4.6 • 949 Ratings
🗓️ 15 March 2025
⏱️ 5 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
This is CrossPoliticNews’ Weekly Roundup sponsored by Christian Business Leaders Network. If you want to find out more about this network and its efforts to connect Christian business leaders so that they can more effectively help their businesses and shape culture, visit businessmakers.network. Again, that’s businessmakers.network. Recently, our reporter David Fowler wrote about the legislation efforts in Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Missouri to enact “covenant marriage license laws” (www.crosspoliticnews.com/news/tony-perkins-and-homosexual-covenant-marriages). in their respective states. When you first look at it, this seems like a good thing. Wouldn’t these covenant marriage license laws help our country return to a more Christian understanding of the world? We’re commanded to spread Christianity in our country and in the world, but this is actually not the way to do it. This isn’t the way to do it because these license laws place the authority of marriage beneath the state’s standard and give the government a power over marriage that it shouldn’t have.
It’s not an issue of the government enacting good or bad laws, but of whether the state even has the power and ability to make laws that will give them a defining control over marriage.
David Fowler foresaw this in 1998. And then, in 2015, the Obergefell versus Hodges case showed that he was right. In the Obergefell case, there were five justices in the Supreme Court who agreed that marriage is personal, and that civil law could create one type of marriage just as easily as another.
In other words, the government could declare homosexual relationships as “civil marriage” because they had the power to define what it could look like.
But while we want to keep this power away from the government, we also want governments to preserve a biblical view of marriage. So, how can we do this?
Our journalist David Fowler recommends that we require the government to recognize but not administer marriages. When a man and woman would get married, the government would have to, “give notice to the public of their already existing marital relationship.” If we did this, then the standard and definition of marriage would properly be outside the state's control.
So, we shouldn’t want the government to enact covenant marriage license laws, but we should have it recognize marriages rightly and biblically understood. After all, if the state doesn’t recognize its proper place, then the covenant marriage license laws could also be easily exploited by the liberals.
On a different topic, our journalist Jonathan Kelly wrote about the case of Navy pilot and reservist Michael Cassidy, the man who tore down the Satanic statue that stood in the State Capital of Iowa. Cassidy had turned himself in after destroying the statue, and “pleaded guilty to misdemeanor vandalism but maintained that his actions were not extremist, violent, or a violation of military conduct standards" (www.crosspoliticnews.com/news/navy-clears-michael-cassidy-rejects-extremism-charges-over-satanic-statue-incident).
His attorney argued against the bias towards Christians in the military, and he also brought up the larger issue of Satanic statues in our culture because Cassidy’s actions to both Florida and Iowa voting no against installing more of these statues.
Cassidy’s boldness not only tore down that one statue then, but it also prevented others from being erected. Returning to Cassidy’s attorney, though, he said that Christians have effectively been told to be quiet, compliant, and secret with their faith. As we can see, Cassidy’s actions have thankfully challenged this mainstream, unbiblical expectation.
Christians should thank God that Cassidy has won his case, even we don’t know yet if the Navy leadership will allow him to be completely reinstated into the Navy.
To discover more news, check out some of our other articles, such as Bridge-Building Apologetics With Lindsey Medenwaldt by our journalist Esther Elliott, or Tier List: Trump’s Greatest Moments by our reporter Luke Edison, or even The Oscars and the Moral Confusion of Hollywood by our journalist Wes Walker.
Here at CrossPoliticNews, we want to faithfully deliver you unbiased news from a Christian worldview.
For more content, you can find us on YouTube at CrossPolitic News, follow us on X at cpnewsusa or cpnewsaus in Australia, or head to our email list and find us at CrossPoliticNews.com.
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
0:00.0 | This is Cross Politics News Weekly Roundup, sponsored by Christian Business Leaders Network. |
0:05.0 | If you want to find out more about this network and its efforts to connect Christian business leaders |
0:08.9 | so that they can more effectively help their businesses in shape culture, visit businessmakers.network. |
0:16.1 | Again, that's businessmakers.network. |
0:32.0 | Recently, our reporter, David Fowler wrote about the legislation efforts in Tennessee, |
0:39.7 | Oklahoma, and Missouri to enact, quote, covenant marriage license laws, unquote, in their respective states. |
0:42.6 | When you first look at it, this seems like a good thing. |
0:47.7 | After all, wouldn't these covenant marriage license laws help our country return to a more Christian understanding of the world? |
0:49.7 | We're commanded to spread Christianity in our country and in the world, but this is actually not the way to do it. |
0:56.0 | This isn't the way to do it because these license laws place the authority of marriage beneath the state's standard |
1:01.8 | and give the government a power over marriage that it shouldn't have. |
1:05.8 | It's not an issue of the government enacting good or bad laws, but of whether the state even has the |
1:11.9 | power and ability to make laws that will give them such a defining control over marriage. |
1:17.8 | David Fowler, the reporter of this article, and once a senator in Tennessee, reasoned that if |
1:22.2 | the state can define marriage in a good way, they can just as easily define marriage in a bad |
1:27.3 | way because their |
1:27.9 | statutes control the definition of marriage. If the government can declare that marriage is between |
1:32.4 | a man and a woman out of their own authority as the state, then what could legally prevent |
1:37.1 | them from declaring homosexual relationships to be marriage too? David Fowler foresaw this in |
1:41.5 | 1998. And then, in 2015, the Old Bergergefell v. Hodges case showed that he was right. |
1:49.4 | In the Obergefell case, there were five justices in the Supreme Court who agreed that marriage is personal and that civil law could create one type of marriage just as easily as another. |
1:59.8 | In other words, the government could |
... |
Transcript will be available on the free plan in 28 days. Upgrade to see the full transcript now.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from FLF, LLC, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of FLF, LLC and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2025.