Should There Be a Constitutional Ban on Same Sex Marriage?

In February of 2011 Rep. Steve King (R-IA), who is a strong supporter of traditional marriage, took a bold stance against same sex unions being defined and legalized as marriage:

“I am … a strong supporter of traditional marriage. This union between a man and a woman is the building block of the family and the cornerstone of our society. Thirty-one states have either passed constitutional amendments to define marriage as between one man and one woman or have passed initiatives that uphold this traditional definition”

Congressman King advocates for a constitutional amendment “to defend marriage as the union between one man and one woman.”

I agreed then with Congressman Steve King, both morally and economically. I still agree with the Congressman.

More importantly, I agree with the Word of God, where marriage is clearly defined:

  • Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall join to his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”-Genesis 2:24
  • 1 Cor. 7:2-3 says, “Since there is so much immorality each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife and likewise.”
The Bible also presents several condemnations of the practice of homosexuality: 
  • Leviticus 18:22 – You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination
  • Leviticus 20:13 – If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.
  • Romans 1:26-27 – For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
  • Jude 1:6-7 (NASB) – And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day, just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.
The angry backlash experienced by Congressman Steve King and those who are resolute in their commitment to the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman is not actually a personal attack on those who take such a stance. It is a reject of the God who created both man and woman.
It is, for all intents and purposes, moral surrender.
There are, however, more than moral questions to the issue of same sex marriage or “domestic partnerships”. There are also economic questions to be considered. Specifically, the certainty of an increase in taxes.

 

A 2012 study from the General Budget Office concluded that extending federal benefits to same-sex couples will cost taxpayers $898 million over the next nine years;

This is in reference to the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act — H.R. 2517.

Per the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department, the gross federal debt of the United States has reached $15,888,741,858,820.66.

Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has admitted that a lot of the costs for administering Obamacare aren’t counted in the original cost estimate.

Per the CATO Institute:

“There’s at least $5 billion to $10 billion in Health and Human Services (HHS) spending, and another $5 billion to $10 billion for the IRS. Just this year, HHS asked for an additional $850 million to pay for setting up a federal backup exchange in 2013. None of these costs are counted in the original cost estimate. Further, there’s the $300 billion in physician fees.”

Add the potential $898 million costs of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act to the above-stated costs of ObamaCare that were not included in the original estimates and what you have is another “great depression”.

Not every American is a Bible believing Christian. This is why the Biblical views of marriage between a man and woman is increasingly challenged as unconstitutional and bigoted.

However, regardless of one’s religious preference or ideology, there is a tie that binds: economics.

No one who cares about American wants to see this nation suffer an total economic collapse.

Congressman Steve King asserted that he supports  a constitutional amendment to defend marriage as the union between one man and one woman.

In light of the substantive, material evidence provided by the General Budget Office and the Congressional Budget Office, the verdict is in:

A constitutional amendment banning gay marriage is necessary for both the social and economic stability of our Republic.

About sswimp

I am not an "African-American'. I am a proud American, who happens to be of African descent. I am Christian. My personal relationship with Jesus Christ and the Word of God shapes my concepts of what it means to be a conservative. I am Pro Life. Devoted to the principles of free enterprise, limited government,and individual responsibility. I believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman.
This entry was posted in Capitalism, Education, Health Care, Social Issues, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Should There Be a Constitutional Ban on Same Sex Marriage?

  1. Yes, there should be.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s