Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Why Indiana Must Constitutionally Protect Marriage

Vibrant and thriving families are what create a strong country. America’s national greatness is a reflection of her history of committed family life. When a mom and a dad raise their children, teaching and instilling in them the value and indispensable necessity of those transcendent “self-evident truths” spoken of in the Declaration of Independence, they are preserving all that America stands for and creating the next generation of American patriots. Created and ordained by God Himself, marriage matters. It must be defended no matter what the cost because the future of our state and our country depend upon it.

Today, here in Indiana and across America, the very definition of what makes a family is being challenged. In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court issued a decision to strike down California’s citizen-passed law to keep marriage between one man and one woman. In doing so, they not only defied state law, but also the will of the people of California. In April of 2009, the Supreme Court of Iowa followed in the California Supreme Court’s footsteps. The Iowa Supreme Court ruled 7-0 to overturn the state’s Defense of Marriage Act. These incidents serve as an ominous caveat of what could very feasibly happen all across America, including here in Indiana.

In an environment of ever-increasing judicial activism, a law alone is no longer sufficient to protect against judicial intrusion. This is why the citizens of over thirty states have now protected marriage in their constitutions. If given the honor of representing the people of the 21st House District of Indiana, Timothy Wesco will lead in the effort to make Indiana the next state to constitutionally protect marriage. Timothy believes that unless we act now, Indiana will continue to be left vulnerable to the whims of judges seeking to conduct social experiments with devastating consequences.

If we intend to ensure the continuing viability of the policies that are embedded in our state’s statutory laws protecting marriage, we must amend our constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Since 2004, the Indiana Senate has passed a marriage amendment multiple times, but repeatedly, the measure has failed to make it through the House of Representatives. We cannot afford to give in now. History tells us that persistence prevails. We must re-introduce this amendment again, and again, and again, until we prevail, because marriage matters.

Because the future of Indiana depends on her vibrant family life, the future of Indiana is hinging right now on how our leaders respond to attempts which are seeking to turn marriage into something it was never meant to be, nor can ever successfully be. Timothy Wesco is committed to leading this cause forward in Indianapolis.


  1. Don't heterosexual people commit nearly 100% of all the divorces in America? And 100% of extra-marital affairs? What can gay people do to destroy marriage that heterosexuals haven't already done?

    The reason we DON'T need a constitutional resolution defining marriage between an man and woman is because we should encourage ALL people to build and sustain lasting, healthy family relationships, regardless of their sexual orientation. ORIENTATION, not PREFERENCE. It's not a choice. Seriously, would you CHOOSE to be gay? I certainly wouldn't. Growing up a Hoosier, I've had the displeasure of seeing gays treated like crap, beaten up, ridiculed. They deserve equal rights, not special rights.

    Every year scientists make more discoveries proving that homosexuals are born that way. Legislation which tramples on peoples' rights goes against science and the American ideals of providing justice to everyone, regardless of how they were born. And your notion of "saving marriage through legislation" is a failed concept; marriage should be between 2 people, and shouldn't figure into rules imposed by the state.

  2. Good Morning, jsepeta,

    Your first question makes implication that homosexual marriage is the answer to the epidemic of divorce in our society. You have no basis for making such an assumption, and you cannot prove such a statement. In fact, there have already been divorces among the homosexuals that were recently "married" in CA.

    Your second question implies that homosexuals are monogamous, when we know that homosexuals typically have far more partners throughout their lives than heterosexuals do. I think we can discard those 2 questions as misleading.

    Your third question requires attention, though. "What can gay people do to destroy marriage that heterosexuals have not already done?" Well, they can take God's created order and skew it so that society can no longer discern between right and wrong, as evidenced by the fact that we even have to have this discussion.

    You are making a false assumption that homosexuals are "born that way".
    God made man in His own image. God calls homosexuality an abomination in many places in the Scriptures. Therefore, it cannot be reconciled that God created anybody to be homosexual.
    God is Truth. His Word is Truth. He is not the author of confusion. Whatever He says is good and right, IS good and right, by definition. He said He made them male and female, and He saw that it was very good.

    It is a myth that scientists have proven that homosexuals are born that way. The one study that gets so much attention was commissioned by a practicing homosexual activist in 1993. He certainly had motivation for getting the data to say what he wanted it to say. Even his colleagues accused him of excluding pertinent data, and he was under investigation for the integrity of his research.

    You specifically mentioned "two" people should have the right to marry. Did you know that in Hawaii, there is a movement to incorporate three or more into a "marriage" relationship? After all, what's one more? If marriage is to be based on feelings and commitments only, with no true moral standard, then why not? Homosexuals want to marry under the guise that is is "arbitrary and unjust" to prohibit them from doing so. This is the reasoning that the "three in a bed" crowd is espousing--it is "arbitrary and unjust" for anyone to say that someone cannot have two spouses...
    It is also "arbitrary and unjust" for someone to tell me I cannot marry my dog, or my brother, or my father, were I so inclined...

    do you now see the damage that is being created?

    We are all sinners. We all have our own temptations. Something that tempts me exceedingly may have no affect on you. But, we do not have to give in to those temptations. We can make our choices based on Truth and morality, or we can choose the relativistic, humanistic path to destruction.
    God created all things. He created sexuality as a beautiful expression of the marriage relationship between one man and one woman. It would go against His Holy character to permit homosexual relationships. This is how we KNOW that homosexuals are not born that way.

    Thank you!
    G. Nero

  3. Jsepeta,

    I agree with Timothy’s position on this issue and I am very pleased to see that he is willing to take a stand. I would like to answer one of your objections to the proposed marriage amendment.

    You’re right that marriage isn’t working well in America. So, given the high divorce rate, should we give homosexuals an opportunity where we have failed? What should we do? Give up? Erase the marriage laws? We have laws against murder, but people still commit murder. Do we erase the murder laws? Of course not! When laws aren’t working, legislators try to fix them. You are absolutely right in contending that the ultimate “save” for marriage will not be through legislation. This battle will be won at home. But legislative bodies should still be doing all they can to strengthen and encourage healthy families.

    High divorce rates are one result of another failed experiment from the liberal left: no-fault divorce. These laws make it much easier for a spouse to walk away from marital problems, rather than persevering and relentlessly striving to solve the problems. No-fault divorce has been a massive failure—children and parents have been hurt far more deeply than ever imagined.

    The proponents of the no-fault divorce movement claimed that the “till death do us part” portion of marriage wasn’t that important. They were wrong, and their mistake has left the devastating consequences you mention. The same-sex marriage proposition claims that the “husband and wife” portion doesn’t matter either. And so the cycle begins again. In light of the results brought about by the no-fault divorce experiment, our families can’t survive another such failed social experiment. We should be endeavoring to strengthen marriage, not re-defining it.

  4. Thank you Tim for taking a stand on a very controversial issue.

    From my perspective, homosexual marriage requires a re-definition of the word "marriage" and its history and meaning. Equal rights would not force others to accept a new idea of what marriage and family is all about.

    I don't believe it is the place of citizens to beat up or ridicule homosexuals, as jsepeta has reportedly witnessed, or vice versa.

    Also, as far as scientific data supporting the theory that homosexuals are "born that way", scientists would also be fair to point out the severe health risks of a homosexual lifestyle. One should also consider that people have shown other various inclinations, such as alcoholism or drug abuse. Just because someone has a particular bent, doesn't make it justifiable, although they certainly are able to choose their own path and face the consequences or benefits.

    From my experience, it seems homosexuals have moved past equal rights and now want special recognition and acceptance. It's time to protect the definition of marriage and family.

  5. Timothy,
    Thanks for taking a strong stand on marriage between one man and one woman. Keep up the good work in Indiana!

  6. We stand with you, Tim! Thank you for upholding and fighting for the basic backbone of our nation. Without marriages that are between one man and one woman, as God planned it to be, the home becomes a confused mess, and then the nation as a whole suffers the consequences. We pray God blesses and prospers you as you fight for what is truth and right in a day when many are not.

  7. Dear jsepeta,

    I have been praying for you. In fact, when I woke up this morning at 5:30, you were the first person I thought of. I believe the LORD is leading me to be sure you understand that there is hope and peace available for you, and it is found in Him!

    Surely, you will agree that we are all sinners. God says we are; therefore we are. "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23)
    God is Holy and Just, and He must punish sin. "For the wages of sin is death..." (Romans 6:23) This death is eternal separation from God in Hell.
    Because God is Holy, He cannot allow sin into His Presence or He would cease to be Holy. But, your sin can be forgiven and you can become justified in His sight! Moreover, He wants to forgive you because He loves you! "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)
    If you will wholeheartedly repent of your sin by agreeing with God that you have offended Him, and if you will put your complete trust in Christ to forgive you, He will! "...the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:23)
    God sent His only Son, Jesus Christ, to die on the Cross as our Substitute. His Sacrifice is sufficient to save every person who will believe, but it will not benefit you personally unless you repent toward God and put your faith in Christ alone.
    Now, you cannot fool God! You must come to Him without holding back. "For the word of a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12)

    It is clear that homosexuals have no peace in their current lifestyle, and are searching for justification for it.
    You do not state whether or not you are living that lifestyle choice, but I do know that you can stop searching for peace, joy, and satisfaction right now! God created each of us with a deep desire for Himself. We don't recognize that for what it is, and we try to fill that void in many ways. But, that void cannot and will not be filled, except by God--because He made us that way. He gave you your conscience to point you toward the Truth. Don't silence it.

    Won't you repent of your sin and trust Christ to save you right now? "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved..." (Acts 16:31)
    "...if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved...For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Romans 10:9 and 13)

    If you have questions, please do not hesitate to ask. I am sure that there are other people following this blog who would consider it a priviledge to help you, also.

    May God bless you with repentence and faith today,
    G. Nero

  8. I am not of the liberal left or conservative right. However, I do get confused on this issue. When one proclaims that we should have less government interference, how do we justify telling who can marry who? In our lifetime, it was illegal in many states for a man and women of different races to marry. The Bible is a beautiful, wonderful, and necessary book for those of us who believe. However, we shouldn't use it as a weapon to discriminate against those of us who are different. Homosexuals are born in God's image in the same way that "normal" people were, or those that were born with a disease, or birth defect. We are a reflection of his love. While I don't agree with homosexuality for myself, nor do I believe in gay marriage, there has to be a compromise that won't violate our beliefs and presume to know God's thoughts on this issue. We as a Christians are supposed to show the love that God has for us by our actions, not our condemnation. We can quote scripture and call it truth, but we can also read what we want into scripture and twist it for our own beliefs, either positive or negative. Marriage, as it has been defined by the citizens of the state, should stay as is, however, the legal ramifications of marriage shouldn't be withheld from those of us who are "different".

  9. Part 1 of 2
    Hello, Anonymous,
    I hope you are having a good day.
    I am making a wild assumption that you are referring to me in much of your comment, so I’ll take some time to answer.
    For most of my life, I was of the liberal left, but for the past 19 years I find myself very conservative. This change came about not by my will—but because I became convinced that God’s Word is true! Again, this convincing came about not by man, but by God Himself. He showed me in a moment of time that I had offended Him by my sin: not only because of the specific sins that I had committed, but because I was a sinner. When I agreed with Him about my hopeless condition and trusted Him fully, He forgave me and I became His child. The act was supernatural, and all of the work was His.
    The Bible is God’s Book. He wrote it, and He promised He would preserve it. He is the Almighty God, and He makes the rules. If God says a thing is true, then that automatically makes it true. Whether or not we choose to believe that the Bible is true does not change the fact that it is.
    The Bible is historically accurate. Its prophecies have been, and are being, fulfilled. The evidence for Christ’s resurrection is overwhelming (1 Jn. 1:1-3; 1 Cor. 15:3-8).
    God’s Word speaks to individual hearts. The Bible changes lives BECAUSE it is true.
    I am sorry if you thought that I was using the Bible as a weapon, although I do not agree with you. The Holy Spirit is far more capable of wielding His sharp two-edged Sword than I am; I know that. I cannot convince anyone to believe it, and I am so very glad that I cannot! If I could, then someone else could come along and convince that person not to believe it. Faith to believe comes from God alone (Eph. 2:8-9). We have a responsibility to share His Word, and He promised that it would not return to Him void. You say, “We as a Christians are supposed to show the love that God has for us by our actions.” God says that sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ IS showing His love.

  10. Part 2 of 2

    Government has some God-given rights. One of these is to protect its citizens by preserving order (forming a police department and funding the armed forces, comes to mind). God is a God of order. Where there is no order, chaos reigns.
    God set up the standard (His standard) for marriage thousands of years ago in the Garden, and He expects that standard to be maintained. Marriage was ordained by God as a life-long covenant between one man and one woman. He does not change; His Word does not change; His standard for right and wrong does not change! Therefore, we cannot compromise on this issue, as you suggest. There is no compromise that will not violate Scripture.
    As you know, our government has been continuously overstepping its God-given authority for many years. By attempting to put its “stamp of approval” on same-sex marriage, government IS interfering in the most basic institution set up by God Himself—the family. Remember, He made them male and female, and He said that it was very good.
    You are exactly right when you say it was once illegal for a man and a woman of different races to marry. As you know, we all are of the same race—the human race. When our government chose to embrace the myth of evolution rather than the Truth of God’s Word, this unscriptural law was the result. Government had no business trying to redefine marriage!
    You say, “We can quote scripture and call it truth, but we can also read what we want into scripture and twist it for our own beliefs.” You are correct. So, the only way to avoid twisting Scripture is to agree with God, no matter what He says, whether we like it or not.
    It is not presumptuous to say that we know God’s thoughts on an issue when He has clearly and unequivocally stated what His thoughts are. If He did not want us to know Him and what He expects of us, we would not need the Bible. Homosexuality is condemned in many places in the Scriptures (I Tim. 1:8-11; Rom. 1:18-28 and numerous other places which, frankly, I do not have time to find references for right now). If Almighty God says homosexuality is a sin and an abomination (and He does), who do we think we are to disregard that?
    Thank you,
    G. Nero

  11. a) G. Nero says: "Government has some God-given rights. One of these is to protect its citizens by preserving order..." Why do you believe governments have God-given rights? The founders certainly did not believe this. Consider, for instance, the Declaration: "...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted..." So, as you can see, God gives rights to people and then people institute governments by sacrificing some of their rights to it. God does not give rights to government. He gives them to us. Those who thought otherwise were generally monarchists. This is uncontroversial.

    b) G. Nero says: "the only way to avoid twisting Scripture is to agree with God, no matter what He says, whether we like it or not."

    Do you agree with these?

    "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)

    "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18)

    " not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19)

    "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9)

    Why not? Because the New Testament changed things? Why these things and not Leviticus 18:22?

    c) G. Nero provides several references to scripture. He then summarizes these as commanding that homosexuality (and, not just gay marriage)is "a sin and an abomination." Where in the New Testament is homosexuality described as an "abomination"?

    Sorry to bug you with all of this stuff, but:

    Yours in CHRIST,