NEWS

WIRES

OTHER

Family Values Vilified as Intolerant

By Daniel Gilbert

There is not a politician today who would think of standing up and saying that he or she was against family values. To say this would be like saying you are against, mom, apple pie, and the American flag. However, ironically, those of us who run on a platform of family values are vilified as being intolerant, narrow-minded and in some cases, hypocritical. Why?

Well first, we need to define what family values are and why this term has a variety of meanings for different people. The family is the cornerstone of any civilization, and to destroy or debase the family is to erode the foundation that any civilized groups of people encompass as their existence. This existence begins with the valuing of human life and the sanctity and pricelessness of that life. It is not a stretch to move from debasing or devaluing life in the womb, to justifying the abuse of children, women, and even dogs as in the recent case of Michael Vick and the dog fighting scandal.

When a certain class of people is seen only as the property of others, to be exploited for personal and financial gain, eliminated at will, then the dignity of all people suffer. The issue of abortion is as emotional and polarizing as slavery was two hundred years ago. There was a clear understanding by many that to own a person, have control over that person, even determining outside the law whether they could live or die, was a moral inconsistency that had to be addressed and rectified.

Today we are seeing that same battle played out on a different field, but for basically the same moral struggle, the sanctity and value of all life, which is the foundation of all families. There are pharmacists around the country, who are fighting over the right of an individual to make a moral choice that values a newly conceived child, by refusing to prescribe the morning after pill. The pro-abortion defenders are suggesting that not to prescribe the morning after pill is a violation of the rights of the person who the Supreme Court has determined, has the right to end that life. They want these pharmacists to either be forced to sell contraceptives or lose their licenses. How is this different than the abolitionists who worked to free the slaves, but were condemned and locked up for interjecting their moral values on the legal choices of others?

That same battle is being waged across the country, state by state, as it relates to same sex marriage. But the irony to this debate is that it rings hollow, and drips with hypocrisy from the lips of those who claim there should be a wall of separation between the church and the state. The state of marriage was a sanctified institution first, in the Jewish Torah, and then in the Christian Bible, long before the United States was even a twinkle in its forefather's eyes. This institution is Biblical, it is based on God's perfect will for one man and one woman with the hope of children, and there is no place in the text of the origin of this institution, that suggests that it could work for two people of the same sex. But to argue against same sex marriage, and to support and value the God-ordained family is considered by many to be intolerant and insensitive.

However it is interesting that the state puts many restrictions and conditions on licenses that they issue to specific classes of people, "discriminating", against those who don't "qualify" for that privilege. You can't drive unless you are a certain age and meet all the conditions and requirements. You can't practice law or medicine, or build commercial buildings or operate certain equipment or even run a business without the government setting conditions that you must comply with.

How hard is it to understand that the institution of marriage, defined as a Judeo/Christian ceremony, should not be co-opted by the state to be redefined and reissued as something that is nothing at all like the original intention of the act? Many states allow for same sex unions to get around the issue of hospital visits by next of kin, insurance issues, and any other reasons given for allowing same sex marriage. But it isn't enough for those who have determined they want to remake an institution in their image regardless of the fact that is a religious ceremony and a covenant that God has ordained specifically for one man and one woman. This is just another goal for secularists to extract the true meaning and importance from this Holy institution.

While conservatives are vilified for actually supporting and promoting "family values", those who throw stones are reluctant to say they oppose family values because it is understood that the family is the strength of any society and without it, any civilization would be one generation from extinction. Simply put, family values means, you value the family and all that is required to keep that family intact and strong so that a free and civil society will continue to exist.

Presidential Candidate Daniel Gilbert's Remarks, www.wethepeopleforpresident.com