Satan’s master plan destroy marriage, destroy the family and destroy the human race.
What God has created and said it is good let no one destroy except at their peril. Judgement day will come!
These people do not care what you want. They only care what they want. They are self-centered to the extreme.
While you may not be inclined to use government to achieve all of your objectives regarding them: they are completely dedicated to using government to accomplish all of their objectives regarding you.
Their plan: Deceive/self-deceive, pervert, eliminate.
As an atheist, this immoral lesbian does not acknowledge the fact that marriage is not merely a human institution, completely malleable in the hands of human custom. Marriage is a divine creation, intended to project onto the screen of the human imagination the beauty of a Saviour who gives himself sacrificially for his bride and of his bride who yields herself gratefully back to him.
The biblical concept of marriage is grounded in Genesis 2:23–24.
The ‘one flesh’ meaning of marriage calls a man and woman together into a fully shared life. Two things stand out here. First, this is a ‘one flesh’ union. Overriding even blood relationships (‘his father and his mother’) to create a new kinship, marriage is the most profound bond that exists between two human beings; within it nothing can be withheld. Secondly, this is a ‘one flesh’ union. Profound as it is, marriage is still less than ultimate, for mortal ‘flesh’ (v. 24 has post-fall people in view) falls short of the divine (*cf. Ps. 78:39).
Genesis 2, therefore, teaches that God created marriage when he made the first woman out of the flesh of the first man, so that the bond of marriage reunites man and woman as ‘one flesh’. All other relational claims are subordinate to those of marriage. ‘One flesh’ entails a life-long, exclusive clinging of one man to one woman in one life fully shared. Marriage puts a barrier around a husband and his wife and destroys all barriers between them; they belong fully to one another, and to one another only.
The overall pattern of biblical teaching on marriage discloses typological symmetry from Genesis to Revelation, as the ‘one-flesh-ness’ of human marriage, sacred but provisional, points forward and upward to the eternal spiritual union of Christ with his bride, the church. The symbolism inherent in earthly marriage lends the relationship greater dignity; its significance goes beyond the human and temporal to the divine and eternal.
The homosexualism, modern “progressive” liberalism, feminism, etc… (isms) that seek to redefine marriage to their immoral and/or selfish “lifestyles” or eliminate God’s institution of marriage for humanity altogether are damaging society and hurting members of society.
In these last days, with the great falling away occurring, many are being injured by way of the world’s isms.
So are you claiming this one person’s views represent everyone who is in favour of same-sex marriage? She no more speaks for others than you speak for all Christians. Still, why admit this is the case when you can get another anti-gay rant out of it? Why does this issue preoccupy you so much, Robin? It’s not the gospel you are commissioned to proclaim.
Right from the days of the Bloomsbury set, right through Gay Liberation Front, Gay Left, those in the Marxist tradition, the enemies of Christianity have wanted to destroy the institution of marriage and the family for their various and sometimes interlocking reasons.
And yes, we are preoccupied here with defending the cause of Christ, Christianity and the kind of society which God wants to see. And as obedience to the laws of God brings a blessing (see Deut 28; Psalms 1, 19, 119) we want to see our nation blessed. And that is as much the Gospel as straightforward evangelism.
It’s true that many people on the Left (esp. the feminist Left) and also on the libertarian Right want to destroy marriage, but most who push for same-sex marriage do not. The destruction of marriage may be the outcome but it is not the intention. To present the rantings of this woman (who looks like a man) as the “the movement’s true agenda” is inaccurate and inflammatory – probably intentionally so.
Not so fast. Ever since the mid-twentieth century, feminists have been calling for the destruction of marriage, and scores of public thinkers who were previously opposed to marriage are now singing the praises of ‘gay marriage’ precisely because this is seen as a way to deconstruct the family and redefine marriage into oblivion and meaninglessness.
Throughout the seventies, eighties and nineties it was commonplace for feminists to condemn the matrimonial state. This can be seen in the way Catharine MacKinnon, like other second-wave feminists, have compared sexual intercourse within marriage to rape, saying, “What in the liberal view looks like love and romance looks a lot like hatred and torture to the feminist. Pleasure and eroticism become violation. (Catherine A. MacKinnon, Applications of Feminist Legal Theory to Women’s Lives, Temple University Press, 1996), p. 39.) Elsewhere the Harvard Press author said, “The major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that normal happens so often that one cannot get anyone to see anything wrong with it.” (Catherine A. MacKinnon, quoted by Christina Hoff Sommers, “Hard-Line Feminists Guilty of Ms.-Representation,” Wall Street Journal, November 7, 1991.)
Feminist author and journalist Jill Johnson was equally unbending in her antipathy to marriage. Writing in 1973, she commented that “Until all women are lesbians, there will be no true political revolution.” (Jill Johnson, Lesbian Nation: The Feminist Solution, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1973.) This echoed a whole body of feminist and lesbian literature aimed at discrediting marriage. Here is just a sampling of some of the statements from this corpus:
“Like prostitution, marriage is an institution that is extremely oppressive and dangerous for women.” Andrea Dworkin, ‘Feminism: An Agenda’ (Letters from a War Zone, Brooklyn, NY: Lawrence Hill Books, 1993), p. 146.
“Feminism stresses the indistinguishability of prostitution, marriage, and sexual harassment.” Catharine MacKinnon, Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law (Harvard University Press, 1987), p. 59.
“We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.” Robin Morgan Sisterhood is Powerful (New York: Random House, 1970), p. 537
“We have to abolish and reform the institution of marriage.” Gloria Steinem, cited in the Saturday Review of Education, March 1973.
“Legal marriage thus enlists state support for conditions conducive to murder and mayhem.” Claudia Card ‘Against Marriage and Motherhood’(Hypatia, vol. 11, no. 3, Summer 1996).
“Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession…the choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn’t be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that.” Vivian Gornick, The Daily Illini, April 25, 1981.
“If women are to effect a significant amelioration in their condition it seems obvious that they must refuse to marry…The plight of mothers is more desperate than that of other women, and the more numerous the children the more hopeless the situation seems to be…Most women…would shrink at the notion of leaving husband and children, but this is precisely the case in which brutally clear rethinking must be undertaken.” Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971), pp. 317 & 320.
By now you should get the picture. It isn’t complicated. The narrative is essentially marriage is bad and must be destroyed.
Now fast-forward to the present and what do you find? You find many of these same writers are now agitating for gay marriage. Why is this? Have they suddenly had a major ideological shift to go from anti-marriage to pro-marriage? No. Their agenda is consistent but their tactics have changed. They now realize that little can be achieved on the large scale through explicit calls for the abolition of marriage and therefore they have settled on a new strategy that seeks the same ends while ostensibly placing a high valuation on the institution of marriage. Only in this way can they successfully shift the unconscious normalcy fields in ways consonant with their long-term goals.
This isn’t just speculation on my part. Dozens of public feminist figures (including some of the feminists I quoted above, in addition to leading activists, scholars, educators, writers, artists, lawyers, journalists, and community organizers) have now signed a joint statement titled, ‘Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families and Relationships.’ This statement argues that those who are advancing same-sex ‘marriage’ have not gone far enough. The statement argues that since traditional nuclear families are no longer the norm, government needs to be more elastic in what it considers to be “legitimate families.” They write, “The struggle for same-sex marriage rights is only one part of a larger effort to strengthen the security and stability of diverse households and families.” How diverse? The Statement suggests that anyone living together should be considered a family, including “Close friends and siblings who live together in long-term, committed, non-conjugal relationships…” It also suggests that “legitimate families” can involve people who don’t live together, including “Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households.”
What is going on here shouldn’t be difficult to grasp. When marriage and family can mean anything, then marriage and family will mean nothing, which is what the radical feminists have wanted all along. As I said before:
Just as the i-phone might have come to us through the calculator metaphor (imagine someone saying “I can speak to someone through my calculator”), so same-sex marriage might have come to us through different ideological channels. For example, it could have arisen out of mid twentieth-century feminism’s fixation with heterosexual marriage being oppressive because it allegedly institutionalizes prostitution. Imagine that a bunch of feminists like Gloria Steinem, Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon had got together and started saying things like, “Marriage allows men to control women, so we need to undermine the hegemony of the traditional family by stretching the boundaries for what can count as family. What better way to do this than same-sex marriage.” Had same-sex marriage come to us via that path of descent, it probably would have fallen on deaf ears and only been appreciated by a few radicals, in much the same way as it didn’t work to build a prototype of the i-phone on the model of a bicycle. For despite massive family breakdowns throughout the last half of the twentieth-century, the core values of traditional marriage are still too pervasive for same-sex marriage to have come to us via a direct attack on the traditional family. Instead, same-sex marriage is coming to us through a clever appropriation of family values. Indeed, it is being presented as a tribute to marriage, as if all that is needed is simply a quantitative enlargement of the pool of people eligible to marry and not a quantitative shift in the very idea of what marriage actually is.
Even though this is how ‘gay marriage’ is being presented to us, you sometimes get glimpses of the truth, like when Lesbian Masha Gessen acknowledged that calls for gay marriage involve having to lie to the public. That is why this video was so useful.
/ Greets, Robin. Seen the following? I spotted it not long ago on the amazing net. /
USA – from Puritans to Impure-itans
Is there a connection between beautiful New England and entire American cities turned into smoking rubble? There is.
Take same-sex marriage. I would have guessed that a “sin” city (San Francisco? Las Vegas?) would have been the first to legalize it.
Oddly it’s been the place where America started that’s wanted to be the first place to help bring about the end of America and its values! It’s been a Nor’easter of Perversion (helping to fulfill the end time “days of Lot” predicted in Luke 17) that began in (you guessed it) Boston in 2004.
New England has gone from the Mayflower Compact to the Gay Power Impact, from Providence to decadence, from Bible thumpers to God dumpers, from university to diversity to perversity, and from the land of the Great Awakening to God’s Future Shakening that will make the Boston bombings look like Walden Pond ripples by comparison!
The same Nor’easter has been spreading south and as far west as Washington State where, after swelling up with pride, Mt. Rainier may wish to celebrate shame-sex marriage by having a blast that Seaddlepated folks can share in lava-land!
The same Luke 17 prediction is tied to the Book of Revelation which speaks of the cities that God will flatten because of same-sexism – including American cities – a scenario I’ll have to accept since I can’t create my own universe and decree rules for it.
I’ve just been analyzing the world’s terminal “religion” that has its “god,” its accessories, its “rites,” and even a flag. It’s an obsession that the infected converts are willing to live for, fight for – and even die for!
Want more facts? Google “God to Same-Sexers: Hurry Up” and “Government-Approved Illegals.”
[…] feminists, such as Masha Gessen, have been candid enough to acknowledge this. (See the video ‘Gay Marriage Activist Reveals Movement’s True Agenda: Destroy Marriage.’) Ryan Anderson reminds us […]
[…] (Some gay activists have been upfront that their true aim is to destroy the institution of marriage. See ‘Gay Marriage Activist Reveals Movement’s True Agenda: Destroy Marriage‘) […]
'Molly Malone wheels her wheelbarrow outside Trinity College Dublin. Secular values have displaced Christian virtue in Dublin's ancient seat of learning.'
The motion before the...
Satan’s master plan destroy marriage, destroy the family and destroy the human race.
What God has created and said it is good let no one destroy except at their peril. Judgement day will come!
These people do not care what you want. They only care what they want. They are self-centered to the extreme.
While you may not be inclined to use government to achieve all of your objectives regarding them: they are completely dedicated to using government to accomplish all of their objectives regarding you.
Their plan: Deceive/self-deceive, pervert, eliminate.
As an atheist, this immoral lesbian does not acknowledge the fact that marriage is not merely a human institution, completely malleable in the hands of human custom. Marriage is a divine creation, intended to project onto the screen of the human imagination the beauty of a Saviour who gives himself sacrificially for his bride and of his bride who yields herself gratefully back to him.
The biblical concept of marriage is grounded in Genesis 2:23–24.
The ‘one flesh’ meaning of marriage calls a man and woman together into a fully shared life. Two things stand out here. First, this is a ‘one flesh’ union. Overriding even blood relationships (‘his father and his mother’) to create a new kinship, marriage is the most profound bond that exists between two human beings; within it nothing can be withheld. Secondly, this is a ‘one flesh’ union. Profound as it is, marriage is still less than ultimate, for mortal ‘flesh’ (v. 24 has post-fall people in view) falls short of the divine (*cf. Ps. 78:39).
Genesis 2, therefore, teaches that God created marriage when he made the first woman out of the flesh of the first man, so that the bond of marriage reunites man and woman as ‘one flesh’. All other relational claims are subordinate to those of marriage. ‘One flesh’ entails a life-long, exclusive clinging of one man to one woman in one life fully shared. Marriage puts a barrier around a husband and his wife and destroys all barriers between them; they belong fully to one another, and to one another only.
The overall pattern of biblical teaching on marriage discloses typological symmetry from Genesis to Revelation, as the ‘one-flesh-ness’ of human marriage, sacred but provisional, points forward and upward to the eternal spiritual union of Christ with his bride, the church. The symbolism inherent in earthly marriage lends the relationship greater dignity; its significance goes beyond the human and temporal to the divine and eternal.
The homosexualism, modern “progressive” liberalism, feminism, etc… (isms) that seek to redefine marriage to their immoral and/or selfish “lifestyles” or eliminate God’s institution of marriage for humanity altogether are damaging society and hurting members of society.
In these last days, with the great falling away occurring, many are being injured by way of the world’s isms.
So are you claiming this one person’s views represent everyone who is in favour of same-sex marriage? She no more speaks for others than you speak for all Christians. Still, why admit this is the case when you can get another anti-gay rant out of it? Why does this issue preoccupy you so much, Robin? It’s not the gospel you are commissioned to proclaim.
Right from the days of the Bloomsbury set, right through Gay Liberation Front, Gay Left, those in the Marxist tradition, the enemies of Christianity have wanted to destroy the institution of marriage and the family for their various and sometimes interlocking reasons.
And yes, we are preoccupied here with defending the cause of Christ, Christianity and the kind of society which God wants to see. And as obedience to the laws of God brings a blessing (see Deut 28; Psalms 1, 19, 119) we want to see our nation blessed. And that is as much the Gospel as straightforward evangelism.
Neil’s point is a valid one.
It’s true that many people on the Left (esp. the feminist Left) and also on the libertarian Right want to destroy marriage, but most who push for same-sex marriage do not. The destruction of marriage may be the outcome but it is not the intention. To present the rantings of this woman (who looks like a man) as the “the movement’s true agenda” is inaccurate and inflammatory – probably intentionally so.
Not so fast. Ever since the mid-twentieth century, feminists have been calling for the destruction of marriage, and scores of public thinkers who were previously opposed to marriage are now singing the praises of ‘gay marriage’ precisely because this is seen as a way to deconstruct the family and redefine marriage into oblivion and meaninglessness.
Throughout the seventies, eighties and nineties it was commonplace for feminists to condemn the matrimonial state. This can be seen in the way Catharine MacKinnon, like other second-wave feminists, have compared sexual intercourse within marriage to rape, saying, “What in the liberal view looks like love and romance looks a lot like hatred and torture to the feminist. Pleasure and eroticism become violation. (Catherine A. MacKinnon, Applications of Feminist Legal Theory to Women’s Lives, Temple University Press, 1996), p. 39.) Elsewhere the Harvard Press author said, “The major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that normal happens so often that one cannot get anyone to see anything wrong with it.” (Catherine A. MacKinnon, quoted by Christina Hoff Sommers, “Hard-Line Feminists Guilty of Ms.-Representation,” Wall Street Journal, November 7, 1991.)
Feminist author and journalist Jill Johnson was equally unbending in her antipathy to marriage. Writing in 1973, she commented that “Until all women are lesbians, there will be no true political revolution.” (Jill Johnson, Lesbian Nation: The Feminist Solution, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1973.) This echoed a whole body of feminist and lesbian literature aimed at discrediting marriage. Here is just a sampling of some of the statements from this corpus:
“Like prostitution, marriage is an institution that is extremely oppressive and dangerous for women.” Andrea Dworkin, ‘Feminism: An Agenda’ (Letters from a War Zone, Brooklyn, NY: Lawrence Hill Books, 1993), p. 146.
“Feminism stresses the indistinguishability of prostitution, marriage, and sexual harassment.” Catharine MacKinnon, Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law (Harvard University Press, 1987), p. 59.
“We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.” Robin Morgan Sisterhood is Powerful (New York: Random House, 1970), p. 537
“We have to abolish and reform the institution of marriage.” Gloria Steinem, cited in the Saturday Review of Education, March 1973.
“Legal marriage thus enlists state support for conditions conducive to murder and mayhem.” Claudia Card ‘Against Marriage and Motherhood’(Hypatia, vol. 11, no. 3, Summer 1996).
“Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession…the choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn’t be. The heart of radical feminism is to change that.” Vivian Gornick, The Daily Illini, April 25, 1981.
“If women are to effect a significant amelioration in their condition it seems obvious that they must refuse to marry…The plight of mothers is more desperate than that of other women, and the more numerous the children the more hopeless the situation seems to be…Most women…would shrink at the notion of leaving husband and children, but this is precisely the case in which brutally clear rethinking must be undertaken.” Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971), pp. 317 & 320.
By now you should get the picture. It isn’t complicated. The narrative is essentially marriage is bad and must be destroyed.
Now fast-forward to the present and what do you find? You find many of these same writers are now agitating for gay marriage. Why is this? Have they suddenly had a major ideological shift to go from anti-marriage to pro-marriage? No. Their agenda is consistent but their tactics have changed. They now realize that little can be achieved on the large scale through explicit calls for the abolition of marriage and therefore they have settled on a new strategy that seeks the same ends while ostensibly placing a high valuation on the institution of marriage. Only in this way can they successfully shift the unconscious normalcy fields in ways consonant with their long-term goals.
This isn’t just speculation on my part. Dozens of public feminist figures (including some of the feminists I quoted above, in addition to leading activists, scholars, educators, writers, artists, lawyers, journalists, and community organizers) have now signed a joint statement titled, ‘Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families and Relationships.’ This statement argues that those who are advancing same-sex ‘marriage’ have not gone far enough. The statement argues that since traditional nuclear families are no longer the norm, government needs to be more elastic in what it considers to be “legitimate families.” They write, “The struggle for same-sex marriage rights is only one part of a larger effort to strengthen the security and stability of diverse households and families.” How diverse? The Statement suggests that anyone living together should be considered a family, including “Close friends and siblings who live together in long-term, committed, non-conjugal relationships…” It also suggests that “legitimate families” can involve people who don’t live together, including “Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households.”
What is going on here shouldn’t be difficult to grasp. When marriage and family can mean anything, then marriage and family will mean nothing, which is what the radical feminists have wanted all along. As I said before:
Even though this is how ‘gay marriage’ is being presented to us, you sometimes get glimpses of the truth, like when Lesbian Masha Gessen acknowledged that calls for gay marriage involve having to lie to the public. That is why this video was so useful.
/ Greets, Robin. Seen the following? I spotted it not long ago on the amazing net. /
USA – from Puritans to Impure-itans
Is there a connection between beautiful New England and entire American cities turned into smoking rubble? There is.
Take same-sex marriage. I would have guessed that a “sin” city (San Francisco? Las Vegas?) would have been the first to legalize it.
Oddly it’s been the place where America started that’s wanted to be the first place to help bring about the end of America and its values! It’s been a Nor’easter of Perversion (helping to fulfill the end time “days of Lot” predicted in Luke 17) that began in (you guessed it) Boston in 2004.
New England has gone from the Mayflower Compact to the Gay Power Impact, from Providence to decadence, from Bible thumpers to God dumpers, from university to diversity to perversity, and from the land of the Great Awakening to God’s Future Shakening that will make the Boston bombings look like Walden Pond ripples by comparison!
The same Nor’easter has been spreading south and as far west as Washington State where, after swelling up with pride, Mt. Rainier may wish to celebrate shame-sex marriage by having a blast that Seaddlepated folks can share in lava-land!
The same Luke 17 prediction is tied to the Book of Revelation which speaks of the cities that God will flatten because of same-sexism – including American cities – a scenario I’ll have to accept since I can’t create my own universe and decree rules for it.
I’ve just been analyzing the world’s terminal “religion” that has its “god,” its accessories, its “rites,” and even a flag. It’s an obsession that the infected converts are willing to live for, fight for – and even die for!
Want more facts? Google “God to Same-Sexers: Hurry Up” and “Government-Approved Illegals.”
[…] feminists, such as Masha Gessen, have been candid enough to acknowledge this. (See the video ‘Gay Marriage Activist Reveals Movement’s True Agenda: Destroy Marriage.’) Ryan Anderson reminds us […]
[…] (Some gay activists have been upfront that their true aim is to destroy the institution of marriage. See ‘Gay Marriage Activist Reveals Movement’s True Agenda: Destroy Marriage‘) […]