|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Location:
6425 Jefferson Rd. For
directions, click here.
On
February 24, 2004, President Bush
endorsed that same amendment. Here
is the text of the president's
remarks. Those
congressional votes, and the passage of
similar defense-of- marriage laws in 38
states, express an overwhelming
consensus in our country for protecting
the institution of marriage.
In
recent months, however, some activist
judges and local officials have made an
aggressive attempt to redefine
marriage.... And unless action is
taken, we can expect more arbitrary
court decisions, more litigation, more
defiance of the law by local officials,
all of which adds to uncertainty….
Activist
courts have left the people with one
recourse: If we're to prevent the
meaning of marriage from being changed
forever, our nation must enact a
constitutional amendment to protect
marriage in America. Decisive
and democratic action is needed because
attempts to redefine marriage in a
single state or city could have serious
consequences throughout the country.
The
Constitution says that "full faith and
credit shall be given in each state to
the public acts and records and
judicial proceedings of every other
state."... Congress
attempted to address this problem in
the Defense of Marriage Act by
declaring that no state must accept
another state's definition of marriage.
My administration will vigorously
defend this act of Congress.
Yet
there is no assurance that the Defense
of Marriage Act will not itself be
struck down by activist courts. In that
event, every state would be forced to
recognize any relationship that judges
in Boston or officials in San Francisco
choose to call a
marriage.... For
all these reasons, the defense of
marriage requires a constitutional
amendment.... The
union of a man and woman is the most
enduring human institution, honored and
encouraged in all cultures and by every
religious faith. Ages of experience
have taught humanity that the
commitment of a husband and wife to
love and to serve one another promotes
the welfare of children and the
stability of society. Government,
by recognizing and protecting marriage,
serves the interests of all. Today,
I call upon the Congress to promptly
pass and to send to the states for
ratification an amendment to our
Constitution defining and protecting
marriage as a union of a man and woman
as husband and wife…. America's
a free society which limits the role of
government in the lives of our
citizens. This commitment of freedom,
however, does not require the
redefinition of one of our most basic
social institutions.... Our
government should respect every person
and protect the institution of
marriage. There is no contradiction
between these responsibilities.
We
should also conduct this difficult
debate in a matter worthy of our
country, without bitterness or
anger. In
all that lies ahead, let us match
strong convictions with kindness and
good will and decency.
Gateway
Church gathers
for worship
Sundays
at 10:30 a.m.
(Hwy. 129) in Athens,
Georgia.
Ministry
of the
Word:
Recent
sermons
Our quarterly e-magazine
Gateway
Today
For the Gateway family
Pastor
Jerry's Weekly
E-Mail
CULTURE
WATCH
From
Gateway
Today
The
e-magazine of
Gateway Church
SPRING
2004
Protecting
the institution of
marriage
On
October 12, 2003, Gateway's pastor,
Jerry Varnado, preached a sermon
titled, "Protecting
Marriage,"
during which he spoke in favor of an
amendment to the U.S. Constitution
that would define marriage as "the
union of one man and one
woman."
Eight years ago, Congress passed
and President Clinton signed the
Defense of Marriage Act, which defined
marriage for purposes of federal law as
the legal union between one man and one
woman as husband and wife.
The act passed the House of
Representatives by a vote of 342-67 and
the Senate by a vote of 85-14.
Serious
consequences
Marriage
must be defended
Marriage cannot be severed from its
cultural, religious and natural roots
without weakening the good influence of
society.
