Challenging the Rainbow

Facebook1It’s hard to keep my emotions in check as I type this blog.  Generally speaking, I’m a laid-back kind of guy.  I don’t easily give in to emotional outbursts.  As a matter of fact, I pride myself on being extremely pragmatic, allowing my reasoning functions to reign over my emotions. This time it’s not so easy. My level of frustration is rising.

I’m also the kind of guy who strays from political comment.  As a man whose citizenship is with a heavenly Kingdom, I don’t typically get caught up in political issues with earthly kingdoms.  It’s not my game.  However, when concerns overlap the Kingdom to which I am enjoined, then I may find myself in a position to respond.  Like now.

For years Christian leaders have been using the term “Cultural War” to describe the situation in our nation. It’s a type of war not being fought on a battlefield with guns and cannons, but in our schools, our colleges, our courts, and our workplaces, with weapons of words and ideas.  It’s not over land or oil, or against an evil tyrant.  No, in this war the stakes are much, much higher.  To the victor of this war goes the hearts, minds, and souls of the people of this nation.  It’s hard to imagine a conflict with more at stake.

The reality of this war was never so vividly experienced as when the US Supreme Court recently handed down its decision to legalize same-sex marriage in all 50 states. From the White House, to the news media outlets, to university campuses, many saw this is as an incredible victory for equal rights, and they took to the streets to celebrate.  My heart sank as I heard the news and saw the celebration.  Not because I hate anyone or have some sort of phobia. That’s not me.  Rather, my heart sank because I saw the decision differently: as a deliberate blow leveled against righteousness, peace, and reason.  It was a blow that will have far-reaching repercussions.  It was a well-aimed strike meant to open the flood gates of chaos and destruction upon our country and this world.  I’m not suggesting that all who were in favor of this change are seeking for the destruction of our country.  Rather, that there is a very real force behind these things that most certainly is bent on our downfall. Without being on guard, it’s easy to fall under that power’s spell.

Just days after the decision was handed down, I began hearing reports of requests for licenses for polygamous marriages.  I was hesitant to believe them since they seemed to have come from questionable sources.  However, on 02 July 2015, Fox News ran a story of a Montana trio requesting a license.  Surely this couldn’t have come as a surprise to anyone.  Many proponents to traditional marriage have been predicting it for years – even I said it would happen.  Once you redefine the word “marriage,” without an appeal to an objective authoritative source, then the word will no longer mean anything.  It no longer has value.  This, I believe, was the real purpose behind many (not all) who campaigned against traditional values.  They were actively seeking the deconstruction of the moral framework of this society.

It probably won’t be long until you will hear of a woman who decides to marry her father to help him get healthcare through her employer.  Since the word “marriage” can no longer be defended, the courts will have to allow this kind of marriage, even if she is already married to someone else.  Once polygamy becomes legal one U.S. citizen could marry 10, 20, or 100 illegal immigrants, who will immediately file for their green cards and seek out benefits.  The financial results will be devastating for this country.  The welfare system will collapse. Insurance companies will either stop writing policies or will charge such exorbitant rates that health care will no longer be affordable.  Instead of getting health care, people will go without. You may think is ridiculous but I recall hearing some say that polygamy would never happen.  Just give it a little more time.  It will happen. And much more.

One thing that has really grieved me about the Supreme Court ruling is the response I’ve seen by some Christians.  It was no surprise to see the people who live in rebellion to Jesus to be celebrating. But, what saddened me was to see so many Christians take on the rainbow icon and join in the festivities.  In my opinion, they had gotten caught up in the delusion that this issue was about discrimination, or they had swallowed the lie that what two people do in the privacy of their own bedroom won’t affect their own marriage.  In my opinion, they had traded their rational faculties for a pretty rainbow.  I like rainbows, too.  But, I’m not quite ready to discard my thinking processes for one.

Let me first address the objection that same-sex marriage won’t affect my marriage and therefore I shouldn’t care if it happens.  This is a seriously flawed argument. First, the person making the argument never appeals to any data to prove their case.  It’s really just a guess, not a calculated response. If they have hard, fast evidence showing that same-sex marriage has no ill-effects on society, then they need to share it.  But, they don’t.  Second, let’s say a murder occurs in another state in the middle of the night and it doesn’t affect me, does it make it right? Obviously not. We cannot judge whether something is right or wrong based on how it does or does not affects me.  Instead, we have to appeal to a different standard to make this determination.  I would be happy to dissect and compare standards of morality with anyone who has a differing method. Third, if marriage becomes so wildly redefined so that it creates a harmful financial burden on our society, then it affects everyone.

Next, let me address the notion of discrimination.  This is a real catch phrase in our society.  We don’t like to hear that someone was unfairly discriminated against.  We want to believe that everyone should have equal rights under the law.  It’s what sets our country apart from others.  However, we need to pause and think whenever we hear the word “discrimination.”  Just because someone uses the word does not mean that they are using it correctly, or that real discrimination has occurred.  We need to be careful not to join every parade or campaign that is marching against the use of that word.  Again, we need to stop and think – something that seems to be going incredibly out of style lately.

What I’m about to say may shock and anger you, yet it is the truth: this country has never denied the right to marry based on sexual orientation.  Never.  In fact, no marriage application in the country has ever asked: what is your sexual orientation?  A hetrosexual person could always marry.  An a-sexual person could always marry. A homosexual person could always marry.  A bi-sexual person could always marry.  However, in all of these cases there were the very same restrictions.  For example, none of these people could marry children.  They could not have simultaneous marriages in multiple states.  They could not marry a close blood relative.  And, they could not marry someone of the same sex.  What is indisputable is that concerning marriage no one was ever discriminated against simply because of their sexual orientation.  No one.  Ever.  A heterosexual person had the very same restrictions placed on them as a homosexual person.  They were always both equal under the law.  If you had heard and believed differently, than you had heard and believed a lie.

If you would like to establish that the above paragraph is wrong, then you need only cite a single instance where a governmental agency had inquired into an applicant’s sexual orientation rather than for one of the other reasons mentioned above before denying them the right to marry.  For example, if two heterosexual men were permitted to marry one another but two homosexual men were denied that privilege, then you would have a bona fide case of discrimination.  If an opposite-sex orientated woman were allowed to marry a minor child, but a same-sex orientated woman were not permitted to marry a child, then you would have a clear case of wrongful discrimination.  If a straight man were licensed to have several wives in different states, but a gay man were denied that same license, then discrimination would clearly be in view. The stark truth of the matter is blatantly obvious.

You’ve probably been told that same-sex oriented people have been wrongly discriminated against concerning marriage.  As you can see, this has never been the case.

The erosion of the reasoning processes and the destruction of the moral barometer of Christian people is alarming.  Neither of these, however, has come by accident.  We have an enemy who is prowling around us like a lion (1 Peter 5:8), always looking for prey.  We must be vigilant or we will fall victim to his lies.  If our enemy has captured our minds, then our souls will soon be in his grasp.  Are you already a victim?

Oh, and a word about the rainbow.  In Genesis 6 God declared that because the world’s white housewickedness had reached a crescendo that He needed to bring judgement.  After the terrible judgement was over He promised that He would never again destroy the world by water.  As a sign of that promise God gave us the rainbow.  The archer’s bow was an instrument of war and God had hung His bow up in the sky for all to see (Gen 9:13). It was as if to say that He was done fighting.  He was no longer at war and had retired His weapon.

Ironically, God’s own symbol of judgement is being used today to mark the rebellion being led against Him.  It is as if the weapon has been pried from its holding place and mockingly taken up like a coat of arms to wage this Cultural War.  In my opinion, it may not be a safe thing to do for a Christian to be fighting God while displaying His own symbol of judgment.  But who listens to reason anymore?



Dane Cramer is a backpacker, Christian blogger, jail chaplain, amateur filmmaker, and author of two books: Romancing the Trail and The Nephilim: A Monster Among Us.



One comment on “Challenging the Rainbow

  1. I would like to add a bit to this avalanche of despair. Note the following, reasonable hypothetical:

    Fact: most states have an age minimum of either 15 or 16 to be married with parental consent. Which state has the LOWEST minimum age to be married with parental consent?

    Surprisingly enough, it was royal blue MASSACHUSETTS!
    Massachusetts: 18 for first marriage, 14 (male) 12 (female) with parental and/or judicial consent

    Now, let’s also note scientific evidence of human brain development:

    The part of the teen brain not yet fully developed is the frontal lobe, which is the part of the brain that manages impulse control, judgment, insight, and emotional control. So when teens engage in risky and/or foolish behavior, it’s not just that they don’t have life experience to know better, but that their brains have difficulty assessing consequences. Basically, teens have less myelin (the fatty coating that surrounds nerve cells). Nerve cells need myelin to send signals throughout the brain. So in teen brains, the synapses that are supposed to connect the frontal lobe to the rest of the brain are not working as well as they should. As a result, teens can’t access those skills based in the frontal lobe easily

    According to brain experts from Children’s Hospital Boston, teen brains are only around 80 percent developed. New research shows that the human brain may not reach its full development until a person’s twenties or possibly even the thirties [Source: Graham].

    With most states allowing, even fostering adoptions by homosexual couples, does it not follow that gay couples, as parents, give legal consent for their children to marry (remember, as young TWELVE for a female in “enlightened” Massachusetts) other children of the same sex? Remember, their “impulse control, judgment, insight and EMOTIONAL CONTROL” is no where near any semblance of development. Further, what a boon for homosexual pedophiles who can convince homosexual parents of their “love” for their child.

    Think none of this can happen under the guise of the cheerful rainbow? If you think not, then you live in a world of rainbows, unicorns, elves and yes, fairies (no, I DO NOT apologize to the LGB etc. folks) who break wind and magic dust settles upon the land.

    Respectfully submitted.

    Also, my quote of the day, along this vein:

    “The difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian state is a matter of time.” Ayn Rand

    One could substitute “welfare” state for “politically correct” state and come to the same conclusion.


Leave a Reply