Love of Money Threatens Traditional Marriage

Our country made history in 2008 when we elected our first black president. The 2012 election is already historic as well, but for a much less promising reason. This year marks the first time in history that a major political party has put the redefinition of marriage into its national platform.

The obvious question for many of my friends was, “Why are they in such a hurry?” If their victory is so inevitable—as they always tell the mainstream media—if the next generation is as likely to fall into their grasp as they think, why don’t they just trust the process? The answer is simple: It’s not as easy as they project.

The radical gay-marriage activist sect within the Democratic Party knows that their time is short. They also know that a win by President Obama is not guaranteed. Think about it this way: If President Obama loses the race this year its internal “civil union” may turn into a political divorce within 18 to 24 months.

A large number of Democrats, perhaps the majority, have not “evolved” on same-sex marriage or other major wedge issues of our day. These so-called wedge issues are actually the most important moral and spiritual issues of our day. Devout Christians believe that God will either bless or curse America based on her faithful execution of His will on these issues.

In light of this kind of sentiment the following excerpt for the current Democratic Platform reads:

“We support the right of all families to have equal respect, responsibilities and protections under the law. We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples. We also support the freedom of churches and religious entities to decide how to administer marriage as a religious sacrament without government interference.

“We oppose discriminatory federal and state constitutional amendments and other attempts to deny equal protection of the laws to committed same-sex couples who seek the same respect and responsibilities as other married couples. We support the full repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act.”

I appreciate the nod to religious freedom, but we already know that churches have been threatened with government action for refusing to perform ceremonies for homosexual couples.

Most recently a church meeting in Miami-Dade County public schools was warned of its possible expulsion from the facilities for their teaching against homosexuality. But even if our religious liberty were not being seriously threatened, we should pause to consider what caused the Democratic National Committee to make this unprecedented move.

My purpose is not to pick on one party. My purpose is to point out how serious our situation has become for any major political party that would dare place these words in its platform. This is a drastic shift for the Democrats.

For those who don’t remember, the Defense of Marriage Act the platform pledges to repeal was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1996. It allowed states to refuse to recognize homosexual “marriages” performed in other states.

This means that as recently as 16 years ago, there was a consensus between both parties that, at minimum, homosexual “marriage” should not be forced on citizens who did not agree to it. In fact, support was building across the country for a Federal Marriage Amendment to the United States Constitution, which would have protected marriage from redefinition once and for all.

How quickly things have changed! While public opinion has shifted some, the opinion of certain elected officials has shifted much faster and much farther toward the agenda of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) activists. Why could this be?

Here is how the Human Rights Campaign, a lobbying organization that raises hundreds of millions of dollars to promote the LGBT agenda, explains what has happened on the federal level: “Twice—in 2004 and 2006—HRC led the successful fight against the Federal Marriage Amendment [which would have protected traditional marriage]. … The massive field and lobbying effort in 2004, coupled with a $1 million TV, print and online advertising campaign, effectively communicated the message.”

Christians are often criticized for being too concerned about politics, but in reality, we are outspent in these fights three to one or even 100 to one. When the mayors of Boston, San Francisco, Chicago and Washington, D.C., boasted that they would deny Chick-fil-A the right to do business based on its owner’s personal belief in traditional marriage, they did so with no fear of backlash or negative consequences. What does this tell us? It tells us that, at least in those cities, the LGBT lobby is so powerful that they can easily protect a politician who fights for what they want.

When our president announced his “evolution” on the issue of redefining marriage to include homosexual couples, many people were confused. What did he hope to gain? Multiple news outlets, including The Washington Post and The New York Times, noted that he raised tens of millions of dollars from LGBT donors within hours of his announcement. If you want to know why marriage is threatened in our country, just follow the money.

Bishop Harry R. Jackson Jr. is the senior pastor of Hope Christian Church, a 3,000-member congregation in the Washington, D.C., area. He is also founder and president of High Impact Leadership Coalition, which exists to protect the moral compass of America and be an agent of healing to our nation by educating and empowering churches, community and political leaders.