The Meaning of the the Arizona Veto
With Vladimir Putin taking control of Crimea–he was mad at the Ukrainian people for forcing out their pro-Russian tyrannical leader– came the temptation to write on the beginning of a new Cold War.
But that can come later. We have yet to see whether President Obama will act weakly like Jimmy Carter in the 1970s or strongly as Ronald Reagan did in the 1980s.
But we do know what happened in America last week when Arizona Governor Jan Brewer vetoed SB 1062. Religious liberty died and propaganda won.
Here’s the real meaning of the Arizona veto.
I will let some other voices set the stage. Gary Randall of the Faith and Freedom Network tells us the facts about SB 1062:
“It was simply an amendment to the 1999 state Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a state law similar to the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act [RFRA] signed into law in 1993 by President Bill Clinton.
“Senate Bill 1062, was designed to merely clarify the protection already offered in the state RFRA. It would have clarified that protections extend to any “state action” and would apply to “any individual, association, partnership, corporation, church, religious assembly or institution or other business organization. It protected all citizens and the associations they can form from undue burdens by the government on their religious liberty or from private lawsuits that would have the same results.”
It seems like an eternity ago when a Democratic president, House and Senate passed a bill that was good for America. But the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, sponsored by then-Congressman Chuck Schumer-NY, passed on a unanimous voice vote in the House and a whopping 97-3 margin in the Senate.
Bill Clinton signed it. Good law–good leadership.
As Randall points out above, the Arizona bill was a mirror of the RFRA that clarified two minor points. You can read read its 680 words here. (It’s not 2000 pages long like Obamacare.)
What did it strengthen?
Ryan Anderson of the Heritage Foundation explains:
“When the government starts forcing people to do things that violate their deeply held beliefs, we have a problem. Unless the government proves that there is a compelling government interest in doing so (and that there was not another, less restrictive means possible), citizens should be left free. We need legislation protecting religious liberty for all, because in a growing number of cases, government coercion and penalties have violated religious freedom.”
Arizona’s SB 1062 took a good law passed by Democrats eleven years ago and added two tweaks: 1) Government can’t force anyone to do anything unless it has a compelling interest to do so, and 2) That there is not another less restricted way to accomplish the same result.
If you took the time to the read SB 1062, you might be surprised that it was a generic bill that applied to all people, races, issues, situations, and circumstances.
It never mentioned gay rights or gay marriage.
So why did the vast majority of media outlets (including Fox News) trumpet headlines that the Arizona bill was “anti-gay” or “anti-gay marriage?”
Ryan Anderson explains in the following Q&A:
Q: How did people’s beliefs about same-sex marriage become an issue?
A: “In New Mexico, a photographer declined to use her artistic talents to promote a same-sex ceremony because of her religious beliefs. The couple complained and the New Mexico Human Rights Commission ordered her to pay a fine of nearly $7,000. Christian adoption and foster-care agencies in Massachusetts, Illinois, and Washington, D.C., have been forced to stop providing those services because they believe that the best place for kids is with a married mom and dad. Other cases include a baker, a florist, a bed-and-breakfast, a student counselor, the Salvation Army, and more.”
Q: Why is this a religious liberty issue?
A: “Many religions teach that marriage is the union of a man and woman, and the religious liberty concern in these recent cases is that people are being coerced into violating that belief. While Americans are legally free to live and love as they choose, no one should demand that government coerce others into participating in activities that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs.”
Q: But isn’t government supposed to guarantee equal treatment for all?
A: “These are cases of private individuals offering (or not offering) their services, not government officially recognizing same-sex relationships—which is another case altogether. There is no need for government to try to force every photographer and every florist to service every marriage-related event.”
Q: Would laws like these open the door to lots of businesses discriminating against gays and lesbians?
A: “Claims that proposals like Arizona’s encourage refusing service to gays and lesbians are simply nonsensical. Arizona’s proposed legislation never even mentioned same-sex couples or sexuality; it simply clarified and improved existing state protections for religious liberty.”
“Some people have claimed, for example, that it meant a pharmacy could refuse to serve gays and lesbians. But I know of no sincere religious belief that says you can’t sell penicillin to someone because they are gay or lesbian. Ensuring that all citizens have access to crucial medical care is a compelling government interest. And requiring every pharmacy to sell penicillin might very well be the least restrictive means possible of ensuring access.”
Q: What about people whose religions say different things, or Americans who choose not to practice a religion?
“These types of freedom protections are important for all Americans. As Cato’s Ilya Shapiro put it, ‘For that matter, gay photographers and bakers shouldn’t be forced to work religious celebrations…and environmentalists shouldn’t be forced to work job fairs in logging communities.’ When it comes to this particular issue, all Americans should remain free to believe and act in the public square based on their beliefs about marriage without fear of government penalty.”
Is that too hard to understand? Arizona’s reasonable law protected all people from being forced, in a myriad of situations, to violate their religious beliefs.
Forcing violations of conscience–in any area–is bad. Freedom is good. If government is going to force us to go against our strongly held religious beliefs (be they Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or Atheistic), then they better have:
- A very compelling reason to do it,
- In the least restrictive way possible.
Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council put it this way:
“All SB 1062 did was ensure the government couldn’t force business owners to violate their religious beliefs. If that’s controversial, then so is the First Amendment…As Americans, we have a proud tradition of respecting each other’s differences — a tradition that was never threatened by this bill. On the contrary, it would have extended to Christians, who have suffered the loss of jobs, security, and money at the hands of the liberal agenda, the same courtesy of tolerance.”
Here are two other sane explanations of the Arizona bill.
Rich Lowry, writing in Politico, “The question isn’t whether businesses run by people opposed to gay marriage should provide their services for gay weddings; it is whether they should be compelled to by government. The critics of the much-maligned Arizona bill pride themselves on their live-and-let-live open-mindedness, but they are highly moralistic in their support of gay marriage, judgmental of those who oppose it and tolerant of only one point of view — their own.”
On last weekend’s “Meet the Press,” Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) hit back at the massive misinformation regarding SB 1062:
“The notion that someone because they are gay would be denied service at a restaurant is something that Americans don’t support. The other side of the equation is imagine if you’re a Southern Baptist or a Catholic or even evangelical photographer, who does not believe, because of your faith, in gay marriage. And because of that, you don’t want to provide photographic services to a gay marriage. Should you be punished by the state for refusing to do so?”
The answer to that question should be a resounding NO.
So why did Governor Jan Brewer veto SB 1062? What is the meaning of the Arizona veto?
1. The current US Administration–and those who cowtow to it–are determined to enshrine secular values by force. These values include forcing us to pay for abortions through the Affordable Care Care, removing the Judeo-Christian heritage from American life, and demanding that we support the re-definition of marriage.
Because government is all about force–the only sphere of society thus designed–it is crucial that this power is used minimally–and never to trample human rights to life, liberty and conscience.
2. We are becoming a banana republic where propaganda is more powerful than thoughtful argument and debate. The Brewer veto of a good law–one that would have helped all Arizonans–came about because the media, some businesses (like the NFL), and government elites distorted a good law. The propaganda pressure over a politically correct issue (gay marriage) was too much for Governor Jan Brewer to resist.
She wilted–and freedom died.
Waves of propaganda are common in totalitarian countries–such as Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, China and Russia. But they are now finding their way into the West because of our ignorance, sin, and rejection of godly values. This is a troubling trend that sets the stage for Hitler-like deception and evil under the right circumstances.
3. Christians must be prepared to suffer for their faith if present trends continue. The success of propaganda is the first step toward alienation and suffering by the “offensive” social group. Ask the Jews about that one–and followers of Christ in other eras. If authoritarian governments, in sync with media boosters and duped masses, can silence those who disagree with their objectives, then those “traitors” to the new order can be rounded up and a “final solution” served.
I believe the Western World is closer to Christian persecution than at any time in the past five hundred years.
4. Only a tidal wave of godly renewal–and fearless leaders who will call for it! (think 21st century Martin Luther Kings)–can defeat the propaganda and its secular goals.
We are standing at a watershed moment in history. Russia, Iran, and China form formidable foes from without–and apathy, ignorance, and sin are destroying us from within.
May the Church rise up and pray, and may a new generation of leaders call God’s people to a rebirth of faith, morality and religious liberty.
May that be the result of the Arizona veto.
That’s What Marriage is For
Most of us have known for a long time that God’s gift of marriage serves many purposes. It is a beautiful vehicle for intimate friendship, the opportunity to create new life, an advanced course in selflessness and learning to serve others, and a nurturing environment for children and family.
But a recent article on Islam turned on some light bulbs for me. Marriage is all of the above and more. But it is also a vital tool for world peace.
World peace? Isn’t that taking things a bit too far?
I don’t think so. I’ve had my “Aha” moment. World peace and stability.
That’s what marriage is for.
I don’t think it is a coincidence that after Genesis 1, which records the incredible, awesome, magnificent creation of the heavens and the earth, that Genesis 2 immediately records the importance of marriage to the overall creation.
Marriage seems to be the “key” to creation going well.
Of course, God-designed marriage is the joining together of a man and a woman into a relational and physical “oneness” that models the unity of the Trinity. That’s been the God-given definition of marriage for at least six thousand years.
Let’s take a moment to look at the passage that describes its origin: Genesis 2:18-24
“The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him. Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.”
“But for Adam, no suitable helper was found. So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.”
“The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.’”
“That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.”
That’s God’s equation for marriage.
A couple things leap out here. First, man needed a woman to make him complete. She was designed to complement him, to make him whole. Second, the woman was made from the flesh of the man (the rib). British theologian John Stott believes that the essence of marriage is God re-uniting male and female flesh through sexual intercourse.
On a micro-scale, that makes a lot of sense. The natural draw of men and women is the desire to reunite maleness and femaleness into a newly constituted unity of life and purpose.
However, from a macro point of view– the big picture of things–maybe the institution of marriage was meant to accomplish a far greater purpose.
Social harmony. Stability. Order. Peace.
This lofty thought came after reading an article on the roots of Muslim Jihad. It’s worth sharing in its entirety.
Is Polygamy the Cause of Muslim Violence?
By: William Tucker
“Syria is submerged in civil war. The Sunni and the Shi’ia of Iraq are renewing their 1300-year-old conflict. Libyan rebels have shut down the nation’s oil industry. Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood has been suppressed and is resorting to terrorism. Pakistan is a cauldron of violence and assassinations. In short, the Muslim world, as usual, is at war with itself.”
“This is not a contemporary phenomenon. Islam has been attacking its neighbors ever since the Prophet Mohammed received the Koran from the Angel Gabriel in the 7th century. Within 50 years of his death, Muslim armies had conquered the known world from Spain to Afghanistan. The Moguls invaded India, setting off a conflict that persists today. The Ottoman Empire besieged Europe for hundreds of years before its collapse in the 20th century. As historian Samuel Huntington has written, Islam has always had ‘bloody borders.’”
“Is there any explanation for this? Is it temperament or history? Is it the inevitable fight over scarce resources? Or, as Muslim cultures would insist, is it because Islam has always been surrounded by hostile neighbors?”
“In my book, Marriage and Civilization, I offer a novel explanation as to why Islam has always been at war with itself and others. It is because Islam it is the only major religious culture that embraces polygamy.”
“Polygamy? What does that have to do with anything? Am I suggesting that because some minor sheik outside Baghdad takes two wives, two young Muslim brothers in Massachusetts feel compelled to blow up the Boston Marathon?”
“Well, yes. In any human society there are approximately the same number of men and women. Under monogamy, which limits each man to one wife, everyone gets a fair chance to marry. When powerful and successful men are allowed to take more than one wife, however, as they are in a polygamous society, this creates a pool of unsuccessful men at the bottom of society who are constantly in conflict with the system.”
“The history of Islam has been one continuous story of rebel groups off in the desert and deciding that the religion being practiced by the authorities and their harems back in the cities is not the ‘true Islam.’ They come crashing back upon the palaces, overthrowing the leaders (no Ottoman Sultan ever died of natural causes) and establishing a new regime that is just like the old one, where powerful are allowed to take multiple wives.”
“The Prophet Muhammad had a novel solution to this problem. Go and conquer neighboring societies and requisition their women. If you die in the process, the reward will be even greater – 72 virgins waiting for you in heaven! ‘Jihad’ has been a clever and effective way of redirecting the hostilities of the ‘bachelor herd’ that polygamy inevitably produces.”
“The fruits of polygamy are visible all over the Middle East. Because women are always in short supply, families can charge a ‘bride price’ to any man who wants to marry their daughter. Because daughters are now worth money, they must be veiled and sequestered so they don’t run off with some callow youth. Older men desperate for wives push down into younger and younger cohorts of the population. Marriages between 35-year-old men and 13-year-old girls become common. (Muhammad’s last wife was age six.)”
“But the main product of polygamy is a population of angry young men who are ripe recruits for terrorism. The Koran supposedly limits a man to four wives but in countries where there are vast disparities of wealth this is routinely violated. Osama bin Laden’s father, a successful Saudi businessman, had 22 wives and 54 children. The unbalance between unmarried men and the available women in Saudi Arabia is the highest in the world. Is it any wonder that 15 of the 19 September 11th hijackers were Saudi nationals?”
“Ann Coulter once suggested that we would cure Muslim violence by converting the Islamic world to Christianity. This is not as far-fetched as it sounds. Christianity’s long enforcement of monogamous marriage has obviously played a critical role in establishing the more peaceful civilization of the West. The same can be said for China and India, where the vast majority adhere to monogamy. None of these cultures is plagued with the endless internal violence and outward aggression of Islam.”
“Converting the Muslim world to Christianity may be out of the question, but persuading it to give up polygamy on the grounds that it creates an inherently unstable society is a task that the rest of the world might be willing to undertake.”
I agree with everything Tucker postulates except the final paragraph. Ann Coulter is right. The key to eliminating Muslim violence in the world is the Good News of Christ which changes the heart and brings a human life into the blessings of God’s ways. One of those blessings is marriage–monogamy–and the peace and stablity it brings to human societies.
The most peaceful societies in the world are biblically based. Look at Europe, the Americas, Pacific Islands, and many other nations where the Good News has created marriages and cultures that create the greatest amount of peace possible in a fallen world.
Why?
Because marriage restrains sin through godly wives who keep men from giving in to their pugnacious natures.
This was a conclusion of Robert Bellah in his 1980s best-selling book Habits of the Heart. In his chapter called “Love and Marriage” Bellah explained that the genius of early America was the centrality of faith, marriage, family, and “superiority of the American women.”
Bellah quotes Alexis de Tocqueville, the French historian, who visited America during the 1930s: “[Christianity] reigns supreme in the souls of the women, and it is women who shape mores. Certainly of all countries in the world, America is the one in which the marriage tie is the most respected and where the highest and truest conception of conjugal happiness has been conceived.”
Bellah concluded what we men know from experience: Women are the superior sex and we desperately need their spiritual sensitivities to restrain our male excesses, guide and teach our children, provide an environment of love and nurture for the family–and in a phrase–keep the peace.
Is there any honest man out there that disagrees? Godly women are the fulcrum of stable families and nations. And it is the institution of marriage that ties us to their apron strings so that we don’t go off half cocked and destroy the planet.
Thirty years ago, in the margins of Bellah’s book, I wrote in my wife’s name–twice. Yes, I desperately need Shirley to bring peace, love, and unity to our home and family!
If we want peace on earth, less wars, and social stability, then godly women anchoring biblical marriages form the time-tested recipe for success.
God is awfully smart.
He knew that’s what marriage is for.
The Real War on Women
War has been with us as long as city/states have existed. Human beings fight because fallen people are selfish and like to conquer others.
Behind human wars is a satanic war mentioned in the Bible in Ephesians 6:12. Paul explains: “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.”
Recently, another kind of war has entered American politics called “The War on Women.” Progressive politicians have used this phrase in the past two election cycles to make it appear that conservatives and people of faith hate women and are trying to suppress them.
That’s not true–just like the promises of the Affordable Care Act (which is quickly becoming history’s most famous oxymoron).
Let’s discuss the real war on women taking place in America and around the world.
First, we must be clear that the so-called “War on Women” that Sandra Fluke and the 2012 Democratic Convention made famous is a crock that was cooked up to win votes.
Here are the facts: American single women tend to vote for liberal causes and American married women vote for conservative ones. This is understandable. In today’s world, single women are more dependent on government and more self-oriented in their lifestyles. Married women, with husbands and children in tow, possess greater family support and have learned through experience that life is not about them.
So, there is no “war” on American women in general. Single women lean left and married women lean right. Let’s get rid of the nonsense of an overarching “War on Women.”
But worldwide, and inspired by the satanic realm, there is a very real war against the female gender. This is the true war on women that we ought to be praying and fighting against.
I will list, in order of severity, the real war on women that we must engage and win.
1. The Abortion War
Modern-day abortion is, by far, the world’s greatest holocaust. In the past forty years, it is estimated that 27.5 million female unborn babies have been killed in the United States–never to see the light of day. That’s like systematically killing all the residents of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose, and Austin, Texas–the nation’s eleven largest cities.
Imagine the “fearfully and wonderfully made” women lost to American society whose beauty, creativity, mothering abilities and vocational gifts were lost to eternity on the pro-death altar of the sexual revolution.
And that’s just America. Possibly a half-a-billion to one billion women have been killed through the carnage of abortion worldwide. That’s like dropping atomic bombs on the entire continent of Africa and killing every single living person.
Abortion is the real war against women–and, of course, it includes an equal amount of men.
2. The Islamic War
There are about 50 Muslim nations in the world containing 2.3 billion followers of Islam. Let’s assume that 1.2 billion people in these nations are women, and that half of those women live in suppressive Muslim states (The Middle East and North Africa in particular).
So, today, in the modern world, at least a half a billion Muslim women live in subservient slavery where they are treated as property and sexual objects. That is the true state of Muslim women who live under the teachings of the Koran.
We might be able to excuse this type of authoritarianism if we read about it during the time of the Dark Ages or maybe fifteen hundred years ago when Islam began.
But in 2014? A half a billion Muslim women cover themselves from head-to-foot, are not allowed outside by themselves, do not go to school, are not allowed to drive, and are treated as a piece of meat by their husbands? In our time period?
This is shocking even to contemplate because the Western world has been blessed by the Christian worldview which gives equality of value of women and has liberated billions of women worldwide.
But not in Islam. Women are still in chains. Where is the outcry? Where is the tear-stained scream for justice and civil rights for the women living in oppressive Muslim states?
3. The Sex-Trafficking War
The U.S. State Department estimates that between 600,000 and 800,000 people are trafficked across international borders each year. Eighty percent of those trafficked are women and girls, mostly for sexual exploitation. These figures overlook the millions more victims who are trafficked annually within their own national borders.
So, let’s say conservatively, that at least 480,000 women–really young girls–are used as sexual slaves for lusting men in the international arena each year. That’s equivalent to the entire city of Seattle being forced into prostitution. Those figures do not take into account the sexual slavery taking place within domestic borders.
Whichever figure you choose, the outcome is the same — far more women and girls are forced into brothels annually in the 21st century than African slaves were shipped into slave plantations each year in the 18th century.
Sex slavery is bigger today than racial slavery in the past. And the problem of sex slavery is getting worse. Trafficking for sexual exploitation is one of the fastest-growing organized crimes, generating $27.8 billion each year—most of it involving the abuse of women.
Sex-trafficking is certainly a satanic tactic to to hurt and destroy women.
4. The Inflation War
You may have never thought of this, but current American monetary policy is also a war on the female gender.
If you go back two generations, you find that a majority of women in American preferred spending most of their lives as wives and mothers who believed the greatest vocation was the care and nurturing of the family unit. Those generations were indeed blessed by the godly women who were not forced into the work world to provide for their families.
I grew up in the world of stay-at-home moms. My maternal mother was one. My mother-in-law was another. My wife also preferred to be a stay-at-home mom who tended the family fires and even home-schooled her six children.
The strength of America was built upon this foundation of many generations of stay-at-home mothering.
This changed when a Republican president, Richard Nixon, took America off of the gold standard in 1972. Then both Republican and Democratic administrations carelessly inflated the money supply for the next forty years. This caused the price of everything to rise–forcing many women into the work world where two incomes were required to pay the rising bills.
Most of us have never thought about the sudden emergence of two-income homes because it’s all we’ve ever known. Dad works and mom works (whether she wants to or not). But this is a recent phenomenon. Fifty years ago, only 7% of married women worked outside the home. Today, the number has “forcibly” risen to nearly 60%.
According to one study, about half (51%) of respondents say that children are better off if a mother is home and doesn’t hold a job. Nearly three-quarters of adults (74%) say the increasing number of women working for pay has made it harder for parents to raise children, and half say that it has made marriages harder to succeed.
Wrong-headed inflationary policies are another form of war on women in America.
5. The Hollywood War
A cultural dimension of the real war on women is the Hollywood-inspired portrayal of females as sex objects. For two hundred years of American history, the Proverbs 31 model of womanhood held the day where faith, chastity, hard work, and family were the bulwark upon which a great society was built.
But starting with Marilyn Monroe, and then exploding into the starlets, models, and porn stars of today, women have been relegated today to the status of sex toys to meet men’s lusts. This is a huge step backwards into the female slavery of the Dark Ages and Ancient Roman obsession with sex.
This is not liberation. It is a sexual targeting of women.
6. The Advertising War
Finally, the Hollywood stereotype of women has been fueled by modern-day advertisers. A false image of “beauty” has been forced down women’s throats, telling them they must have a certain hairstyle, curves, bikini-body, breast implants, or plastic surgery to “compete” in today’s oversexed world.
This is also a lie– an expensive and depressing one. A woman’s beauty is her uniqueness and godliness, not whether she looks like Marliyn Monroe or Scarlet Johansson.
How many women are beaten down today by the advertising hype? Probably millions. Or maybe, they’ve just given up. This is yet another form of the devil’s war on the female sex.
Conclusion
Let’s reject about the phony war on women and focus like a laser on fighting the real one.
- Give your effort and time to see the abortion holocaust halted (the repeal of Roe v. Wade).
- Pray for and share your faith with oppressed women in the Muslim world, believing that God can bring about an amazing deliverance.
- Support organizations that are freeing women from sex trafficking.
- Vote for political leaders who will restore us to sound monetary policy.
- Influence Hollywood to produce films that showcase Proverbs 31 women, not sluts.
- Reject the advertising lies, and encourage female freedom to be “beautiful in Christ.”
Yes, there is a global war on women (and human beings in general). We must know our true enemy. We must resist his fake rabbit trails and understand his actual strategies.
Let’s help liberate the women of the world.