Tag: Family

Federal Judge Strikes Down Texas Marriage Amendment

~ Evan Lenow ~ 2 Comments

same sex marriage graphcIn what is now a string of cases decided by federal judges regarding state laws, U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia has struck down Texas’ constitutional amendment defining marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman. After the state legislature presented the amendment in 2005, 76% of Texas voters approved the addition of the amendment to the state constitution.

Judge Garcia immediately stayed his ruling pending an inevitable appeal. This should be quite interesting considering that the man who will be responsible for the appeal, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, is the hands-down favorite to receive the Republican nomination for governor. Abbott will be responsible for filing the appeal while also managing his campaign against likely Democratic nominee Wendy Davis.

This case came about when a lesbian couple filed suit against the state for not recognizing their same-sex marriage performed in Massachusetts in 2009. According to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram article, the plaintiffs “argued that the state’s gay marriage ban had caused them undue hardship that other married couples do not face. For example, the couple have one child together, but because Texas does not recognize their union, only one parent’s name was allowed on the birth certificate.”

The logic of the names on a birth certificate is quite interesting.  Biologically speaking, only one of the women is the mother although it is likely they both wanted to be listed as mothers. This demonstrates how the redefinition of marriage is attempting to separate the relationship completely from any aspect of procreation. Assuming the couple used an anonymous sperm donor as the father, then standard procedure would be to list the woman who gave birth as the mother. A second mother is biologically impossible for the purposes of a birth certificate. It is unclear how this causes undue hardship related to a medical record that is intended to connect a child to his/her biological parents.

While marriage does not require procreation, separating marriage and procreation completely is illogical. Melissa Moschella has recently written that children have a right to know who their biological parents are and a right to a relationship with them. She states:

The biological parent-child relationship is uniquely intimate and comprehensive, at least from the child’s perspective. A child’s relationship to his biological parents is the closest of that child’s human relationships. It is identity-determining. To be born of different parents is to be an entirely different person. This, combined with the observation that receiving proper care is crucial for the child’s current and future well-being, implies that biological parents are the ones with the strongest obligation to ensure that their child is well-cared-for.

When someone makes the claim that they have a right to produce a birth certificate containing two mothers and no father as the biological record of the child’s birth, they undermine the right of the child to know his genetic history. If marriage includes unions other than those between a man and a woman, it undermines the creation ordinance designed to be the avenue of procreation and perpetuation of the human race. This is not an undue hardship placed on the couple by the state. It is Biology 101.

In just the last two months, marriage amendments have been overturned by judicial action in Utah, Oklahoma, Virginia, and Texas. Seventeen other states allow same-sex marriage (or are in the process of allowing it). In addition, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder just recently told state attorneys general that they are not obligated to defend traditional marriage laws in court if they do not want to do so.

I tell my classes every semester that our children will grow up with a different understanding of marriage than what we have. I have been fighting and praying that we would be able to stave off the redefinition of marriage. Now it seems that the U.S. Supreme Court will have no choice but to hear these cases and rule on them, potentially providing a new definition of marriage.

Honestly, I am not optimistic about any future SCOTUS rulings; however, we do not place our hope in judges, governors, legislators, or presidents. Instead, our hope is in Jesus Christ, and he has already declared:

Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate. (Matthew 19:4-6)

*If you are interested in learning more about how to respond to the campaign to redefine marriage, consider attending the It Takes a Family conference on the campus of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, co-hosted by the Ruth Institute and the Land Center for Cultural Engagement, on April 11, 2014. More information and registration is available by clicking here.

_________________________

Edgar Walters, “Federal judge rules Texas’ gay marriage ban unconstitutional,” Star-Telegram, February 26, 2014.

Melissa Moschella, “The Rights of Children: Biology Matters,” The Public Discourse, February 20, 2014.

Good Reading: The Rights of Children: Biology Matters

~ Evan Lenow

There is an interesting article on the Public Discourse regarding anonymous gamete donation and the rights of children to know their biological parents. Here are some of the highlights:

Now that many children conceived with the help of donor sperm or eggs have reached adulthood, many of these donor-conceived adults have claimed a right to know their biological parents. This phenomenon has led a number of European countries to outlaw gamete donation. Even in places where anonymous donation remains legal, such as the United States, there is a growing trend toward the use of non-anonymous donors. This shift away from the use of anonymous gamete donors parallels the shift toward greater openness in adoption, and it marks an increasing recognition that knowledge of one’s biological origins and contact with one’s biological parents when possible are important for human well-being.

This recognition points to a more fundamental critique of donor conception. Indeed, the basic premise of arguments against anonymous gamete donation—the recognition that children have a fundamental interest in knowing their biological parents—implies that conceiving children with donor gametes is always morally problematic, even when the donor is not anonymous, because it always involves conceiving children with the intention of depriving them of a parental relationship with (at least) one of their progenitors. Thus, it is different from the usual case of adoption, in which a child already exists; putting a child up for adoption is an attempt to give that child the best possible care in non-ideal circumstances.

After further explaining her premise, the author provides the following scenario to illustrate her point:

Amanda and Arnold are in desperate need of money. Amanda learns of a local fertility clinic that is offering generous compensation for participation in a study on the effectiveness of fertility treatments. Amanda and Arnold decide to participate in the study, foreseeing that Amanda will most likely become pregnant as a result. If conception does occur, they plan to give the child up for adoption as soon as he or she is born, because their financial situation would make it impossible for them to care for the child adequately.

This case seems to be the exact moral equivalent of what egg and sperm donors do. Just like Amanda and Arnold, donors knowingly perform actions that will most likely lead to their becoming biological parents, while having no intention of raising their offspring themselves. If we think that Amanda and Arnold’s actions are wrong, we should also think that the actions of gamete donors are wrong, and for precisely the same reason: a child has a prima facie right to be raised by his biological parents, based on the absolute right to be loved by his biological parents.

The entire article is worth your time and can be found at here at the Public Discourse.

_________________________

Melissa Moschella, “The Rights of Children: Biology Matters,” The Public Discourse, February 20, 2014.

Guest Post: How to Embrace a Season of Stillness

~ Evan Lenow ~ 1 Comment

This is a guest post from my wife, Melanie. She originally wrote this post for Biblical Woman, the blog site for the Women’s Programs at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. The post originally appeared here.

Everything is still and dead. I look out on my backyard and that is what I see. My ferns are brown and droopy and my trees are bare. Had my husband not raked for endless hours, dead leaves would have created a brown carpet over the ground. In the place where the daffodils bloom is a hard bed of earth. Even the birds are eerily quiet and the bugs save their song for another time.  Now is the time of year where living things go into dormancy. It’s a time to conserve energy and not fight against the harsh conditions on the outside.

God has built into every living thing a cadence or rhythm of life. Solomon describes it in Ecclesiastes 3:1 “To everything there is a season. A time for every purpose under heaven.” He is reminding us that the Lord has a specific time for everything that He has called you to do. During this time of year, there are new ministries to join, new classes to take, New Year’s resolutions to accomplish. The idea of “getting back into the swing of things” thrills us. One more meeting? Sure, I need to be there. A playdate? Of course, my children want to see their friends (and so do I). A party to throw? Yes, a friend deserves it. A task to volunteer for? Absolutely, for if I don’t do it, who will?

We are, by nature, brilliant multi-taskers. God has wired within us the ability to accomplish a great deal for our families, our homes, and our community. We are moms, sisters, daughters, students, professionals, makers of the home, and our gift of nurturing is a vital component of who we are. However, as I look out onto my backyard, I see stillness and quietness and a silent preparation for beautiful things to come.

In God’s divine grace and wisdom, there is a time for activity and a time for rest. Rest brings a conservation of energy. In reading about daffodils, I discovered that you are supposed to remove the dead flowers immediately so energy is not wasted in making new seeds that will not develop before the dormant season. I don’t need to remind you that the activities that God has called you to require large amounts energy. Like the daffodil, we cannot afford to waste energy on unnecessary activity. We are finite beings, and it is arrogant of us to believe that our energy is everlasting. That is not God’s design.

In the life of Elijah, there were times of extreme activity. First Kings 17 begins with him predicting a drought to King Ahab. Then, in the midst of the drought he ministers to and rescues a widow and her son from starvation. Then, on behalf of the widow, God uses Elijah again to show His glory and raise the widow’s son from the dead. In a magnificent climax, Elijah calls out the prophets of Baal and, through him, God proves to hundreds upon hundreds that He is the all-powerful, one true God. And finally afterwards, Elijah is the first to notice the rain clouds that bring an end the horrible drought.

It is obvious that God is not against activity. However, let us read between the events. This is why God’s Word is so precious in its entirety; for between the amazing activities of Elijah’s life are periods of mandatory rest.

After Elijah predicted the drought, God commanded him to go and dwell by a brook. He relied on God for even his basic sustenance. The ravens brought him bread and meat in the morning and again in the evening (1 Kings 17:5-7). He stayed there, trusting God for everything until the brook dried up. Can you see that those lessons of patience, trust, and total obedience were paramount for him grasp in order to perform the miracles that were to come? After the victory over the prophets, Elijah was once again driven into the wilderness as he ran from the threats of Jezebel. When he was exhausted and unable to run any longer, he sat down and slept only to be awakened briefly by an angel to give him nourishment. His unplanned yet God-ordained time of rest in the wilderness brought Elijah to a new level of awareness of who God is, for God spoke to Elijah clearly in a “still small voice” (1 Kings 19:12).  Elijah accomplished everything God had ordained that he accomplish.

In the same way, God has great plans for us and wants to use us mightily, but we must heed his call to rest. It is during the quiet times where God does a mighty work within our own hearts.

I might not know you personally, but I am almost certain that you are a busy lady. However, it is a challenge to me and, I pray, will be a challenge to you to submit our hearts to God’s calling on us to rest. Throughout the next year there will be seasons of activity and opportunities for rest. When God leads you there, embrace the season of stillness and rest. We never know what God will teach us as we lay dormant and conserve our energy for a period. It is there that we will hear His still, small voice. He will tend to us and nourish us spiritually. And only then can we burst out of the ground in a splendor of colors, praising God for his faithfulness and head back into our ministries for the glory of God.

Will All the Ducks Fly Away?

~ Evan Lenow ~ 5 Comments

“God, Family, Ducks…in that order.” So reads the Twitter profile of Jase Robertson, one of the stars of A&E’s “Duck Dynasty” reality show. It looks like that saying is about to be tested. A&E has suspended Phil Robertson, father of Jase, Willie, and Jep Robertson and founder of Duck Commander, for his recent comments about homosexuality in an interview published in GQ.

A&E released the following statement:

We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series Duck Dynasty. His personal views in no way reflect those of A+E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.

Apart from the irony that Phil Robertson was doing an interview with GQ, the substance of his comments was not really surprising. In the interview Phil calls himself a “Bible-thumper,” and the author describes this commitment to the Bible by saying that Phil “thumps that Bible hard enough to ring the bell at a county-fair test of strength.”

The controversial statements that have led to his suspension from the blockbuster show revolve around the issue of homosexuality. The interviewer asked, “What, in your mind, is sinful?” Phil responded:

Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men. Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.

In a further discussion of homosexuality, Phil makes a somewhat crude biological case against homosexuality and concludes by saying, “But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

So now both sides have spoken. Phil spoke his mind on homosexuality and other issues, and A&E has spoken by indefinitely suspending Phil from future filming.

What should Phil and his family do now?

For the Robertson family, this will be a test of their family creed. From the beginning of the show, they have committed to “three no-compromises” of “faith, betrayal of family members, and duck season.” The first two are now on the line for the Robertsons. The patriarch of the family has essentially been fired from the show for expressing his religious views. The rest of the men, including Duck Commander president Willie Robertson (one of Phil’s sons), are about to have their allegiance to family tested. Do they go on without Phil or stand by him?

When asked about the sons’ views on morality, the youngest son, Jep Robertson, replied, “We’re not quite as outspoken as my dad, but I’m definitely in line. If somebody asks, I tell ’em what the Bible says.” It’s now time to see if the Robertson family sticks together through thick and thin.

What’s the right decision for the Robertsons? I think they only have one option—walk out on the show. Sure, the show could go on without Phil, but the family couldn’t. Either Phil is a part of the show or no one is on the show. That is the only option.

Perhaps Phil was being more prophetic than he realized when he told the interviewer that the show would not last forever. He said, “Let’s face it. Three, four, five years, we’re out of here. You know what I’m saying? It’s a TV show. This thing ain’t gonna last forever. No way.” This may be the end of “Duck Dynasty,” but it would solidify a family who is committed to no compromise on faith and betrayal of family.

_________________________

Drew Magary, “What the Duck?” GQ, January 2014. (*Warning: This article contains profanity, not from Phil Robertson or any other members of the family but from the interviewer.)

A. J. Marechal, “‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Phil Robertson Fired Following Anti-Gay Remarks,” Variety, December 18, 2013.

Guest Post: What’s “Naughty or Nice” Got to Do with It?

~ Evan Lenow

This is a guest post from my wife, Melanie. She originally wrote this post for Biblical Woman, the blog site for the Women’s Programs at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. The post originally appeared here.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God.” (Eph 2:8)

I love this time of year! Love everything about it! If you read my last post, you will understand that my feelings toward the Christmas season are the exact opposite from my thoughts of that last day of October. I love the music, the smells, even the craziness of all the parties. Being a mommy at Christmas time is like being a tour guide at some magnificent destination. I get the privilege of guiding them to experience all the wonderful sights, sounds, smells, and activities of the season. Sometimes we focus on a favorite tradition my husband or I had growing up or sometimes we create our own new traditions. I enjoy the millions of questions that surface in the awestruck mind of a child. However, I have noticed a question arising more and more in the last few years, not necessarily with my own children, but with our culture as a whole. It has nothing to do with “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays.” It is the question of “Have you been good this year?”

Oh, I know. It’s just a saying. We’ve all said it without any real meaning behind it. However, through the marketing and merchandise around us, I believe this idea is creeping into our hearts and minds more and more.  Many of you know of a little elf that you can pretend watches your kids to make sure they are being good. Even in the Christian circles, merchandise has been created to encourage our kids to be good this time of year. If not, they will find switches and ashes in their stocking. Of course, many dismiss it as part of the make-believe game we play with our children at Christmas.

However, I would argue it is more dangerous than that. The danger comes from the fact that it preaches a different gospel. In the New Testament, Paul marveled that the church in Galatia was “turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel” (Galatians 1:6). Even then, the people of Galatia were turning away from a gospel of grace to a different gospel of works. The Gospel of Christmas is that God loved us so much, He sent his only Son and all we have to do is believe in Him and He will grant us eternal life (John 3:16). Ephesians says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God.” (Ephesians 2:8) The gift of Christ is a gift not based on our works. There is no naughty or nice list in Heaven where, if we have more checks on the nice side, we get the gift. The gift of Christ is given to us simply because God loves us and desires a relationship with us for His glory.

In light of this, I want to challenge myself to remove this false gospel from my vocabulary and most of all from my heart. How do I approach giving gifts this Christmas? Do I do it out of obligation? I truly desire my attitude of gift giving to be one that reflects the same attitude of God. I want to give out of an overflow of the incredible gift that God has already given to me. Most importantly, I want to love this Christmas in an unconditional way, expecting nothing in return, but pointing the object of my love back to my Savior who loved me so. What if my 4-year-old throws a fit that goes 10.0 on the Richter scale because he didn’t get the right color cup on Christmas morning? Am I going to be just as joyful about giving him gifts as I would be if he had been an angel? What about that family member who rubs you the wrong way? Will you buy her a present out of obligation or will you see it as a way to minister to her and show her the unconditional love that comes only from Christ? This Christmas, may we give our loved ones gifts not because they were nice to us, but because the greatest Gift-giver loved us so to give us Jesus.

As we talk with our children, let us make it absolutely clear that receiving gifts has nothing to do with their works, but has everything to do with celebrating the greatest Gift of all. None of us deserve the Gift of Christmas, “but God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,” (Ephesians 2:4) gave us the most wonderful gift of all.