Is the issue of same-sex marriage a cause to divide the nation and the Churches from Government? 

How could one define marriage, when no one has a blueprint for a successful marriage?  Would we not be wiser to define true happiness between two people, rather than to define the meaning of the word ‘marriage’?  For example, if I show you the picture of a house and I ask you: “What is this?”, what will you answer me, if not a house?  But then if I say to you: “What if I tell you that it’s not a house?  It’s a home.”  What will you say?  Perhaps so many have never seen a home that it is just a house to them.  This is why they venture anywhere in the world to buy houses and this is when that houses come to demonstrate and define the character of the person that can afford it.

Statistics tell us that if every Canadian was to return where he belongs (rightfully), that 65% of the housing in Canada would be vacant.  Talk about house for rent (not homes!), because a home is never vacant, because there is love, respect and togetherness in it.  If we go to statistics again and for politicians to really grasp on this, is it not this shattering record of failure that justifies crime, drugs, street people, homeless, high cost of healthcare and Medicare?  You will also find in this an explanation to the high record of abortion, suicide, and death.  If we are looking forward to the agenda of the future, and our priorities are to compete in technology, are we not turning our backs on the homes, happiness, security and prosperity? 

Let us look at little deeper into the extent of the problem, that now, a nice dress, a nice car, power, money, will make somebody look more intelligent and better and assure him of many worshippers.  Isn’t this a form of prostitution, as to the highest bidder for the one that shows the most?  You will find in the high profile people a quotation that many rich men have heard: “You judge a man by the size of his toys.”  Simply saying, doesn’t this demonstrate the lack of intelligence of those who get dragged into this philosophy?  The one who has the most to show is the one that will be worshipped the most.  It’s a bit like high class prostitution.  That’s why at the highest level of the elite, you find them blackmailing each other on the issues of woman and monies; that they will go as far as selling their souls to keep the name of ‘elite’.  I really believe that it’s time that the Churches and Governments start talking to each other instead of both screaming in different directions, in a way to peddle votes at election. 

If for instance, the Churches that are so uniting together from Muslim to Christians, to Buddhist and all others; to denounce the issue of same-sex marriage, aren’t these people bringing the Churches together, to gang up against their own teachings?  Love your enemies, offer the other cheek, be good to those who persecute you, those who offend you.  To the rich man, leave everything you have.  Sell it and give it to the poor and follow me.  Aren’t these the teachings of all the diverse religions?  How come no one gangs up so powerfully against crime, woman abuse, child abuse, but that we have decided to make it be this way.  Here’s another way to look at it.

In Manitoba, we have what we call ‘a no-fault’ insurance, meaning, it doesn’t matter who hits you.  You’re both responsible.  So it’s cheaper for the province.  Now imagine, in the divorce courts, we sort of say the same thing: a ‘no-fault divorce’.  Just divide everything and go on your way.  If we look at the issues of residential schools, those people that were left with broken homes, now we look at the children of the so-called elite people, surviving broken homes, they are left in the same dilemma as the First Nation people with broken homes.

Now to the diverse Churches and everybody knows this quotation:

When Jesus rebuked Peter for making promises and I quote: “Before the cock crows three times, you will have denied me three times.”  That was the proof that Peter should have not made a promise.  How come in the same church we promise for better or worse, until death do us apart, when the same Christ said: “Make no promises”?  Let us look a bit at marriage (and I ask you to take this in learning if you are truly honest because these are facts that we present.  And if you can’t take the truth that should tell you why you are so unhappy).

On the issue of marriage:

It is written in the bible that if a young widow is 25 years or under, you better help her get married, find a man for her, because her body will torment her.  It is best that she marries then living that way.  Strangely in French, the Ninth of the Ten Commandments, as I have heard it in school (residential school): “If the flesh must be weak, just find one and get married so you will not trouble others with your temptations.”  The apostle Paul when writing to the Corinthians first said: “These are my own words.  I did not hear them from the Lord.  But I tell you, it is best that you don’t marry, because you cannot serve two masters, God and yourself.”  

If I asked a priest “When you preach so much on the values of marriage (and that applies to other faiths too), how come you never married?”  Some say that they should be able to.  Others will say: “I am married to God and that’s why I’m a priest.”  But then I would say: “Since you’re so happy, why do you preach so much on marriage between two people, when you know that the closeness to God should be first in everybody’s life, then people could learn to live besides each other without being physically tormented all the time?”  How many teachers of righteousness preach that woman must submit herself to all the sexual ideas, under the disguise of marriage, and that it’s her obligation?  That is false.

A few days ago, a man asked me on the issues of self-satisfying in the flesh.  That he was told in his church that all this is ‘normal’.  Why must there be lusting and bringing someone into the hypocrisy of your mind, because you could not tell that one that you’re lusting over him or her, while praising that person as to be so close to your heart?  How could we be dishonest, pretending to be honest?

Must the Church and Government divide?  Who could define ‘marriage’?

It is easy to say that if I mix water and wine, I still have wine.  But if you were to go into the detail of the composition, you could write for hours.  Marriage is not a merger, a blending, even as they say ‘becoming one’, because then I could say, “Which one?”  or “Describe that one as well as the difference between home and house.”

It would be more important that we lay aside for now the continuity of failure and that we start building a structure in the definition of true happiness.  Strangely, it is not something that you could study, that you could learn, that you could teach, that you could share, it is something that is born in your heart when it truly is accomplished, meaning, that you could truly then say “For better or worse, until death do us apart and even beyond.”

Just to explain to you how insane we could be as humans, here s a little story. Perhaps you’ll laugh, but deep inside you can’t deny it.  Neither can I.

There was an older couple talking about the past.  They decided to look in this box of memories and imagine, (we ask you to really read it slowly, how we are all the same) the man grabs the picture of his wife when she was nineteen years old, (keeping in mind that she is now 62) and he looks at her and he says to her with his arm around her shoulder: “Look my love, how beautiful you used to be.”  (doesn’t that mean, not anymore?)  “You are the greatest love of my life.  Weren’t you something back then?”  Or you would look at your daughter whom you love so much and say: “Look how cute you were when you were four. “ Sort of saying “Anything after that, sorry kid.”  “Boy, I love you my daughter.  Now son, look here how cute you were.”  Don’t we change with time?  So imagine, if we look at this to define marriage, who could speak about it?  We should put these things on hold and look at the scars we’ve put on each other and our children.  And in such, we will discover how more beautiful they are then ever, to have put up with all of this, all those years. 

You will find also, (and this is to help the young men and women that have fallen to other men’s love for a father, or other women’s love for a mother) that when a new child was born, suddenly, the other child becomes non-existent, under the disguise that this is the little one, or perhaps that the older one is the better one.  In a way we could say that one has been around a little longer, so you got to know that one a little more.  Are we fair and just?  Should we carry on marrying?  Could we not understand that we should stop hatred between all people; whether they are gay or straight, that we as a people should start looking at the wrongs we have created in others?  And you will find them walking out of these wrongs because of the love you will give them, which will become greater than the love that they found.

Let us look at the redefinition of happiness.  When we find this, we will have found a structure where people should start looking at each other and be able to live side by side, without having to submit to the pressures of flesh, regardless of how it comes because the mind must be over matters.  Then the rest does not matter.

God bless you.  We love you, all of you regardless of who you are.  You mean something to us.  This is not counseling, it is offering a fathership for all of you.  Doesn’t this explain why Jesus said: “Call no one of this world father” because not one is fit to be.  Only your heavenly father in the example that Christ became father to all.  And he didn’t return to heaven with a wife and kids.  We are his family.  As he loves me, I truly love you.

Thank you for reading.

Roger Poisson

We invite any comments or questions by e-mail sindone@shaw.ca, phone (204) 233-6087 or fax (204) 233-6217.