Tag Archives: traditional marriage

Sep 7 2017

The Intellectualism of Stupidity (Requiem)

As violence fills our streets, the shouts of angry decadents spewing the reasoning for their debased acts are simply the outer rotting layers to the cancer that lies beneath. Generations of youths without a family structure to instill a code of decency, law, and order. Angrily they are tearing down the structure they have been taught to hate, while no one is doing anything to protect the foundation that holds it up. More quickly now, we are pulled towards the ghosts of civilizations past to either learn from them or join them.

So we gather here for our requiem. To recollect, review the arguments proposed from all sides of the political spectrum against the defense of the Marriage Construct. All of our political parties, our media, our entertainers, and sadly even some of our religious leaders have abandoned fact, history, and reason for the heady, temporal approval of the popular swell of societal fads. Popularity takes precedence in a win now culture.

The writing on the wall would suggest this writer has embarked upon a lost cause. The gathering of forces against the very foundation of the nation, the defection of expected allies, and the mounting apathy and fatigue with defending the structure of life should be a signal to wave the white flag of surrender. Yet, it is a very different signal.

A signal of the mass disdain and ignorance of the very destruction this societal stupor is inflicting upon their own existence, which begs a voice to still call out a warning and fasten a hand to the lanyard of the bell that tolls the doom of a nation. These patterns in history are here for our warning. We cannot ignore what has happened to every civilization before us.

We are not exempt. We are not unique. We are human.

But here are the arguments we give. We breathlessly await our opportunity to join the ruins of humanity. Our intellectual recipe for societal suicide.

We have no right to tell people what they can do in their bedrooms. I would agree if Marriage was simply about sexual pleasure, but sex is only one facet of marriage. The Marriage Construct is the structure that every civilized society has used to safely promote the propagation and culturing of life, the building block of civilization. It is the security of the nation.

It is cruel and intolerant to say that marriage is for heterosexuals alone. That very well may be true but facts and history are usually cold and cruel. They are dead, lifeless, and enjoy the luxury of being completely devoid of emotion. The Heterosexual Marriage Tradition, The Marriage Construct, was created by heterosexuals for heterosexuals who are engaged in the activity of creating life. It belongs to the creators who designed it as the structure for the propagation and cultivation of life.

Everyone has the Right to Marriage. Wrong! Marriage is not a right. It is a Rite. It is a Religious Rite for some and a Rite of Passage for most heterosexuals. We have a right to Rites, but no one has the right to get married.

Our Constitution doesn’t protect Traditional Marriage. The document in its whole is a defense of the Marriage Construct. Not only does it explicitly protect Religious Rites and the peaceful and non-violent societal rites of the many ethnicities in our Nation, but all of our rights and liberties our predicated upon life. It is the ideal that these liberties are endowed, stamped in our being in the womb by God.

Every civilization has used its Marriage Construct to cultivate the ideals of their society into the next generations. As we decimate our Marriage Construct, so our ideals of liberty are being decimated before us. The ideals the document protects must be cultivated in the life it heralds.

We cannot push our religious beliefs on others. No, we can’t. But marriage is not a religious belief. For many throughout time’s civilizations there has been a religious aspect to the Heterosexual Marriage Tradition that gave the Rite a sense of sanctity and emphasized fidelity, but not everyone that marries and has children is religious. The Marriage Construct is the structure that every civilized society has used to safely promote the propagation and culturing of life, the building block of civilization. It is the security of the nation.

It is not going to hurt anyone to let loving couples marry. In a romance novel culture this a shock but love is not the primary purpose of marriage. In many civilizations in history, love was a by-product of marriage agreement, if you were lucky. While we should be thankful for love and its place in our societal traditions for marriage, let’s not lose sight of the fact that every healthy and growing civilization throughout history has stood upon a Marriage Construct that was focused upon the healthy propagation and cultivation of life.

We will lose elections if we defend the Marriage Construct. The foundation of our civilization should not be validated or denigrated by the ever changing winds of political expediency, polling and punditry which is historically proven wrong by the end of a political cycle. Furthermore, it is laughable that so many of our political leaders from all political parties are so blinded by the intellectual stupor of our day that they cannot see the reams of studies that conclude that the strength of a society is directly related to the strength of the heterosexual family. Whether it is this drunken stupor or by willful ignorance that we stubbornly refuse to see blaze of the trail left for us by ruins of history, the studies of learned men, and the common sense of nature, we stumble blindly on oblivious to our crumbling Empire,a self-inflicted demise.

We have to accept people just as they are. No, we don’t. This is the foundation of our nation. The means by which we cultivate life, the future of our nation. Any builder can attest without exception that compromise and acceptance of such in the foundation of a structure is a recipe for disaster.

It is Settled Law. The most ruinous and apathetically small-minded argument of all. This a Republic. There is no such thing as settled law. All laws are subject to review and repeal by the citizens of the Republic. If settled law was valid, then those who have sought and succeeded in the destruction of the Marriage Construct would have had no avenue to bring us to the destination and traverse where we now stand in debate.

Without life there is no living and without living there is no life. It is for us to decide the fate of our nation. The Tree of Liberty is dying. The cause is a simple diagnosis. Its roots of Life, its Endowment are dying.

Our political leaders are weak and afford us no hope of a cure. While they add packages to the limbs, burdening the branches to the breaking point, and prune the withering leaves, they ignore the root of the problem, our life is waning. The Marriage Construct, The Heterosexual Marriage Tradition is the protector, cultivator of that life. Without Life there is no Living, Without Living there is no Life.

Jun 11 2017

The Intellectualism of Stupidity Pt 1

By Andy Torbett

As the “Delicates” scatter towards their safe place to furtively suck on a pacifier while feverishly kneading handfuls of play dough, let me explain that the title of this column refers to the denotative meaning of stupidity and not the connotative. Stupidity is derived from the root word stupor. Think of it as an aura, a fog, similar to how this construction guy feels after a hot day, baking on a roof while shingling. In simple terms, after getting fried all day at work, one prefers to sit on the couch staring at the television or computer in a state of stupidity.

But where the intellectualism? The state of our nation is this, that we have pontificated, debated, and at all points elevated our speech to such a place that the common place, common sense, and the common man is disdained, lampooned, and mocked as irrelevant, not worthy of the modern man. The Apostle Paul described it as, “Ever learning and never coming to the knowledge of truth”. Solomon observed in The Ecclesiastes and Proverbs that after all his learning, acquisition of treasure, and accomplishments that it was all “vanity” and the only final necessity was to “get wisdom”.

Could it be that in all our quests for high-minded words and soliloquy that befuddle the simple man, we dull ourselves to the basic innate powers of perception, which comes so naturally to the simple man? Can we possibly have become so churlish and bigoted in our lofty pursuits of intellectualism that what we call reasoning is nothing more then self-indulgent prattle rife with circular reasoning which has withered what was once the nation’s greatest resource, common sense, into a fallow wasteland? Like the Greek philosophers of old, Americans are walking about with a lantern searching for a honest man, a discerning man, a common man and, like the civilizations of old, we follow blindly in their wake wanting and wasting to “get wisdom” as we decline.

As the debate on our foundational structure of marriage has raged on, to which I am party, I have noticed some curious threads woven through the debate that I find fascinating. One would think as ideological barbs are cast back and forth that the only heterosexuals who have developed a marriage construct are Christians. Again, one would think that through the haze of charges of intolerance hurled so flippantly about that only Christians have built a civilization upon the foundation of their marriage construct. Finally, in our age of enlightenment, one would think that it is a small thing to dismantle and redefine the marriage construct upon which your nation is built, that moving, twisting, and reshaping this foundation upon which we for generations so labored to build will have no negative impact upon the civilization, and the mountains of evidence to the contrary which are blazed throughout history do not apply to us.

A common man with common sense could look at this list of modern arguments and say no to all of them, but since we are now intellectuals with our noses too far inclined to see anything which resembles common, it’s necessary to breaks things back down to the basics. What is the most basic building block of a civilization? Life! Yes, babies are the most basic building block of a civilization. You can’t have one without them.

The very basic essence of a civilization is the secure propagation of life. Our Constitution describes it as “to insure the domestic tranquility”. It has become a matter of debate for our civilization as to whether it is Constitutional to defend the traditional structure of marriage. I would counter that the whole of the Constitution was designed to defend that structure. You cannot ensure the domestic tranquility unless you have a domestic to insure.

  • The first in all multi-part series on the marriage structure as a national security issue.
May 26 2017

Life Adrift

 

Known as the “Weeping Prophet”, Jeremiah witnessed the destruction of Jerusalem and the magnificent Temple of Solomon. Despite his repeated warnings to the people of Judah to change their ways and return to their foundation, which had built and strengthened their Nation, the people continued in their downward spiral of moral decay. After the death of King Josiah, Jeremiah watched the quick plunge back into paganism of his fellow citizens and foresaw their doom and, despite his many emotional warnings, the nation of Judah stubbornly quickened toward the fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecies at the sword of a predatory empire.

Jeremiah’s writings in the Bible hold special significance to the Christian of today. He recounts in Jeremiah 1:4-5 an assurance of his call from God, “Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations.” This scripture encapsulates to a great degree the view of life that Christians embrace.

It is to the Christian that life is formed by the very hand of God. Our Founders used the word endowed. Life is written into the fabric of our foundational documents, of this there can be no denial.

But the protection of life is not necessarily exclusive to a Christian pursuit or endeavor. Most of the greatest civilizations established traditions to promote life among their civilization to ensure their safe and prosperous propagation. Traditions of birth and marriage were established usually in the context of that civilization’s religion. These formed the foundation on which that civilization was built.

This discussion is basic grade school social studies to many but it is important to reaffirm, in light of our nation’s perilous course, the basics of world history. What destroys a nation? What makes it live?

If we as a people do not protect and cherish life, how can we live? As each civilization grows in power, its fear for survival lessens giving way to a desire for personal gain, pleasure, and indulgence. Life holds inevitable repercussions for personal choices, which the selfish work to circumvent. Wants outweigh what is worthy as the people so stalwart to build now wallow in decadence.

Civilization to civilization, the same weakness persists. We strive to build an empire but have not the moral fortitude to maintain it. The path for national decay is well worn for all have followed it.

The decline that Jeremiah wept against for his nation was not new then and happening before our eyes now. A nation grows strong on its zeal for life and desire to survive against all odds. It succeeds and becomes a power to the world and the envy of all nations. Soon, secure in its power, the people began to flock to pleasure and decadence. The constraints of life, the responsibilities thereof, are tossed aside as obstructions in the path towards a new and better nation. We sacrifice our children like nations of old and destroy the structure which raised them and built our society.

We wonder now at our depravity like there was no herald to warn of us of this demise, forgetting those we mocked and shouted down. The sanctity of life and the tradition of marriage is more than just a Christian tradition. It is the very essence and necessity of a nation’s security and survival.

Still, we will ignore the fate in the ruins of time and mindlessly walk towards our doom. It stands to reason, if we could reason, that the value of life could build a civilization and the devaluing of life destroys a civilization. But some will wonder in the end how we got here?

It’s not that complicated. It’s as simple as common sense. When you cut free of the mooring, you simply keep drifting…

  • Andy Torbett
Apr 8 2015

The Anti-Celebration: It’s All Inclusive

 

I recently read a post by another activist here in Maine that brought out a point to this anti-Christian gay-rights fervor that is sweeping our nation, which was something I had never really given much thought to. Genie Jennings asked, “Why would anyone want to force anyone else to attend or approve of their day of celebration if they don’t approve or want to attend?” The quotation marks are there to provide some sense of syntax but those words are more of a paraphrase then a direct quote. I was surprised, first, because this is an issue she doesn’t generally get involved with or speak about, and secondly, the direct simple question provided one of those “stop and think about that” moments.

I have worked with Genie on several different issues and she is always very thoughtful. She consistently provides unique perspective, so the insight was not the surprise. I just had one of those very selfish “whydidn’tIthinkofthat” intraflections…I think I made that word up.

When I was in college, there were certain events that required all students and staff from the school to be in attendance. All of us knew this. This was a very strict school and we had signed an advisement when we enrolled that clearly stated that there would be required attendance at certain events. Still, it didn’t prevent many of us from making wry and cynical remarks about having to engage in “mandatory fun”.

The reason for this rule, as it was explained to me, was to promote a feeling of unity and togetherness within the campus community. What it really did, in my observations, was create two groups of people at the “mandatory fun” banquet: those who wanted to be there and those who couldn’t wait to get out of there. Quite frankly, it was a relief to those who were enjoying the banquet when the others had fulfilled their “mandatory fun” quotas and bailed out of there, taking their killjoy attitudes with them.

So, again, why would you want anyone associated with your party, your celebration, your wedding that doesn’t want to be there? Why would you want flowers or a cake provided or delivered by a business under duress, with an “I don’t believe in what your doing, it violates my faith, but if I don’t do this the government is going to take away my business, take all my life savings, destroy everything I have, and force me to take reeducation classes” look on their face with the fury of the persecuted and aggrieved simmering just below the surface. Is this truly a moment of celebration or a moment to inflict punishment on those who will not willingly affirm your expression, so then they must be forced?

The “new freedom” is beginning its conquest of the American tradition and it’s starting with the basic foundation of that tradition: marriage. The “new freedom”, the freedom to sex, demands that all other freedoms affirm its sovereignty with their allegiance. If the Freedom of Speech speaks against it: Speech is silenced. If the Freedom of Religion preaches against it: Faith is punished. If the Freedom of the Press reports against it: Reports are crushed. If Commerce disagrees with it: Commerce is blocked.

Once again I ask do we value sex above all other freedoms? Is it more important to affirm lifestyle choices than maintain our personal freedoms? And how did we get here?