God invented marriage at creation, and no amount of shouting can re-invent it.

A fifth is to shout down all opposition. If you oppose same-sex marriage or the homosexual lifestyle, you are automatically a bigot and a homophobe. People don't like being called bigots and homophobes, and so keep quiet.

Are you going to speak up for traditional marriage? It's not too late. If you do, you may be accused of hate speech, which will probably not be the case. (Someone said "We have fallen victims to two big lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone's lifestyle, you must hate them, and the second is that to love someone you must agree with everything they say or do. Both are nonsense.")

There are two reasons why you should speak up for traditional marriage. If you don't, the homosexual lobby will win by default. And if you don't, who will?

Listen to Dr Lisa Nolland, of Anglican Mainstream: "Jesus. . . spoke a good deal about sex issues - even more than about poverty or love.

"Jesus condemned porneia, which meant any sex outside heterosexual marriage. Incest, fornication, gay sex etc. His hearers would have known that.

"Moreover, Jesus claimed to fulfil Old Testament law, and clearly endorsed and extended its core ethical and religious values - among them the sexual. He showed mercy to sinners, but took sin seriously. So should we."
           

Law chief intervenes in 'gay cake' case

An appeal in the Ashers "gay cake" case in Northern Ireland was halted at the last minute this week after an intervention by Northern Ireland's Attorney General.

The McArthur family, who run Ashers Baking Company, was asked to bake a cake bearing the slogan "Support gay marriage." The McArthurs, who are committed Christians, declined. They were taken to court by the Equality Commission of Northern Ireland (with £40,000 of public funds).

Judge Isobel Brownlie decided the McArthurs had unlawfully discriminated against homosexual activist Gareth Lee on grounds of sexual discrimination and they were ordered to pay £500 compensation.

They arrived at court this week expecting their appeal to be heard before Northern Ireland's Lord Chief Justice Sir Declan Morgan, but the appeal was postponed after an intervention from John Larkin QC,  Attorney General of Northern Ireland, apparently on the grounds of a potential conflict between Northern Ireland equality legislation and European human rights laws.

The Court of Appeal will meet in March to hear legal arguments on the compatibility of Northern Ireland law with European law, and the appeal will now not be heard until May.

Homosexual campaigner Peter Tatchell, who originally supported the claim against Ashers, announced this week that he had changed his mind. He said the claim against the bakers was well intended, but was "a step too far." The request to bake the cake was refused not because Mr Lee was homosexual, but because of the message that was asked for on the cake.

"Should Muslim printers be obliged to publish cartoons of Mohammed? Or Jewish ones publish the words of a Holocaust denier? Or gay bakers accept orders for cakes with homophobic slurs?" There was a difference, he suggested, between discrimination against people and discrimination against ideas.

He's right. There's a big difference between having the legal right to do what you want and forcing everybody to like it.
      

Street preacher gets a reprieve

Mike Overd preaches the gospel regularly in the streets of Taunton, motivated, he says, by his love for Jesus Christ and a deep concern for people who don't know His great love.

One day a man who identified himself as a homosexual objected to something that was said about homosexuality and insisted on debating it. Mr Overd was charged under the Public Order Act, which deals with threatening words or behaviour. At Bristol Crown Court he was fined, ordered to pay costs and ordered to pay compensation.

The Christian Legal Centre (part of Christian Concern) took a dim view of a remark by the judge that Mr Overd should not have referred to Lev 20:13 in explaining what the Bible said but could have used Lev 18:22, and decided to back Mr Overd in an appeal.

At Taunton Crown Court Circuit Judge David Ticehurst upheld the appeal and overturned the conviction.

King Solomon High School in Redbridge recently held an "LGBT Week." The pupils were given rainbow badges which they were told they must wear or they would be given detention. 

When one of the sixth form girls went home with the news, her mother, Anna Erickson-hull, wrote a protest on her Facebook page. She quoted 1 Cor 6:9, 10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Apparently someone complained to Facebook, and Facebook took down her Facebook page.

The Office for National Statistics says that one per cent of the population in Britain is homosexual. Actually, the figure is 1.6 per cent, but that includes bisexuals. That one per cent is holding this nation to ransom, and the nation is helping it do so.

The sooner this nation comes back to its senses the better.  
      

Is this the end of free speech?

Extremism disruption orders (also known as EDOs), which the UK Government is to include in a counter terrorism bill in the next month or two, are a cause for real concern.

Their premier target, of course, is Islamic terrorists. But they don't stop at attempting to deal with people planning to commit murder and wanton destruction.

The orders will allow courts to take action against people considered "on the balance of probabilities" to be "preaching, inciting, or justifying hatred on the grounds of disability, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation and/or transgender identity." Innocent people could be caught up. Like people who disagree with same-sex marriage, or Christian street preachers. The mere risk of "causing distress" would be enough to trigger the new powers.

One MP said EDOs would deal with racists, religious fundamentalists and homophobes. They would "in some circumstances" be applied to a teacher teaching that homosexual marriage is wrong. George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, is reported to have said in a letter to a constituent that EDOs would go "beyond terrorism" and "eliminate extremism in all its forms."

In a typical Christian response, Voice for Justice UK says people who fall foul of these orders would include mild-mannered Christians who oppose same-sex marriage or gender reassignments, or who say that homosexuals unhappy with their sexuality have a right to therapy.

"How can Bible-believing Christians possibly be equated with Islamic hate-preachers inciting violent jihad?" they ask. "Christianity is a religion of love and of obedience to God - it is not part of a jihadist culture that will brook no alternative to its own value system and converts at the point of a gun.

"Mr Cameron is entirely wrong to manipulate the proposed legislation in order to ensure compliance with secular and LGBT ideology. It is not just wrong, but unnecessary. Christians are not the enemy."

This week the Christian Institute, which is well aware of the dangers, became unlikely partners with the National Secular Society and Peter Tatchell in launching Defend Free Speech - defendfreespeech.org.uk -  at the Houses of Parliament. They will challenge the Government to identify legitimate targets that are not already covered by existing law - like the Public Order Act 1986, the Terrorism Act of 2000, the Terrorism Act of 2006, the Serious Crime Act of 2007 and the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act of 2014.

The Government has already done its best to make everyone agree with what it thinks are "British values."

The Government must not tell the church what to believe. And if it attempts to prevent someone expressing an opinion in public, we are on our way to a totalitarian state.
       

Is anyone listening?

When sin begins, it doesn't add up; it multiplies. We are living in desperate days. For hundreds of years marriage was only between a man and a woman: it never entered anyone's head that this was in any way unequal.

Now, in the name of equality, the US Supreme Court has followed the UK's example and legalised same-sex marriage in all 50 states. (Critics say the Supreme Court justices have ignored the law and the Constitution and rewritten the law according to their left-wing mindset.)

More and more denominations are accepting same-sex marriage. More and more churches are in agreement with divorce and remarriage.

Have you noticed the state of British television? More and more programmes are based on sex. Programme makers appear to be vying with each other to see who can be the more explicit. Blasphemy, which would have been unheard of on television a few years ago, is now the common language on some programmes.

Many would say that legalised abortion is so entrenched that it would be impossible to reverse. The Bible says that nothing is impossible with God. Six hundred unborn babies are being killed each day in the UK.

I am told that some Christian groups are now trying to live outside of society,  without reference to the standards of society around them. Their attitude is incorrect. Christians are meant to take a stand on all these issues.

Corporate prayer is desperately needed.

What is required is not sympathy, but action. Is anybody listening?
    

Petition for 'gay cake' company

You may have heard that the McArthur family, who run Ashers Baking Company in Northern Ireland, are committed Christians. When they were asked to bake a cake bearing the slogan "Support gay marriage," they declined, as the slogan was against their deeply held beliefs.

They were taken to court in Belfast by the Equality Commission of Northern Ireland (with £40,000 of public funds), accused of discrimination.

Judge Isobel Brownlie upheld the Equality Commission. She accepted that Ashers had "genuine and deeply held" religious views, but they were conducting a business for profit and were not a religious group. They had unlawfully discriminated against the plaintiff - homosexual activist Gareth Lee - on grounds of sexual discrimination.

Daniel McArthur, Ashers' general manager, said they were extremely disappointed. "The ruling suggests that all business owners will have to be willing to promote any cause or campaign, no matter how much they disagree with it. Or as the Equality Commission has suggested, they should perhaps just close down, and that can't be right."

They are considering an appeal.

I am delighted to see that a petition has been started asking Tesco to continue selling products from Ashers bakery. (Homosexuals, in their usual mean-spirited fashion, are evidently trying to close Ashers on their own.) You can see the petition here.
     

You believe in traditional marriage? Watch out

The Coalition for Marriage has published a leaflet outlining 30 cases of individuals or groups who have been "punished" for "believing in traditional marriage."

Each case is documented and carefully referenced. The 30 cases are said to be a small minority of those that have occurred. The vast majority are from the UK.

"Those who believe, teach and practise traditional Christian teaching on marriage, relationships and sexuality are. . . going to find themselves increasingly on the wrong side of the law as this new political correctness is taught in schools, enforced by the constabulary and judiciary and promulgated by the media, in Parliament, through celebrity culture and inevitably in our churches," writes Peter Saunders.

"Our first priority in opposing its pernicious influence must be to ensure that our congregations - and especially our children and young people - are firmly grounded in biblical teaching and also well briefed in how to argue against the new agenda. It is a task that will require clarity, compassion, and, above all, courage.

"The enemy's goal is to undermine real marriage and the family. We must resist him with every fibre of our being - through speaking up for the truth and by faithfully upholding God's model in our personal lives and Christian communities."

An organisation known as ILGA - the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association - is a worldwide federation of 1,100 member organisations from 110 countries campaigning for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex rights.

Its European wing maps the LGBT status of every European country, including the UK. It gives the legislative objectives achieved and those still sought, in great detail.

Northern Ireland still does not recognise hate crime on grounds of gender identity and has not yet legalised same-sex marriage. Scotland has not yet criminalised hate speech on grounds of sexual orientation. But overall the UK bridges not yet crossed are very few.

Says Dr Saunders: "The ILGA is building a similar legal analysis for every nation on earth and its member organisations are working collaboratively to achieve every legislative objective.

"Some may say 'so what?' Why shouldn't LGBT people have the freedom to have what they are calling for?

"But the problem is that legal rights for some constitute legal duties for others. Gay rights were once a concession. They then became an expectation. Now it seems they are a requirement. What began as 'accept me' quickly became 'affirm me' and then 'celebrate me. . . or else.'

"Those who resist being coerced to deliver on the LGBT agenda pay a heavy price - not just ridicule and marginalisation, but legal sanctions - dismissal, fines, imprisonment, gagging and being driven from the public square. These activists will not tolerate disagreement or dissent. Every knee must be made to bow, to recite the mantras and creeds and to grease the LGBT machinery."

The three main political parties all pledged in their election manifestos to do more for LGBT rights.

"They are full of specious euphemisms which cleverly disguise the realities for those who will not play ball," says Dr Saunders.

"The Conservative manifesto trumpets its pride ijn legalising same-sex marriage and promises more: 'Our historic introduction of gay marriage has helped drive forward equality and strengthened the institution of marriage. But there is still more to do, and we will continue to champion equality for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people. We will build on the posthumous pardon of. . . Alan Turing. . . with a broader measure to lift the blight of outdated convictions of this nature.'

"The Labour manifesto speaks of combatting 'homophobia'. . .

"The Liberal Democrat manifesto boasts about 'marriage liberalisation'. . .

"It is clear that the Tory Government after the General Election will be actively advancing the LGBT agenda."

Might I point out that just 1.5% of the UK population is homosexual or bisexual?
   

Deciding what's important

I have the idea there's going to be a General Election shortly. Politicians are going at it hammer and tongs on television, and people are being canvassed for their opinions on this, that and the other. I expect candidates will be knocking at my front door shortly.

They say the most important matter is the NHS, and after that, the economy. They are not the only things that are important.

David Cameron's Government, in redefining marriage as it has stood for centuries, has done the nation a grave disservice.

Eric Teetsel, director of the Manhattan Declaration ("A Christian manifesto in support of the sanctity of life, traditional marriage and religious liberty"), puts it well: "As a Christian, I believe homosexual sex is one of the many forms of sexual activity God prohibits. Biblical norms are not arbitrary, but are based on God's design for human flourishing. Sin isn't just bad. It is harmful. Conversely, a life aligned with biblical principles will be prosperous.

"From this perspective, a person in a same-sex relationship is committing self-harm. Love for my neighbour compels me to fight against that harm, and to point the way towards life more abundant.

"The same applies to public policy. When our laws conform to biblical principles of justice and morality, we can expect society to thrive. When they don't, we can expect the opposite. Although you certainly don't have to be a Bible believer to understand marriage, basing public policy on a lie that contradicts God's design is a bad idea, and destined to fail catastrophically."

Marriage breakdown is causing social upheaval. Almost half of teenagers are not living with both natural parents.The results of family breakdown are costing £47 billion a year.

John Smeaton has worked for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children for 40 years, latterly as chief executive. He says evidence shows that marriage as an institution is fatally wounded by redefining it to include same-sex couples. "Those who suffer as a result are, above all, children. We are sacrificing children on the altar of adults' 'sexual rights.'

"Pro-life movements worldwide must work tirelessly to defend marriage and the family. The pro-lfe movement cannot possibly succeed in its efforts to end abortion if the family, based on marriage between a man and a woman, is destroyed."

So here are the questions I am preparing for election candidates: "Before I vote, can you tell me if you support the appointment of a families' champion at Cabinet level? What view do you take of same-sex marriage? And" - for good measure - "where do you stand on abortion?"
      

Intelligence doesn't have anything to do with it

Stephen Fry is an actor, writer and television presenter. His face and fruity voice will be familiar to most.

Fry is a homosexual. He also claims to be an atheist. He has been in the news several times lately: first, because he "married" a young male writer and comedian; secondly because of his remarks in a television programme about the meaning of life. He was asked what he would say when he was confronted by God.

"I'd say bone cancer in children? What's that about? How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is so much misery that is not our fault. It's not right. It's utterly, utterly evil. . . That's what I would say. . . The God that created this universe, if it was created by God, is quite clearly a maniac. . . utterly selfish."

The arrogance of the man is staggering.

He has been voted the most intelligent man on television, which goes to show that faith in God does not depend on intelligence, or lack of it. Rather, it depends on an attitude of heart. "Unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matt 18:3).

Objections to the existence of God by atheists are not intellectual in origin, but moral. People don't believe not because they can't believe, but because they won't believe. Like the men in the parable: "We will not have this man to reign over us" (Luke 9:14). When there's a clash between faith in God and lifestyle, some find it easier to pretend that God doesn't exist.

God made the world perfect, but He gave man free will. Man chose to sin, and through sin came misery, sickness and sorrow. But God didn't leave man in the mess he had made. He came into the world in the form of His Son, lived a perfect life, then suffered unto death that we might be freely forgiven. We didn't ask for it, we didn't deserve it, but He did it anyway. Amazing love. Amazing grace.

One can only hope that Stephen Fry finds repentance. Having found forgiveness ourselves, could we deny another the same experience?
           

Decision time for evangelicals

Once upon a time a Christian could make a choice of career and know that if he worked hard and lived by his principles he could make a go of it.

No more.

The American Family Association says there are seven careers that are no longer open to the Christian who lives by his principles. They are, it says: 

Photographer - A Christian photographer in New Mexico was fined $6,700 for politely declining to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony. The Supreme Court allowed this fine to stand.

Baker - A Christian baker in Oregon is facing both civil and criminal penalties, including jail time, for politely declining to bake a cake for a gay wedding ceremony. Her business was closed.

Florist - Baronelle Stutzman, a Christian florist in Washington, is being sued by the state attorney general for politely declining to prepare an arrangement fpr a gay wedding ceremony.

Broadcaster - Craig James was fired by Fox Sports Southwest after only one day on the job for expressing his support for natural marriage while he was a candidate for the United State Senate.

Counsellor - Jennifer Keeton was dismissed from the counselling programme at Augusta State University for her religious reservations about the homosexual lifestyle.

Innkeeper - The Wildflower Inn in Vermont was fined $30,000 and forced to shut down its wedding reception business after politely declining to host a lesbian ceremony.

Teacher - Ms Gillian John-Charles was kicked out of a doctoral programme in education at Roosevelt University for expressing in class her belief that homosexuals aren't born gay.

This (if you will permit a rather snide comment) in the land of the free.

Not that we have anything to boast about. We have a  list of people penalised for their Christian beliefs - the latest a young carer at a London nursery dismissed for gross misconduct for telling a colleague in response to a direct question what the Bible says about homosexuality.

In an important and careful piece, as you would expect from the president of one of the largest theological seminaries, Al Mohler says that evangelicals face a decision that cannot be avoided. There will be no place to hide, and there will be no place to remain silent. To be silent, he says, will answer the question.

The question is whether evangelicals will remain true to the teachings of Scripture and the unbroken teaching of the Christian church for over 2,000 years on the morality of same-sex acts and the institution of marriage.

"The world is pressing this question upon us, but so are a number of voices from the larger evangelical circle - voices that are calling for a radical revision of the church's understanding of the Bible, sexual morality, and the meaning of marriage. We are living in the midst of a massive revolution in morality."

Our answer to the question, he says, will determine or reveal what we understand about everything the Bible reveals and everything the church teaches -  even the gospel itself.

He ends with an appeal for fervent, urgent prayer that this moment of decision for evangelical Christianity will be answered with a firm assertion of biblical authority, respect for marriage as the union of a man and a woman, passion for the gospel of Christ and prayer for the faithfulness and health of Christ's church.

I couldn't disagree with that.

If you would like to read his piece - and it is well worth reading - you  can see it here. A masterly exposition of the Scriptures on homosexuality by Dr Mohler and four others you can download free here.
  

Same-sex marriage: A sad day

The first same-sex marriages in Britain took place today..

The following time-honoured words, as someone pointed out, have effectively been consigned to the dustbin of history:

Dearly beloved, we are gathered together here in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation, to join together this Man and this Woman in holy Matrimony; which is an honourable estate, instituted of God in the time of man's innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church; which holy estate Christ adorned and beautified with his presence, and first miracle that he wrought, in Cana of Galilee; and is commanded of Saint Paul to be honourable among all men; and therefore is not by any to be enterprised, nor taken in hand, unadvisedly, lightly, or wantonly, to satisfy man's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understanding; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God, duly considering the causes for which Matrimony was ordained.

First, it was ordained for the procreation of children, to be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord, and to the praise of his holy Name.

Secondly, it was ordained for a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication;
; that such persons as have not the gift of continency might marry, and keep themselves undefiled members of Christ's body.

Thirdly, it was ordained for the mutual society, help and comfort, that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity, unto which holy estate these two persons present come now to be joined. . .

God ordained marriage at the beginning of time:

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.  Gen 2:24.

Jesus clearly supported it:

"Have you not read that he who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,'

"and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?

"So then, they are no longer two but one flesh.Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."  Matt 19:4 - 6.

Marriage has stood for thousands of years. Those who have dared to redefine it have done the nation a great disservice.

The Cutting Edge Consortium and the LGBTI Anglican Coalition welcomed the change in the marriage law, which they say "has evolved over the centuries in response to changes in society and in scientific knowledge."

They continue: "We acknowledge that some (though not all) of the faith organisations to which we belong do not share our joy, and continue to express opposition in principle to such marriages. We look forward to the time, sooner rather than later, when all people of faith will feel able to welcome this development."

They may have a long wait. God's institutions, and God's word, are not so easily overturned.

Shut up - or speak up?

Same-sex marriage has been legalised. We have lost the battle. So what do we do now - shut up about it? Or is it even more important that we continue to preach the truth about marriage?

I ask the question just now because I have come across an excellent blog post by Regis Nicoll on Breakpoint. He lists a number of arguments used in favour of same-sex marriage, with counter-arguments underneath. Here are a few extracts:

Marriage 'equality' follows Jesus's teaching about love and inclusion.

Love incarnate once said "If you love me, you will obey what I command." Among His commands is the prohibition of sex outside of marriage. As He gave no expressed or implied allowance for same-sex "marriage," His prohibition includes indulging homosexual desires, regardless of a committed relationship, church blessing, or legal union. . . 

As to inclusion, while it is true that Jesus extended His invitation to all, His call was not without conditions. Nicodemus was told he needed to be born again, the disciples were told to deny themselves and carry their cross daily, a rich man was told to give up all his possessions, a prostitute and a lame man were both told to stop sinning, and in a parable about the kingdom a man was turned out,of all things, for wearing the wrong clothes.

The good news of the kingdom is that "many are called," but the requirement of repentance means that "few are chosen."

Since God made people that way, He'd have no problem with them marrying.

The Creator's design of sexuality is intended to satisfy the good and essential function of reproduction. It is a function that same-sex couples are incapable of accomplishing. They can only mimic the sex act for the purpose of sensual gratification.

The suggestion that God would frustrate His expressed purpose of sex with an untoward desire is unreasoned. Whatever causes same-sex orientation, it is not God, any more than He is the cause of congenital disorders like club feet or cleft palates. The person who insists that homosexuality is "how God made me" is conflating a dysfunction with a design.

Proscriptions against gay 'marriage' neglect the personal experiences of homosexuals.

While personal experiences may be genuine, intense and heartfelt, they are not a reliable guide to truth. Depending only on our experiences we would think the earth flat in a geocentric cosmos where time and space are absolute. It is only because we have discovered laws transcending personal experience that we know that reality is sometimes radically different than what our experiences suggest.

Opposing gay 'marriage' represents a moral judgment about others, something Jesus warned against.

The same goes for endorsing gay "marriage." Not only is endorsement a moral judgment about the practice, it's a moral insinuation, if not judgment, about those who disagree. In fact, "disagreers" are routinely called (and judged as) homophobes, haters, and. . . anti-gay bigots with impunity.

But popular proof-texts notwithstanding, Jesus never said that Christians shouldn't judge the actions of others. He taught that we should remove our "specks" so that we can "see clearly" their specks, and He told His disciples, "If your brother sins, rebuke him."

Jesus never said anything against homosexuality or gay 'marriage.'

If the "argument from silence" settles the morality of homosexual behaviour, it does likewise for child sacrifice, paedophilia, slavery, rape, bestiality, and a host of other practices that Jesus never mentioned by name. . .

In a disarming passage, the apostle Paul uses marriage as a word picture for the church, and it is clear why. Just as the complementary design of man and woman creates "one flesh" out of two people for the purpose of multiplication, so the complementary gifts of the Holy Spirit create one Body out of multiple members for the same end.

That's only part of it.You can read the rest here.

Transformed by love

What happens when a couple of lesbians go to church to cause trouble?

John Burke tells the story.

"Let's go for fun! We'll see how much we can push their buttons," said Amy. "Come on!"

Amy had been in a nine-year relationship that had broken up, leaving her wondering why her deepest longings could never be satisfied. She and Rachel had started seeing each other when they decided to attend one Sunday morning.

"I came on  a mission to shock people," says Amy. "Rachel and I would hold hands in front of people, but instead of the disgusted looks we expected, people met eyes with us and treated us like real people. So we started coming to church weekly. We kept moving to the front each week, trying to get a reaction so that we'd be rejected sooner rather than later. When we couldn't shock people, we stopped trying and started learning."

Rachel stopped attending, but Amy continued.  "I was searching for something," she says. "I definitely wasn't looking to change, but I wondered if God had answers to my deepest longings.  Problem was, I didn't trust God at all.

"The more I listened and learned about the teachings of Jesus, the more I started to actually believe that God really did love me. I heard more and more about being His masterpiece, and in time, I actually started to believe it."

She found out her father had nine affairs while she was growing up, a secret which rocked her world. She saw how the roots of her sexual issues tied together with his. She was just like him, using people to find comfort, life and love outside of God.

As time went by and she learned more of the Scriptures, she fell more and more in love with the Lord. Then she went to a seminar, and what God showed her shocked her. The speaker was talking about bullying.

She remembered a boy who had bullied her all year. Then one day, he apologised for the way he had acted, and invited her to his home. When she went round, two teenage boys were waiting. They raped her. She was nine years old.

The memory was extremely painful, but it was part of the healing process.

Seven years later, Amy leads a ministry in the church to help others find healing.

You see, you can't tell Jesus anything about yourself that He doesn't already know. He loves you. He forgave self-righteous people, adulterers and prostitutes. He wants to forgive you. 

But that's not all. He wants to transform your life into something beautiful. He wants to make you the person He intended you to be. His love can do that too.

Democracy? Not from where I'm sitting

David Cameron, you will remember, is the man who, despite the fact that most people didn't want it, insisted on legalising same-sex marriage.

Now the Christian Institute says his Government has been responsible for what it calls the biggest liberalisation of abortion procedures since 1967.

The Abortion Act says that two doctors must certify that they are of the opinion, formed in good faith, that the woman complies with a legal ground for abortion. Guidance from 1999 says doctors "must give their opinions on the reasons under the Act for the termination following consultation with the woman."

Former Health Secretary Andrew Lansley told Parliament in March 2012 that he would consult on new guidelines for abortion providers outside the NHS. The institute says new interim guidelines were sent to clinics in July 2012 - 17 months before the public consultation began. They said that doctors did not need to see women seeking an abortion.

The new rules were intended to address the problem of doctors pre-signing abortion forms and of sex-selection abortions. They did neither.

A poll taken for the institute shows almost 90 per cent of people thought that a woman considering an abortion should be seen by a doctor, and 76 per cent believed that not doing so would put the woman's health at risk

The Government is to allow a free vote for MPs and peers on Lord Falconer's controversial assisted suicide bill, and is said to have made it clear it will not stand in the way of a change in the law. Norman Lamb, the minister responsible for care for elderly and the disabled, was among the first at the weekend to say he would vote in favour.

Lord Falconer's bill is the fourth on assisted suicide to come before the House of Lords in the last decade. The other three were voted down. 

It's almost like someone has decided assisted suicide ought to be legal, and lawmakers are being given new chances to vote until they get it right.

If this is democracy, I don't care for it.

Sex and the church

Dr Lisa Severine Nolland, writer, lay chaplain and consultant to Anglican Mainstream, has worked with children, adolescents and families for years.

Before same-sex marriage was legalised, she says, younger people didn't care about the issue. Older people, especially Christian leaders, would say "just preach the gospel," or "run another Christianity Explored or Alpha - that should sort things." Such approaches, she says, are understandable, but naive at best and ignorantly culpable at worst.

She warns that we are in a sexual revolution of the first order, which is affecting us all, inside and outside the church. Now same-sex marriage has been legalised, other alternative sexual lifestyles, including plural partnerships, are demanding the same rights on the same basis - "This is me and my identity, I was born this way, I am not hurting anyone, society discriminates against me, I am not putting up with it any more."

There is a danger, she says, that the antediluvian views of those who still believe in traditional marriage will go the way of the dinosaur, at least in public. Preachers will steer ever more clear of these minefields, majoring on "love and acceptance." Children will be taught to affirm all family forms, which are no better and no worse than any other, and that to believe to the contrary is evil.

But it is not too late to respond to these challenges. Here, says Dr Nolland, is what we can do:

1.   Blow the whistle on the myth that Jesus did not speak much about sex issues. He did. Sex matters a lot to Jesus. Sex was good, but only in a monogamous heterosexual marriage.  

2.   Stand up for the view that living and thinking in a distinctively Christian manner in relation to sex and marriage is a vital part of Christian discipleship. Ask your church leadership to do the same.

3.   Get yourself educated on the dangers of all sex outside this framework and the benefit to children of married heterosexual parents, and teach your children the uncensored, real version. Ask your church leadership to do the same

4.   Become culturally and politically engaged through groups like Christian Concern, Christian Institute or C4M in the UK, or National Organization for Marriage or other conservative groups in the US.

5.  Pray individually and corporately about these matters. 

The need is desperate.

Scotland agrees to same-sex marriage

Same-sex marriage has been approved in Scotland. The Scottish Parliament yesterday agreed to legalise same-sex marriage by 105 votes to 18 in a free vote.

Religious bodies will be able to "opt in" to perform same-sex weddings, but no religious community will be forced to hold such ceremonies. The first homosexual weddings could take place in the autumn.

The bill's supporters made repeated assurances that free speech was protected, but it was admitted that there was no specific opt-out for civil registrars.

The Church of Scotland and the Catholic Church in Scotland opposed the legislation.

Northern Ireland, whose Assembly is not considering legislation, will now be the only part of the UK that does not allow same-sex marriage.

Said Alex Neil, cabinet secretary for health and wellbeing in Scotland: "I am proud that the Scottish Parliament has taken this progressive and hugely important decision in favour of equal rights in our country. It is right that same-sex couples should be able to freely express their love and commitment to each other through getting married. Marriage is about love, and that has been at the heart of this issue."

Said the Rev David Robertson, Free Church of Scotland minister and director of the Solas Centre for Public Christianity: "Those of us who do not accept this redefinition of marriage and hold to the traditional view, which has been the building block of our society, mourn this day. Not just because it is certain that we will now be discriminated against when we do not bow down to the new state absolutist morality, but because we believe that ultimately this will be detrimental to the people of Scotland, especially the poor and marginalised."

Legalising ideology?

The Counsellors and Psychotherapists (Regulation) Bill 2013 - 14 comes up for its second reading in the House of Commons on January 24. It seeks to ban therapists from offering help to people who want to reduce unwanted homosexual feelings in their lives.

While it aims to forbid help being offered to people who do not want to be homosexuals, it allows help for people to become homosexuals. It will deny people the right to choose how to live their own lives. And it appears to be based on homosexuals' insistence that homosexuality is innate and unchangeable, like race. 

Opponents of the therapy say the motivation behind it is homophobic rather than scientific, and that practitioners are not acting in the best interests of the individual. They deny the many accounts of people who have been set free from homosexuality.

Dr Michael Davidson, co-director of Core Issues Trust, claims to have been turned away himself from homosexuality by counselling, prayer and psychotherapy. He writes: "The British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) affirms that conversion or reparative therapies 'have no medical indication and represent a severe threat to the health and human rights of the affected persons.'

"The UK Council for Psychotherapy (UKCP) warns that 'There is overwhelming evidence that undergoing such therapy is at considerable emotional and psychological cost.'

"The Royal College of Psychiatrists says that therapy to change a client's sexual orientation can be 'deeply damaging'. . . 

"The UKCP claims that there is 'overwhelming evidence [of] considerable emotional and psychological cost' associated with such therapies. Its former chair, Prof Andrew Samuels, however, declined to respond to a request as to where this evidence was to be found. 

"Chief Executive, Mr David Pink, affirmed to us that this question was 'adequately addressed in the drawing up of our guidance,' yet the organisation has offered no such evidence at all. 

"Dr Di Hodgson, Chair of the UKCP's Diversity, Equalities and Social Responsibility Committee, has honestly acknowledged: 'I think there is very conflicting evidence. . . So we have taken a view in a way which is regardless of the scientific findings. We still believe that it is unethical to seek to agree or to work towards changing someone's sexual orientation through psychotherapy.'

"The UKCP says first that there is 'overwhelming evidence;' then declined to specify any evidence; then says there is 'conflicting evidence;' and then that they have taken a position that doesn't require any evidence. This should concern any thinking person."

Says the Rev Andrew Symes, executive secretary of Anglican Mainstream: "For centuries in this country it has been accepted that the promotion of the Christian faith so that people are converted to Christ is a good thing. It results in positive change, whereby people generally become more considerate and productive members of society. 

"It has also been generally agreed that stable, loving, heterosexual marriage is a foundational cornerstone for a stable society, and that this necessarily involves encouraging people to overcome natural tendencies to promiscuity, adultery and homosexual practice. 

"Only recently, in the last few years, have these axioms been challenged. Christian conversion has been attacked as 'brainwashing,' or as disruptive to community cohesion especially in multi-faith contexts. And Christian teaching about the sinfulness of sex outside of covenant heterosexual marriage has now been accused of harming the integrity and self-esteem of gay people."

You are asked to contact your MP to  ask him or her to vote against the bill.

Big Brother takes exception

Let me say it again: if you believe that homosexual practice is wrong, you are not allowed to say so in public - and the Christian church appears to be doing nothing about the situation.

Former world heavyweight boxer Evander Holyfield is appearing on a programme named Big Brother on Channel 5.  He is believed to be an evangelical Christian. Fellow contestant Luisa Zissman said she thought it was bad that few people speak out about being homosexual in the sports industry.

"I think it's good to be open like that because it's normal."

Said Holyfield: "But that ain't normal. The Bible lets you know there’s wrong, there’s right.”

Zissman said: "That's just the way some people are born."

Holyfield disagreed: "It don't make no difference. If you're born and your leg was turned this way, what do you do? You go to a doctor and get it fixed back right."

The conversation was broadcast. Afterward Holyfield was taken to task by the Big Brother producers.

They told him: "While Big Brother understands these are the views you hold, they aren't the views that are held by a large section of society, and expressing these views will be extremely offensive to many people. Do you understand why?

"Big Brother does not tolerate the use of offensive language and must therefore warn you to consider very carefully the effect expressing such views may have and the harm and offence you may cause by repeating these views inside the house."

Said Brendan O'Neill in his Telegraph blog: "Today, so cavalier have we become about the old Millian ideal of freedom of thought and speech for all – even for those who offend us – that we think nothing of censuring a man simply for expressing a view that is 'not held by many people in society'. . . "

He said the censuring of Holyfield had been done "in the name of tolerance yet it is actually a prime example of intolerance. In the name of promoting society-wide tolerance of homosexuals, we must not tolerate the expression of any criticisms of homosexuality, the anti-Holyfield lobby says.

 "Remarkably, some people think such censuring and punishment of outdated views about women and minorities is a sign that Britain has become more tolerant. Actually it shows the opposite – that Britain is now astonishingly intolerant of anyone who holds the 'wrong' views, views that run counter to mainstream thinking, and it will humiliate them in public if they dare to express themselves and warn them to keep their filthy ideologies to themselves."

This came at the same time as an announcement that the Rev Donald MacInnes, Church of Scotland minister of Gairbraid Church, Maryhill, Glasgow, had been sacked as chaplain of Glasgow Gaelic School.

Mr MacInnes wrote on a Facebook page: "The overwhelming support of our Scottish politicians in creating same-sex marriage is very disappointing. Many of us, myself included, agreed that the creation of civil partnerships was necessary so that individuals suffering from this disorder were not legally penalised in any way because of their sexuality. We can now expect to see the school curriculum changed to the end that our children will be taught this perversion as if it were a good thing."

Some parents saw the comments, and complained to the city council. One parent said she did not wish her children to be exposed to prejudice. Another said the comments were "absolutely disgraceful." 

So much for the clear teaching of the Bible on the subject.

Duck Dynasty and homosexuality

There can't be too many people who don't know that there's a programme called Duck Dynasty on American TV, described as "the biggest reality-TV hit in the history of cable television." It's about a family from Louisiana who have a  company which makes products for duck hunters, where all the menfolk have long beards and speak openly against abortion and for the family. Some 14 million people have taken the programme to their hearts and watch each episode.

Says Phil Robertson, the patriarch of the family: “I myself am a product of the 60s; I centred my life around sex, drugs and rock and roll until I hit rock bottom and accepted Jesus as my Saviour. My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches." So far so good.

The trouble came when he was asked in a wide-ranging magazine interview what sin was. He said homosexuality, among a number of other things, was sin, and quoted 1 Cor 6:9, 10, which says that fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, sodomites, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers and extortioners will not inherit the kingdom of God.

For that, the TV company suspended Phil Robertson indefinitely, which presumably meant he wouldn't be making any more television programmes.

Fallout from the spat has been considerable.

Says Bill Muehlenberg: "Daring to publicly criticise homosexuality. . .  the only crime in the West that will land you in real hot water every single time. Not even being a murderer or rapist is guaranteed to result in so much backlash as being willing to speak against the homosexual agenda.

"This is unquestionably the greatest and most heinous sin imaginable in the West today. Nothing compares with it, and nothing meets a swifter and more hate-filled reaction. With thousands of such cases now at our disposal, we can safely say that there is no greater threat to freedom and democracy than the militant homosexual lobby."

Says Alan Snyder: “Nothing he said in that statement was outside orthodox Christian belief. . . What is occurring in our society is an all-out attack on biblical standards of morality. Those who say it’s a figment of evangelicals’ imagination are not paying attention. The goal will be to outlaw any public expression of Christian belief that directly contradicts newly accepted societal norms." 

Says David Limbaugh: "When he identified homosexual behaviour as a sin, he might as well have robbed a bank on live television. But when he cited the New Testament book of 1st Corinthians as including homosexuality in a list of sins, he had passed the point of no return. 

"As many are now belatedly realising, the option of sitting out the culture wars is increasingly closed to us if we value our liberties, as we conservatives claim we do. Despite all of its sermonising, the militant left will not live and let live. They demand uniformity of thought, and those who dissent from their PC standards are to be shunned and silenced.

"Christians don’t believe they are the arbiters of sinful behavior, but that God is. But we’re approaching that time - we already may have arrived - when the belief in certain Scriptures will be deemed intolerably sinful and the believer outcast as a hater."

As Phil Robertson also said, God loves us all, and wants to forgive all our sins - but He can't forgive sins we won't acknowledge.

People are wondering what will be the effect of this sort of thing on lukewarm Christians. They will accept a form of sexual behaviour which God abhors, or stand up for what God believes and be vilified by the world.

Says Albert Mohler: “The controversy over Duck Dynasty sends a clear signal to anyone who has anything to risk in public life: Say nothing about the sinfulness of homosexual acts or risk sure and certain destruction by the revolutionaries of the new morality. You have been warned.”

So now you know.

Watch out for 'a genderless mush'

When the Government legalised same-sex marriage, some supposed that the divorce rate in same-sex marriages would be similar to the divorce rate in traditional marriage. Others supposed that divorces in same-sex marriages would be much higher. We may never know.

The Office for National Statistics, which keeps records of marriage and divorce, is considering including marriage, same-sex marriage and civil partnerships without distinction in the same definition of "legally recognised partnerships." The break-up of relationships in the three classes would then be listed in the same single figure.

Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, says "It is vital that the ONS is completely open and transparent about the statistics it publishes on marriage, civil partnership and divorce. If we are going to be able to assess the impact of same-sex marriage on traditional marriage, the figures will need to be published separately and not merged into a genderless mush.

“Decades of research have demonstrated that a marriage between a man and a woman is considerably more stable than other types of relationship and produces better outcomes for children. The Prime Minister and some other supporters of the recent redefinition of marriage are assuming that same-sex unions will produce identical results, but without separate figures the argument cannot be settled one way or the other.

"To adopt a gender-blind approach to marriage and divorce would severely limit the ability of researchers to assess the relative benefits of different types of registered relationships and stifle healthy debate in a key area of public policy.
 
“If the Government is serious about pursuing family policy based on sound evidence, it is of the utmost importance that all the relevant statistics should be readily available and not hidden from view.”

William Oddie, of the Catholic Herald, produces figures from somewhere where same-sex marriage has been available for some time. After eight years, he says, 82 per cent of marriages of a man and a woman are still intact, 60 per cent of opposite-sex cohabiting couples are still together, but only 25 per cent of same-sex couples are still together. 

It is vital that the ONS doesn't muddy the waters, he says. "It's something we HAVE to know about." 

The ONS quietly launched a consultation on the matter on the same day it issued a report showing that female couples were almost twice as likely to end a civil partnership as male couples.

To take part in the consultation, click here, then under the heading Downloads, click on "Consultation document." Your response to the consultation can be sent by e-mail. The consultation closes on December 17.