Thursday, October 23, 2014

CMDA offers marriage principles

Excerpted from "Leading Christian medical association unanimously affirms traditional marriage," Life Site News, October 13, 2014, - The Christian Medical & Dental Associations (CMDA) unanimously adopted its Same-Sex "Marriage" Public Policy Statement September 18, criticizing the “radical revisionist view” which “ignores millennia of legal and cultural affirmation” of marriage, and endeavors to replace it with a subjective concept of marriage based on emotional relationship.

The CMDA said this skewed belief is divorced from the natural and objective elements of marriage - physical union and procreation.

“Marriage is a consensual, exclusive and lifelong commitment between one man and one woman, expressed in a physical union uniquely designed to produce and nurture children,” the CMDA statement said.

“The universal recognition of conjugal marriage by virtually every civilization throughout history, arrived at from both secular and theistic perspectives, testifies to the natural evidence for marriage, its objective structure and its significant contribution to human flourishing and societal stability.”

The CMDA statement was released just a few weeks prior to the U.S. Supreme Court’s October 6 dismissal of five U.S. states’ petitions to review lower court decisions overturning their marriage protection amendments.

The CMDA said that recognition of marriage as being between one man and one woman does not necessarily impede acceptance of other consensual relationships.

“The core debate hinges not on a moral evaluation of various types of relationships, but rather on the objective qualities that make marriage, marriage,” the CMDA statement said.

The benefits to children raised by both a mother and a father, the greater economic stability of intact families and the high cost to government and society when marriage breaks down were all listed by the CMDA to illustrate the government’s stake in preserving marriage.

The CMDA also critiqued court decisions that have asserted that support for marriage is not rational and instead based on hostility toward homosexuals, saying that these judgments have paved the way for religious persecution toward proponents of traditional marriage.

“Once the government adopts an official position that opposition to ‘same-sex marriage’ is based solely on animus and constitutes discrimination, the state can assert a compelling interest to advance this social policy--even if doing so means trampling the rights of religious conscientious objectors,” the CMDA statement said. “This assertion of government power to enforce the ideology of the state threatens not only the individual exercise of conscience but also the entire constitutional balance of the church-state relationship.”

“Such an aggressive, state-sponsored squelching of the free exercise of religion, as expressed in faith-based dissent, creates a powerful deterrent to free speech and the exercise of conscience,” the CMDA said. “Apart from the intervention of courts and/or a reversal of societal values, faithful supporters of conjugal marriage stand to face a virtual ideological Inquisition of increasing intensity.”

The CMDA statement concluded with a list of policy recommendations that would protect the rights of faith and conscience in law and policy, and in particular safeguard against legal assault of physicians who practice in accord with their conscience.


Jonathan ImbodyCMA VP for Government Relations Jonathan Imbody: “Why even get involved in such a controversial area as same-sex marriage? How does this apply to healthcare professionals?

“A number of medical organizations have officially endorsed same-sex relationships, with sanctions and the censure of dissenting members sure to follow. The administration, through the Dept. of Health and Human Services and other federal agencies, has begun to require assent to its same-sex marriage ideology as a condition for receiving federal grants. As same-sex issues politics takes root in our legal system and professional organizations, you will likely find yourself at risk as a healthcare professional or student if you:

  • deviate from governmental or professional organizational same-sex policies when counseling or treating patients regarding their sexuality;
  • decline to provide a requested recommendation for a same-sex couple seeking to adopt a child;
  • affirm, during a medical school or placement interview, the moral principle of reserving sex for male-female marriage;
  • do not fulfill requests by same-sex couples for reproductive services such as in-vitro fertilization (physicians already have been sued successfully for this on grounds of discrimination).

“The church in Germany in the 1930s failed to heed the warning signs, succumbed to state coercion and experienced the absolute disintegration of their religious freedom. The tragic loss resulted in part because na├»ve people of faith opted for compromise with the rising Nazi regime and failed to confront ruthless oppression as Hitler marched toward absolute power.

America is not fascist Germany, but the principle remains the same: Government tends to increase its own power at the expense of individual freedoms--unless We the People take action. “Now is the time to determine to remain faithful, to defend truth and religious freedom--and also to prepare to take a stand in the face of pressure and even persecution.”

“Then Mordecai told them to reply to Esther, ‘Do not imagine that you in the king’s palace can escape any more than all the Jews’” (Esther 4:13, NASB).

“But Daniel made up his mind that he would not defile himself with the king’s choice food or with the wine which he drank...” (Daniel 1:8, NASB).

“Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great...” (Matthew 5:11-12, NASB).

Use our easy, pre-written form at our Freedom2Care legislative action website to urge your legislators to support the Marriage and Religious Freedom Act--S.1808, which prohibits discrimination because of moral beliefs regarding marriage and sex.

  1. Read the CMDA statements on what marriage is and on same-sex "marriage." The two new, board-approved public policy statements on marriage state support for public policy measures that:
    • Recognize marriage as exclusively between one man and one woman.
    • Accord protections, incentives and privileges that reflect a recognition of the economic, social and child-related benefits to the state of conjugal marriage.
    • Do not conflate conjugal marriage with same-sex relationships.
    • Comport with the original intent of Amendment XIV of the U.S. Constitution.
    • Maintain equal protection of applicable laws for those who engage in homosexual activity without according special status or privileges based on that activity.
  2. A Thoughtful Approach to God's Design for Marriage, by Sean McDowell & John Stonestreet.
  3. What is Marriage? By Sherif Girgis, Ryan T. Anderson and Robert P. George.

1 comment:

  1. I believe homosexuality is a sin. As is wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony. Yet it seems to me the sin of homosexuality is held in higher contempt and homosexuals face greater hostility than others who commit "deadly" sins. Why is that? Should we be in the business of segregating others and denying their freedoms? Since you raised the specter of the Nazis, wasn't segregation and relegation to second class status certain minorities in their country the precursor of something truly evil?

    If a man or women are known to be unable to produce children, would you also extinguish their right to marry?

    Respectfully, it's a step or two beyond the pale to compare other Christians- whose interpretation of the bible happens to differ from yours- to Christians in '30's Germany. I think with less bombast and a deeper knowledge of history one could develop a more prescient commentary within the domain of Christian doctrine

    John Kirkland, DPT
    Member CMDA