Latest Headlines
- Cantonment Man Charged With Sexual Battery, Molestation Of 5-Year-Old
- Two Newly Elected Escambia School Members Installed
- Matt Gaetz Withdraws From Attorney General Consideration
- Molino Dollar General Assistant Manager And Her Boyfriend Charged With Theft
- Century Town Hall Closed For Portions Of Next Two Business Days
- Troopers Say Semi Driver Fell Asleep Causing Crash That Block I-10 For Hours
- Free Dental, Vision and Medical Care Available At Weekend Clinic
- Farm Share Food Distributions Friday In Walnut Hill, Saturday In Cantonment
- ECUA Elects Board Officers, Appoints Advisory Committee
- One Injured In Highway 29 Crash
Pastors Urge “Yes” Vote On 2 To Define Marriage As Being A Man And Woman
November 3, 2008
Area pastors are urging voters to cast a “yes” vote on Amendment 2 at the polls on Tuesday, and NorthEscambia.com urges you to do the same.
Admendment 2 on the ballot Tuesday in Florida simply defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
“The amendment protects traditional marriage,” Pastor Bryan Calhoun of Highland Baptist Church said. “That is how God created marriage. Where to do we have the right to redefine it?’
Dr. Ted Traylor from Olive Baptist Church in Pensacola, one of the largest churches in the area, wholeheartedly supports a “yes” vote on Amendment 2.
“I’m voting yes on Amendment 2, and I encourage everyone else to do the same,” Dr. Traylor told NorthEscambia.com.
“I think that the fabric of our nation rests on a traditional family with a traditional marriage,” Pastor Jeff McKee of Victory Assembly of God in Molino said. “We need that strength for our children.”
Every major daily newspaper in Florida has spoken out against Amendment 2. That includes the Pensacola News Journal, with editorials and endorsements against defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman.
Opponents say the amendment will cause problems for senior citizens that often consider themselves domestic partners even in a male-female relationship, but they never marry in order to keep their social security and other benefits.
“The courts have ruled that this has nothing to do with domestic partnerships,” Dr. Traylor said. “This amendment is needed to protect the sanctity of marriage in our state.”
Dr. Traylor said the amendment will prevent activist judges from legalizing same-sex marriages as has happened in Massachusetts and California. A “yes” vote is especially important, he said, with Gov. Charlie Crist set to possible appoint several new judges to the Florida Supreme Court.
Pastors McKee and Calhoun agree, pointing out that in those states that gay marriage has even become part of the school curriculum.
In Boston, second graders were taught from the book King and King. In that book, the king does not choose a princess as his spouse. Rather, he chooses a prince for a male-male marriage. The teaching of gay marriage in public schools was mandated by the Mass. Supreme Court.
The father of a seven-year-old was arrested for objecting to the book at his child’s elementary school. He was convicted despite $250,000 being spent by several groups for his defense.
In California, first-graders went on a field trip to San Francisco City Hall to see their female teacher marry her female partner.
“Do we want that in our schools in Florida?” McKee asked. “Do we want gay marriage being taught to our children?”
Marriage between a man and a woman. It is concept that, simply put, is Biblical.
In Matthew 19:4-6, Jesus himself repeats Genesis 2:24: ““Have you not read, that he who created them from the beginning, made them male and female. And said for this reason a man shall leave his Father and Mother and shall cleave to his wife and they shall become one flesh? Consequently they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together let no man separate.”
But to us here at NorthEscambia.com, it is simple choice, a simple decision. Vote Yes on Amendment 2 to preserve marriage in Florida as the union of one man and one woman.
Comments
19 Responses to “Pastors Urge “Yes” Vote On 2 To Define Marriage As Being A Man And Woman”
Comments on this article are closed since the polls have closed.
To all the posters with two Y chromasomes on here, sorry, you could’nt pursuade me to vote against it. To everyone else ….vote YES.
Voting yes to this amendment, although it seems just to define a word, is a slippery slope you do not want to proceed down. It lies counter to the basic principals of our country in both true religious freedom and to the Constitution’s ideal of all people being treated equally in the eyes of the government. I’ve heard many say this is a Christian nation and its laws are based on the Bible, but that isn’t true. Many of our forefathers were Christian, but so were some Diest (Diest didn’t believe in the divinity of Jesus or the trinity), but together they saw the peril in establishing a religion in the Constitution. If we continue down the road of establishing particular religious beliefs on top of our basic Constitutional rights at some point, very quickly, we’ll have to decide which sect. Think about it: Would you want the government to establish a religion sect or denomination different from your own that establishes ritual or beliefs different than your own in matters of religion? This is what the Inquisition in Europe was all about. The Catholic Church trying to suppress expressions of belief different than that which they ordained. It lead to a very cruel and injust period of history.
The Bible, when used for persecution and injustice, has lead to extremely cruel and immoral acts of humanity, and we need to recognize these biases, even today and we try to deny basic human rights to our fellow citizens. Biological differences have in our own short history has drove us to our most immoral levels. Slavery and its many horrors, denying women equal status in society even as citizens, segregation and now differences based on gender and sexuality. It is a biological difference that is only recently been studied and in doing so has discovered a whole realm of variation in nature.
In summary, when discussing public policy, as harsh as it may sound, religious belief based on any particular sect or denomination is not to be used if it violates the beliefs of any other and if it violates the principal that all people are equal.
The opponents of Amendment 2 are making false claims that it will take away hospital visitation for unmarried couples. That is absurd. Florida law (F.S. 765.202) already gives every person the option of designating a health care surrogate. A unmarried couple can simply designate each other as health care surrogates. Amendment 2 will have no impact on domestic partnerships. The amendment does one thing – define marriage as between one man and one woman. That’s something that the vast majority of Floridians agree with. Vote yes on Amendment 2 !
Whatever happen to tolerance ?
You don’t mind having guns, which are used to kill but even forbid a person love someone. You can not tell your heart who to love and if it happens to be someone of the same sex, well who is to say its wrong.
The bible? What is the bible but a book written by men (Mark, Job, Paul) and edited by other men (The council of Nice) so that it may have power over other men. You wish to live your life dictated to, so be it, but you don’t have the right to tell others how they should live. The way they are living, is it hurting you? No, I think not.
So what’s next? Would you supporters of amendment 2 like to roll back women’s rights also? Clearly the Bible shows women as being lesser than their male counterparts. Why should we give the inferior gender the same rights? While we’re at it we can roll back other civil rights. Let’s get rid of minority rights. Let’s do away with anything and everything that disagrees with the teachings of the Bible.
Why be a country of equality and individual rights when we can just segregate those that are different than us?
It is 2008. Live and let live. Really, how is SOMEONE ELSES sexual orientation DIRECTLY affect you? We are not here to judge. Why worry about what someone else does. Mind your own business.
Vote NO!!! You should have the right to marry whoever you want to!!!!!
VOTE NO
“Genesis 2:24: ““Have you not read, that he who created them from the beginning, made them male and female. And said for this reason a man shall leave his Father and Mother and shall cleave to his wife and they shall become one flesh? Consequently they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together let no man separate.”
This is what God intended on a marriage being, man AND wife (woman). We shouldn’t redefine it to best suit our needs or wants, God already defined it and that is good enough for me but we have to bring it in to law because of the way the world is going now. If a man wants to marry a man, or a woman to another woman, then they will have to answer for that on the day of judgement. It isn’t for us to judge. Now, I am not saying that I am voting “no”…because I am going to vote “yes” because I don’t want my children growing up in a state where it is ok for man and man or woman and woman to be together by marriage. How do you explain that to children? There has to come a point where we put God back in this country. Our Christian rights are being violated and revoked so that we don’t offend anyone that doesn’t believe, but what about how we as Christians feel, what about our rights?? We just sat back and watched as they took God out of schools because it offended someone, so now our children have to go to school and not say the pledge or pray because it might offend the kid next to them. Don’t you think the Christian children are offended because they can’t say the pledge or pray? Does anyone think of them? I think it’s time that Christians take a stand and fight back.
The issue is whether or not certain segment of the population should receive benefits and protections that are not afforded to another segment, and as unpopular as I’ll be for this position, it is wrong for government to establish restrictions on marriage based on the Bible or any other religious document. The Constitution has an ideal which we as a country have never lived up to and that is all people should be treated equally in the eyes of the government. It is no accident the Constitution does not establish any religion within its framework (It specifically restricts a religious test for public office). Some states, prior the nation’s, actually established their dominant religion within their State Constitutions and the forefather’s understood the persecution that such a thing could cause. For true religious freedom, none could be established in the Constitution. This was an abuse of power very evident both in England and in Europe.
As for the marriage issue, the very unpopular fact is someone who is homosexual is a natural fact of nature, and in recent studies of gender, sex and sexual orientation, it has been shown there are examples of many variations within nature (Suggested reading: Evolution’s Rainbow by Joan Roughgarden). Even the sun fish in our ponds have males who have female markings and swim in a manner during spawning that mimic females. So the issue is not defining marriage based on Biblical text, but establishing what is equal and fair within our government. I realize this current legislation is just an attempt to make a narrow definition, but it is the first step in the wrong direction. Just like skin tone shouldn’t be used to establish restrictions or special protections, neither should any other biological characteristic.
Unfortunately, throughout Western History, the Bible has been misused for all kinds of injustices, from the Inquisition which tortured men, women and children for nothing more than thought crimes or the wrong associations the Catholic Church considered heresey, to slavery, racial discrimination and now to this.
The pastor in this article states where do we have the right to redefine marriage. I agree with him on that. My question is where do we have the right to define marriage. The defination of marriage is in the bible. It should not be a law. It also states in the bible that you are not supposed to judge you fellow man. Vote no on 2.
I will be voting “YES”….what is this world coming to when we allow the same sex to marry? The bond of marriage is between a MAN AND WOMAN only….read your Bible. I truly support it and wish other states would follow…especially California. May God have mercy on this country.
I say vote yes! I truly don’t believe God intended marriage between same sex.
Amendment 2 is a terribly written law. Gay marriage is already prohibited FOUR TIMES in Florida statutes. If passed, Amendment 2 would take away rights and benefits from commonlaw couples as well as seniors who live together for financial reasons.
VOTE YES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The opponents of Amendment 2 are running a very deceptive campaign to distract attention away from the real issue at hand. Amendment 2 does not take rights away from anyone but rather preserves the definition of marriage as one man and one woman. Democrats, Republicans and Independents support Amendment 2. I believe that the vast majority of Floridians support traditional marriage and given the facts will back Amendment 2.
Amen! Thanks for taking a stand on this. Now everybody gets out and votes YES on two tomorow.
Who are we to redefine it?
The Bible defines marriage. The Florida Constitution as written today allows ministers to decide for themselves whom they shall and shall not marry. Has some clever devil really convinced us that the Bible is inadequate to this task? Are we convinced that in order to “protect” marriage we must give up our control over it unto the government?
Perhaps tomorrow, we shall ask them to raise our kids. We can trust them after all, since we would trust politicians and bureaucrats with our most cherished institutions.
Malarkey! If you home-school, if you earnestly follow the Bible, you know why God never showed up with an axe at the tree of knowledge. Raise your kids to be believers in any world, and raise them to not mistake the bindings of law for their own virtue.
Marriage is defined in a far more important place. Do not redefine it in the Constitution, because to do so hands it over to the vanities of men.