YOU ARE NOW ON

THE CUTTING EDGE

Copyright © 2006 Cutting Edge Ministries. All rights reserved. See full copyright notice below.

At a time when President Bush's voter approval rating is heading below 30% and fellow Republicans are grumbling about losing control of Congress in the upcoming November elections, Bush's propaganda machine has swung into action to reverse that trend and energize his vital Conservative/Christian base. President Bush knows that he can pull the wool over the eyes of Conservatives and/or Born Again Christians one more time on the issue of "opposition" to Gay Marriages.

How does Bush commit himself to the defeat of the "Gay Marriage Ban" without alienating his other key constituency: Gays and Lesbians? (Read NEWS1652, entitled, "Concerned Women of America Raise The Alarm: President Bush's Gay Policies Are Identical To Clinton's")

The answer is clever semantics; read this expose' and weep.

NEWS BRIEF: :"Bush Rallies Gay Marriage Opponents", Excite News, June 5, 2005

"WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush rallied support Monday for a ban on gay marriage as the Senate opened a volatile, election-year debate on a constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex weddings. 'Our policies should aim to strengthen families, not undermine them. And changing the definition of marriage would undermine the family structure', said Bush, who raised the issue's profile with an event at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building."

At this point, President Bush is hitting all the right emotional and spiritual "hot buttons", and he knows it. He knows that his Conservative/Christian voter will be nodding his head and stomping his feet in absolute joy at the thought that the "most powerful man in the world" would actually be on his side on an issue at which Conservatives have been losing for three decades -- losing to the Liberal Court system in America on the issue of Gay Rights.

Knowing this, Bush struck the next "hot button".

"Bush criticized judges who have overturned state laws similar in intent to the proposed legislation. 'Marriage is the most fundamental institution of civilization, and it should not be redefined by activist judges', he said. Traditional marriage, Bush said, is the cornerstone of a healthy society and the issue should be put 'back where it belongs: in the hands of the American people'." (Ibid.)

President Bush knows that he has chosen an issue which will probably never come to fruition, because the present Republican Congress is in no mood to pass it, and if Democrats make inroads in the November election -- or if they win control outright -- the chances of passage are next to nill. But, this reality makes the issue even more attractive to a lame-duck President seeking to reverse his staggering fall in voter approval polls. The President can "pontificate" to his heart's desire, knowing that he will never be called to account. After all, it is not his fault that Congress will not go along with him, right?

"Many Republicans support the measure because they say traditional marriage strengthens society; others don't but concede the reality of election-year politics. 'Marriage between one man and one woman does a better job protecting children better than any other institution humankind has devised', said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. 'As such, marriage as an institution should be protected, not redefined'." (Ibid.)

"CIVIL UNIONS" VS "TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE"

All this rhetoric sounds pretty good, does it not? Indeed, it does, but the issue is not this rhetoric which is flowing, but the rhetoric which is not be spoken. When in US Army Intelligence, we analysts were trained to not only see what evidence intelligence had given us, but to stand back, to ascertain what is not being said, what is not readily apparent. The two major words which are not being spoken in this outpouring of words are: CIVIL UNIONS.

Several years ago, gay and lesbian activists were beginning to urge their followers to drop the word, "marriage". This word, they reasoned, was too volatile, too emotional, and evoked too strong a religious backlash. Therefore, these activists created a new term for gay and lesbian marital relationships -- Civil Unions. The strategy has worked brilliantly, allowing deceptive politicians to act like they are supporting traditional Biblical marriage, and opposing "gay marriage", while at the same time quietly supporting gay marriage by another name -- Civil Unions.

In this Excite news story, above, "civil unions" is a term not used. However, it casts a shadow both wide and deep over the entire political arena. As we shall show, below, President Bush is in the forefront of this deliberate deception.

Actually, this story with President Bush's deceptions began a while time ago, during the 2004 Presidential campaign. Let us turn our attention there.

Do you remember President Bush's bombshell revelation just five days before the November, 2004, Presidential Election? Recalling his words:

NEWS BRIEF: "Bush breaks with GOP on same-sex unions", United Press International (UPI), 10/26/2004

WASHINGTON, Oct. 26 (UPI) -- President Bush broke with the Republican Party platform in supporting states' rights to permit same-sex civil unions. 'I don't think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that's what a state chooses to do so. ... I view the definition of marriage different from legal arrangements that enable people to have rights. And I strongly believe that marriage ought to be defined as between a union between a man and a woman.

"Now, having said that, states ought to be able to have the right to pass laws that enable people to be able to have rights like others," Bush told ABC's Charlie Gibson in an interview broadcast Tuesday on "Good Morning America."

As if he could not believe his ears, Gibson then asked the President the next logical question:

So the Republican platform on that point, as far as you're concerned, is wrong?" Gibson asked the president, to which Bush replied: "Right."

In this interview, President Bush began by saying he supported "Civil Unions", which is a gay-coined term meaning "Gay Marriage". But, then, the President weighed in his religious views regarding the claims of Jesus Christ as to Who He Is.

NEWS BRIEF: "Bush On Religion And God: President Believes Muslims and Christians Pray To The Same God", ABC News, October 26, 2004

"Oct. 26, 2004 -- While the president often refers to God during public addresses to his supporters, Bush's religious convictions don't always seem to reflect those of the conservative Christians who make up his political base. In an exclusive interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson, Bush said he believes that both Christians and Muslims worship the same God. 'I think we do. We have different routes of getting to the Almighty', Bush said. 'But I want you to understand, I want your listeners to understand, I don't get to get decide who goes to heaven. The Almighty God decides who goes to heaven and I am on my personal walk', he said."

Bush's last sentence is designed to trigger the false belief in undiscerning Christians that one cannot "judge" whether a person is right with God, thus hiding his damning earlier statement. This admonition to "Judge not that ye be not judged" (Matt 7:1) has been so twisted that Christians really believe they cannot know from a person's fruits as to whether that person is genuinely saved; however, the chapter headline on Matthew 7 in my KJV Bible says, "Christ, ending His sermon on the mount, reproves rash judgment". This is precisely correct! Jesus was warning against reaching a spiritual conclusion based upon little or no real evidence.

Proof this Biblical fact is Jesus' other admonition, "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment" (John 7:24) We are to judge righteously, based upon solid fact. Thus, Matthew 7:1 and John 7:24 go hand-in-hand with Matthew 7:16-20, where Jesus emphatically declares, "Ye SHALL know them by their fruits". (Emphasis added)

However, these are the President's own lying words: Muslims and Christians pray to the same God!

JAMES DOBSON PLAYING THE SAME WORD GAME

In 2004, we learned Dr. Dobson of Focus on the Family had been secretly promoting a Federal Marriage Amendment which will correctly define marriage on the one hand while quietly approving wording that will allow gay "Civil Unions" on the other hand. Let us review the facts, beginning with the two pertinent Fox News articles on the metamorphosis of the Federal Marriage Amendment.

NEWS BRIEF: "Federal Marriage Amendment Proponents Offer Compromise", Fox News, March 22, 2004.

"WASHINGTON — Congressional supporters of a constitutional ban on gay marriage unveiled a change in their proposal Monday that they said would leave state legislatures with the unambiguous right to recognize civil unions."

Both the title of this article and this first sentence tells us the very important fact that the change in wording of the "ban on gay marriage" bill came from the proponents -- the supporters -- of the bill, not from nasty pro-gay activists! This realization is very important to keep clear in your mind. We Conservatives and Christians have been "done in" by our leaders, both politically and spiritually, as we shall prove in this article.

On the one hand, this bill will assert that the Federal Government recognizes that "marriage" can only be defined as a union of one man and one woman! That definition sounds just fine to a Christian and will allow President Bush and all his Evangelical leaders to trumpet to the world that they have acted to "protect" the Biblical institution of Marriage from gay and lesbian assault.

However, two major problems exist that will quietly hand the victory to the gays on this issue. First, marriage is always a state institution. When you got your marriage certificate, didn't you go down to a local official, probably an office in your town office complex? You most assuredly did not go to a Federal Government employee! Since states have the authority to issue marriage certificates and decide upon what basis the marriage can be conducted, the really hidden trap in this bill takes on special meaning. This bill will also leave the issue up to the states as to whether they will allow "civil unions" to be legal.

Thus, this Federal Marriage Amendment is as worthless as Monopoly Money when it comes to really protecting the institution of marriage.

Let us now return for more information to this feature article. Listen to a leading "advocate" of this marriage ban:

"This new language makes the intent of the legislation even clearer', said Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., the amendment's leading advocate in the Senate. 'To protect marriage in this country as the union between a man and a woman, and to reinforce the authority of state legislatures to determine benefits issues related to civil unions or domestic partnerships." [Ibid.]

What rank hypocrisy! This Federal Marriage Amendment was trumpeted as a defense of Biblical marriage; obviously, the unmistakable implication is that the bill is needed to prevent the gay - lesbian alliance from getting gay marriage legalized. The Bible not only recognized just heterosexual marriage, it condemned homosexuality in the strongest possible terms. Therefore, a Christian cannot possibly conceive that a bill to "protect" and "reaffirm" Biblical marriage would also legalize gay marriage by that other name, "Civil Union"!

Now, let us go back to this feature article to see that the White House is fully supportive of this change.

"Allard and Colorado GOP Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, the leading supporter of the amendment in the House, outlined their change at a news conference. The previous proposal said that neither the U.S. nor any state constitution or any state or federal law 'shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman'. The revised proposal deletes the reference to state and federal laws. In response, White House spokesman Trent Duffy said that the revision 'actually brings it closer to the president's principles'." [Ibid.]

As Musgrave and Allard admit, this law speaks out of both sides of its Federal mouth; on the one hand, it defines marriage and then on the other allows "civil unions", a term which is meant to change into gay marriage after some time has elapsed.

Thank you, Mr. Duffy, for setting the record straight. President Bush is fully in sync with this terrible proposal! Another Fox News article, March 24, states the same fact somewhat differently. Listen to this explanation as to how Bush is supportive of this word changing in the Federal Marriage Amendment.

NEWS BRIEF: "Sponsors Soften Federal Marriage Amendment", Fox News, March 24, 2004.

"WASHINGTON — If supporters of a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage have their way, marriage will still be a legally recognized union between a man and a woman. But it won't mean gay couples will be left completely out of luck. Newly crafted language — apparently approved by President Bush himself — has removed impediments to civil unions and domestic partnerships that might be approved by state legislatures."

People who read Cutting Edge Daily News Updates regularly will not be taken by surprise to learn that President Bush supports "Civil Unions". On December 26, 2003, we carried the following story from a Christian website, Crosswalk. Listen to how this article revealed Bush's duplicity on the issue of prohibiting gay marriage.

NEWS BRIEF: "Bush Comments on Marriage Alarm Supporters and Detractors", by Susan Jones, Morning Editor, Crosswalk, December 19, 2003

"CNSNews.com) - President Bush's most recent comments on same-sex marriage are prompting concern from both the left and the right. In an interview with ABC News Tuesday, President Bush - asked about his position on a constitutional amendment to defend the traditional definition of marriage - replied this way: 'If necessary, I will support a constitutional amendment which would honor marriage between a man and a woman, codify that', Bush told ABC's Diane Sawyer. 'The position of this administration is that whatever legal arrangements people want to make, they're allowed to make, so long as it's embraced by the state or at the state level'."

This appeal to state's rights in this issue is hidden code meaning that Bush supports the concept that individual states are free to make "whatever legal arrangements people want to make", and that includes "civil unions" for gay couples. Lest you think I may be jumping the gun a little bit in this area, let us continue with this article.

"Bush told Sawyer, 'I do believe in the sanctity of marriage ... but I don't see that as conflict with being a tolerant person or an understanding person' ... FRC (Family Research Council) President Tony Perkins said he's 'very concerned' about Bush's comment that seems to suggest marriage can be redefined at the state level. 'This sounds as though the administration would support civil unions, which are counterfeits of the institution of marriage', Perkins said in a press release." [Ibid.]

This statement from the Family Research Council (FRC) is exactly correct. The Bush Administration supports "Civil Unions", the gay - lesbian "marriage by another name"! Before we leave this subject, let us hear from the rabidly gay advocacy group, "365gay", as they address the President's call for allowing the states to make this decision as to whether to outlaw civil unions.

NEWS BRIEF: "Bush 'Soft On Gays' Conservatives Charge", by Paul Johnson, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Washington Bureau Chief, December 18, 2003

"(Washington, D.C.) Conservative groups are as angry as gays over President George Bush's comments about same-sex relationships in an interview this week on ABC ... conservatives, the mainstay of the Republican Party, are accusing the president of being too soft on gays, because he implied he would not move to prevent states from enacting civil union legislation."

We have discovered one thing on which both Conservative Republicans and gay advocates can agree: President Bush is supporting "Civil Unions"!

CONCLUSION

From these remarks, we can see that President Bush is deftly playing both sides of the issue concerning "Gay Marriage" vs "Civil Unions". In practice, they represent the same legal entity -- gay marriage. However, President Bush knows that his Conservative/Christian base does not pay attention to any other story which might case doubt upon their comfortable belief that Bush is "one of them" -- when the reality is so very, very opposite.

As President Bush travels about the country, singing the praises of protecting the "traditional family" of a marriage between a man and a woman, just realize that the President and his White House are on record as also favoring Gay and Lesbian marriage by that other name, "Civil Unions".

Do not be deceived. Truly, this story should tell us that the unprecedented political deception so prophesied by our Lord Jesus as being a hallmark characteristic of the End of the Age (Matthew 24:24) is now upon us. Are you spiritually ready? Is your family? Are you adequately protecting your loved ones? This is the reason for this ministry, to enable you to first understand the peril facing you, and then help you develop strategies to warn and protect your loved ones. Once you have been thoroughly trained, you can also use your knowledge as a means to open the door of discussion with an unsaved person. I have been able to use it many times, and have seen people come to Jesus Christ as a result. These perilous times are also a time when we can reach many souls for Jesus Christ, making an eternal difference.

Become a Headline news subscriber HERE.