According to Minnesota Statute:
517.01 Marriage a civil contract.
Marriage, so far as its validity in law is concerned, is a
civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent
of the parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.
Lawful marriage may be contracted only between persons of the
opposite sex and only when a license has been obtained as
provided by law and when the marriage is contracted in the
presence of two witnesses and solemnized by one authorized, or
whom one or both of the parties in good faith believe to be
authorized, so to do. Marriages subsequent to April 26, 1941,
not so contracted shall be null and void.
HIST: (8562) RL s 3552; 1941 c 459; 1977 c 441 s 1; 1978 c 772
s 1; 1997 c 203 art 10 s 1
The Bible shows that God created marriage to be between a man and woman. “…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’…” (Matthew 19:4,5).
God defines marriage. Thankfully, for now, the State of Minnesota recognizes only the divine definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. The State has an interest in recognizing marriage as a civil contract. But Christians know that marriage is also a contract between the two people and God. Civil government might eventually decide that marriage can be between parties of the same sex, or that it can have more than two parties, but God’s arrangement does not change. Civil law has decided that marriage may be terminated on any grounds and allows the individual to marry as many times as he/she likes. But God’s law does not provide such. According to God’s law, a party may not divorce, “except for [sexual] immorality” [i.e. unless the spouse was unfaithful], and remarry as that creates an adulterous condition in the new marriage (Matthew 19:9; 5:32). God has an interest in maintaining this order for the sake of righteousness.
What the majority of people want will not matter. Traditional marriage is supported by the majority of Americans. The only way the homosexual agenda can be advanced is through the courts where activist judges may try to force legislators to change the law. The Canada Free Press has a good article on this issue as it affects their country. To see how the debate is shaping up there, follow this link: The Tyranny of Same-Sex Marriage. The article tells how MP Rob Moore is trying to pass a resolution in support of the traditional definition of marriage. The liberal politicians are using parliamentary maneuvers, since they are the minority party, to block his efforts. Because a large majority of Canadians and Americans are traditional on this issue, the articles states, “…a democratic victory is out of reach and accepting the will of the public is out of the question. The only option left is to use dictatorial methods like harassment, intimidation, open defiance of the law, and judicial fiats.” Only recently, we have seen these same tactics at work in the United States. A California mayor, contrary to the law, issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples only to have the “marriages” nullified by a court that declared them illegal. And a Massachussets court has ordered the legislature to rewrite the law on marriage to include same-sex couples. The liberal agenda on same-sex marriage can advance no other way. Because of the current opinion in Minnesota, and elsewhere around the country, for same-sex marriage to become a reality will possible only through illegal means and the court’s “judicial fiats”. Let’s pray that the will of God prevails on this matter.
A matter of faith. The same article that is linked to above also makes the point that this is fast becoming an issue of faith. In some places in Canada, same-sex wedding ceremonies are already legal and commissioners are forced to perform these or be terminated. The article states, “It is not hard to envision a future where people are excluded on the basis of religion from becoming elected officials, teachers, police, and civil servants if this trend is allowed to continue.” Can you imagine the day?
Marriage is not ‘bondage’