How does Homosexual Marriage Affect the Chess Game?

1) Imagine a chess game with no queens but instead with 4 kings. 
2) Imagine a chess game with no kings but instead with 4 queens.

The game of chess is based on the royal wedding relationship between a man and a woman.  I have indeed played a game or two with substitute pieces in my day.  If I were missing a pawn, a checker may have taken its place.  I'm not saying that roles cannot be filled by others.  The question is, "How well can these roles be filled by others?"

Just as I may use a checker to represent a pawn in the game of chess, someone else may fill the role of wife with a man or husband with a woman.  However, as in the case of the checker in the chess game, there is noticeably something awry with the man filling the wife's role and the woman filling the husband's role. 

Clearly if there are 4 kings on the chess board and no queens, the game is hardly a remnant of the traditional game of chess.  The 2 major power pieces have been removed and replaced by second equally weak, needy, and prone-to-peril kings.  Similarly if there are 4 queens on the chessboard and no kings, the game is just as disimilar to the traditional game of chess.  With no kings to protect, with significantly more power in the addition of queens, there is no longer a point to the game in the absence of the king to be protected. 

Even more complex imagine a game with 2 white queens and 2 black kings or vice-versa.  Opponents would be playing one overburdened with protection and little power while the other is ladened with a powerhouse and no concern for protection.  Clearly these opponents will not be playing the same game. 

One would be hard pressed to even call these scenarios a chess game.

With such a round peg into the square hole scenario, it seems only too elementary to say that nature itself rejects homosexuality.  The rules for traditional chess will need to be rewritten, and depending on the gender of choice, not only must strategy be redivised, a completely new purpose must be invented.  Ultimately, if homosexual marriage is to be allowed, then by design and practice, it cannot be "traditional" marriage.  One would be hard pressed to even call the potential scenarios marriage.   

Privates - Jewels - Junk

Well, I guess as the language evolves so goes the culture - or is that reversed?

Privates:  This was to imply that the (taboo) was something that was not shared or discussed with others.

Family Jewels:  While perhaps an inappropriate allusion to the function, this term also correctly alludes to the value of their reproductive nature.

Junk:  Wow.  What a digression.  Does this not correctly state our culture's perception of not only reproduction, but the man's function in society? 

Family heirlooms are first private and treasured only internally.  Then they become public jewels and gems that we begin to buy and sell or use for currency.  Finally, they become so overly abundant and common that they become junk.

Kaleidoscope View

We have a tendency to view life as a kaleidoscope, ever changing from beautiful to strange to mysterious to fearful.  The problem with this perspective of life is that there is nothing constant other than the tube itself.  The only important thing is my small window and how quickly I can change it to something more beautiful than is currently apparent.

We need to get rid of the kaleidoscope that is restricting our view to tunnel vision and seems so appealing and entertaining, but at any moment could change and bring havoc.

We must live life through the lens of eternity; focused on the unchanging God-Jesus, the Author and Finisher of our faith and His eternal purpose for all of mankind.

Pointing to vs Pointing at

In the evangelical church during my short lifetime, it seems that we have focused on pointing out the flaws of sinful life. 

"Don't do this, that, or the other." 
"You don't want to wind up like that."
"Look at the way she is dressed."

Instead of pointing at the problems in the world, we are to be pointing to the One who can resolve those problems, Jesus Christ.

What does your FB say about you?

Is my life the sum total of my facebook statuses and comments?
Is facebook the window to my life as the eye is the window to the soul?

In a day and age when we are so compartmentalized, individualistic, and private, what is it that we share in the social networking realms of cyberspace with these so called "friends"? 

Just 10 years ago, it was popular to hear that one could determine what another's priorities were simply by reviewing one's calendar and checkbook.  Now, I believe, it is no longer necessary to know another person well enough to have that kind of access.  In today's world of rapidly advancing mass personal communication (not just media), each person is pushing his or her own private agenda; whether conscious or no, you are constantly and definitively declaring what is most important to you post-by-post.

My life IS the sum total of my facebook statuses and comments.
Facebook IS the window to my life.

So, what DOES your FB say about you?

Obedience and Subjection to Authority

We, as adults, do not tend to obey traffic laws.  I cannot tell you how many times I've prepared to cross the street, waiting on the "Walk" sign, when a crowd of people stroll right through the "Don't Walk" sign.  Rules are for other people.  We have the ability to look both ways and take care of ourselves, so we don't need to follow the rules.  Consider the speed limit (or suggestion), the yield sign, the red lights, etc.

Why is it that we as a nation expect our children to obey us, their teachers, or other authority figures? 

God says, "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities.  For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God," Romans 13:1.

Am I living in obedience to God's commands?

Learning Christian

Learning to speak to God and learning to live like a believer are very similar to learning to speak a foreign language.

First
One must hear how native speakers sound and listen to how sounds and words are formed and combined.
--One must read the scriptures and spend time with others who are following God.

Second
One must attempt to attempt to speak and make one's own words and sounds alone and with a one-on-one tutor.
--One must make a personal effort alone to pray and seek God alone and with a mentor or discipleship partner, working through decisions with wise counsel.

Third
One must continue to practice constantly with others who do speak the language.  Further development is impossible without constant, continual, concerted practice. 
--One must consistently pray and seek God individually, one-on-one, in small groups, and in large groups. 

Fourth
One must practice reading and writing to follow on to proficiency.
--One must continually study scripture and begin teaching others.