In this post, I wanted to first review Jesus’ position on marriage, and then we’ll look at a couple major churches that have decided to bless same-sex relationships. And not minor churches, either. The Church of England and the Roman Catholic church. Let’s take a look at what Jesus says, and then what these two major churches say.

We find Jesus’ teaching on marriage in Matthew 19.

Matthew 19:1-6:

1 Now when Jesus had finished these sayings, he went away from Galilee and entered the region of Judea beyond the Jordan.

2 And large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?”

4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,

5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?

6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

To be a Christian, minimally, is to be a follower of Jesus Christ. That means that we accept what Jesus teaches, on whatever he teaches about. We don’t overturn the teachings of Jesus in order to make people who are rebelling against God feel better about their rebellion. It is central to the Christian worldview that Christians care more about what God thinks of them than what non-Christians think of them. In fact, Christians are supposed to be willing to endure suffering rather than side with non-Christians against God’s authority.

So, with that said, let’s take a look at what the Church of England is doing about marriage.

Look at this article from the UK Telegraph:

For the first time in history, same-sex partners can receive a blessing to celebrate their unions…

[…]With the rainbow LGBTQIA+ flag waving outside, Jane Pearse and Catherine Bond became one of the first couples in England to receive a prayer that would publicly affirm and celebrate their union. A move made legal at the turn of midnight Saturday – instead of the usual clink of teacups, the pop of champagne corks punctured the post-service chatter, with congregants and the women, both vicars, well aware of the magnitude of the morning’s celebration.

I thought this part was interesting:

Bond and Pearse got together six years ago, when working in the same benefice (an ecclesiastical office), and now live in Felixstowe and are both associate priests… Both have adult children from their prior marriages, to men.

So both of these women were married to men, and left those marriages. That’s how they got their children. And they inflicted divorce on those children.

The Church of England was not the only organization trying to gain the respect of the secular left by compromising on the plain meaning of Jesus’ words about marriage. They are event investigating a vicar who called the the institution’s first transgender archdeacon a “bloke”.

The UK Telegraph reported on that, too:

The Church of England (CofE) is investigating a vicar after he called the institution’s first transgender archdeacon a “bloke”.

The Rev Brett Murphy faces an official rebuke from the CofE over “intentionally derogatory and disrespectful” remarks he made about the Rev Canon Dr Rachel Mann shortly after her appointment in June.

LGBT+ campaigners had hailed her appointment as a “beacon of light and hope”.

For Protestant Christians, it’s easy to switch from Bible-denying denominations to Bible-believing denominations. But it’s not so easy for Roman Catholics to do the same.

Here’s another story reported by Crux, a Catholic news source:

In the hours that followed release of a Vatican note outlining the pastoral grounds for same-sex blessings, reactions among American Catholics seemed to run the gamut from styling it as a major step forward to insisting on hitting the brakes, on the grounds that not much has really changed.

[…]The declaration outlines situations in which blessings are appropriate for same-sex couples or those in irregular unions. It states that these blessings should never be given “in concurrence with the ceremonies of a civil union, and not even in connection with them.”

The declaration continues that the blessing cannot be performed with any clothing, gestures, or words that are proper to a wedding. Conversely, the declaration states that the blessings can be provided in informal situations such as a visit to a shrine, a meeting with a priest, a prayer group, or during a pilgrimage.

Still, despite its narrow scope, LGBTQ Catholics view the declaration as a significant step forward.

Francis DeBernardo, executive director of the Catholic advocacy organization New Ways Ministry, said in a statement that “it cannot be overstated how significant the Vatican’s new declaration is,” for the fact that it “expands the ways that LGTBQ+ Catholics can know God’s love.”

Father James Martin, a leading minister to and advocate for LGTBQ Catholics, in a series of statements called the declaration “a major step forward in the church’s ministry to LGBTQ people and recognizes the deep desire in many Catholic same-sex couples for God’s presence in their loving relationships.”

“Along with many priests, I will now be delighted to bless my friends’ same-sex unions,” Martin said.

So, that’s where we are now. Major denominations have abandoned Jesus’ teaching on marriage. And why? Who are these church leaders trying to impress with their faithlessness? Wouldn’t it be much better if they dug into some studies and make a defenseof the teachings of Jesus using evidence? It’s not that hard. I’ve been doing it for nearly 15 years on this blog. But you just have to accept that it may not win you respect from the secular leftists who run the corporate news. I accept that. Why can’t they?

If you asked me why I opposed Trump in during the 2016 Republican primary, I would have pointed at his extensive record of siding with Democrats on nearly every issue. He surprised me during his first term, by being American’s most conservative president. But something seems to have gone wrong. He is no longer the conservative that he was during his first term.

Here’s the latest story from Daily Wire:

Late on Monday, former President Donald Trump called for someone to take up a primary challenge against Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who has endorsed Trump’s primary rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, for president.

“Has any smart and energetic Republican in the Great State of Texas decided to run in the Primary against RINO Congressman Chip Roy,” Trump said, using the acronym for “Republican in name only,” in a post to his Truth Social platform. “For the right person, he is very beatable. If interested, let me know!!!”

Is Chip Roy a “RINO”? Let’s take a look at the data.

Voters first elected Roy to the House in 2018 after he established himself in politics working for other prominent Texas Republicans, including former Governor Rick Perry and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Now in his third term, Roy represents the 21st Congressional District in Texas, which includes South Austin, North San Antonio, and the Texas Hill Country.

As a congressman, Roy has pressed for reining in government spending, grilled and blasted Democrats over the border and immigration crisis, advocated for the development and better access to lifesaving medicines, and challenged leadership over COVID-19 vaccine and mask mandates during the pandemic.

Roy became a member of the House Freedom Caucus and boasts a “Liberty Score” of 100% as well as a 98% on the Heritage Action’s Scorecard, which looks at how conservative members are in their voting records and co-sponsorships. A few weeks ago, Roy shot back at keyboard warriors who call GOP legislators like him a “RINO,” saying, “You can kiss my a**,” adding, “I’ve spent a lifetime fighting for limited government conservatism.”

Whenever I want to know whether a legislator is conservative, I always go straight for the Heritage Foundation scorecard. Chip Roy’s score is 98%, and his lifetime rating is 97%. That makes him tied for FIRST PLACE for most conservative member of the House of Representatives. Why would Trump oppose such a conservative legislator? Maybe it’s because Trump isn’t a conservative at all, and doesn’t care about conservatives winning the House and the Senate. He just cares about himself. He’s a narcissist.

How do so many left-wing fake Republicans get into the House and Senate? Could it because of people like Trump demanding that they get primary challengers, so that the most conservative candidates don’t get elected? Can we really trust someone who only cares about himself to be the leader of the conservative movement? This would be like picking a quarterback who refuses to throw the ball to the star receiver, because the star receiver doesn’t like the quarterback’s hairstyle. It’s that level of childish and stupid. And we can’t afford to pick a stupid child to run as the Republican nominee. Especially if that stupid child is in prison in Spring of 2024.

One of the of reasons why Republican voters might want to choose DeSantis over Trump in 2024 is that Trump is almost certain to be convicted and imprisoned in early 2024. Even if he were to run and win, he would be a lame duck president. We would only get one term out of him. But most of all, some of his comments lately clearly show that he’s returning to his Democrat roots. Especially his opposition to pro-life legislation at the state level. We can do better than Trump in 2024. A lot better.

I’ve been thinking lately about how to measure how committed and capable a person is on issues of interest to conservatives. For example, on abortion, most conservatives will say, “I vote pro-life”. But I think a higher level of conviction and commitment is shown when a person can show WHY they are pro-life. And I’m not looking for feelings, here. I’m looking for handling scientific evidence.

So, when it comes to the abortion issue, the first step is to answer the question “what is the unborn?” And again, I’m not looking for an opinion here. I’m not looking for feelings. I’m not looking for what your parents, or your pastor, or your church choir says. I’m interested in whether a person can cite some scientific evidence.

Fortunately, we have first class scientists who have collected the relevant information for us, like Dr. Maureen Condic, She’s an Associate Professor of Neurobiology and Adjunct Associate Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Utah School of Medicine, and recently served on the National Science Board. She earned her Ph.D. from University of California, Berkeley, and has published papers in peer-reviewed journals.

One of her publications (PDF) explains what science tells us about the unborn. The title is “When Does Human Life Begin? The Scientific Evidence and Terminology Revisited”. A good paper to have available, especially if your opponent has nothing but purple hair, tattoos and nose piercings. But if you want something easy, you can just use quotations from a variety of embryology textbooks (PDF).

Like this one:

“Human development begins at fertilization, when a sperm fuses with an oocyte to form a single cell, the zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell (capable of giving rise to any cell type) marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

Source: Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 10th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2016. p. 11

Don’t just use one quotation, use lots.

Also useful to know is what the unborn baby can do during the process of developing.

Here’s an article from the famous Cleveland Clinic that explains:

At the moment of fertilization, your baby’s genetic make-up is complete, including its sex. The gender of your baby depends on what sperm fertilizes the egg at the moment of conception.

And a bit further along:

Month 1 (weeks 1 through 4)

In these first few weeks, a primitive face will take form with large dark circles for eyes. The mouth, lower jaw and throat are developing. Blood cells are taking shape, and circulation will begin. The tiny “heart” tube will beat 65 times a minute by the end of the fourth week.

And a bit further along:

Month 2 (weeks 5 through 8)

Facial features continue to develop. Each ear begins as a little fold of skin at the side of the head. Tiny buds that eventually grow into arms and legs are forming. Fingers, toes and eyes are also forming.

The neural tube (brain, spinal cord and other neural tissue of the central nervous system) is well formed now. The digestive tract and sensory organs begin to develop too. Bone starts to replace cartilage.

The head is large in proportion to the rest of the body at this point. At about 6 weeks, a heartbeat can usually be detected.

Most abortions happen in the first trimester, and that’s why pro-lifers say “abortion stops a beating heart”. It’s definitely human, and it’s definitely killed in an abortion.

So, what’s the point of this post? I’m saying that if you are a conservative, then you have to be familiar with enough evidence to be persuasive to others who do not share your views. Not just on the issue you like, but on EVERY issue – social issues, foreign policy issues, fiscal issues.

It’s not enough for you to be happy that you have the right opinion about one issue. It’s not enough that the people around you like you because they agree with your “right answer”. You have to be able to make a case that crushes your opponent with evidence. Being a conservative isn’t about you or your feelings. It’s about the world out there – can you make a difference by being convincing to other people?

Of course if doesn’t feel good to have to learn how to talk about issues using scientific evidence. It’s work. And of course it doesn’t feel good to disagree with people about controversial issues. But you have to get used to not being ignorant and not being liked. I know a lot of feelings-based Christians who know a lot about sports, fiction, music, essential oils, and other nonsense. They want me to be satisfied that they have the right answer to questions like “Does God exist?”, “does military preparedness deter aggression?” and “does the free market system make people more prosperous than socialism?” But if I am out on a date with you, and I ask you these questions, I’m looking for more than the right answer. I want you to show your work. I want to see you demonstrate your ability to persuade people on the other side, either in your writings or in your discussions.

Don’t cry to me about how you can’t find a husband when you can’t do anything that a husband needs you to do. There is no path to impressing a conservative man that allows you to be lazy, ignorant and cowardly. I expect performance. If you are smart enough to get a college education and a job in the competitive private sector providing value to paying customers, (not a public school teacher or anything disconnected from reality, like that), then you are smart enough to be able to explain your views on moral issues and public policy.