Ruth Institute Blog

My husband I attended a marriage preparation retreat in a small town in central California a few weeks ago. We were by far the oldest people there. The retreat was developed by an order of priests who are very orthodox in their teaching about marriage, family and human sexuality.

They do not soft-pedal anything. They do not cut corners. In fact the small-group breakout sessions, one of the young couples said “this is not the easiest place in town to get married.” All the other young couples in the group nodded in agreement. “But this is my parish. This is where I was baptized. We wanted to get married here.”

So I feel confident when I say that these priests are holding the line on orthodoxy. Over the course of the weekend, the presenters told their

personal faith journey. Almost all of the presenters at this conference had had some significant irregularity in their marriage situations.

What I saw was the Church “welcoming” sinners.

One couple recounted their journey from civil marriage to sacramental marriage. Their priest asked that they live together “as brother and sister” in the months leading up to the con-validation of their marriage in the Church.

For the uninitiated, this means: they had already been married civilly for some time and had children. One party had become Catholic. They wanted to get their marriage validated so they could have a sacramental marriage. Since they were not married in the eyes of the Church, they could not licitly have sex with each other. So their priest asked them to abstain until their wedding.

I heard no whining and complaining from this couple. What the husband had to say Read more…

George Weigel has a good article on the Synod on NRO today. He correctly states that the Church will not change her teachings on marriage, the family and human sexuality.  However, he misses an opportunity in this paragraph.

What the Catholic Church believes about the ethics of human love and about marriage is not a matter of “attitudes.” It’s a matter of truths. Many of those truths can be demonstrated by reason, if people are willing to work through a reasonable argument. Some of those truths, especially those pertaining to the permanence of marriage, come from the Church’s Lord Himself. (Emphasis mine)

He makes it sound as if the problem is that people just won’t listen to a reasoned argument.  I’m not suggesting that we abandon reason. But we have been reasoning ourselves to death and no one is listening.  If this debate could be solved through reason alone, we would have won a long time ago.

A more fruitful approach, I suggest, is to note the fact that millions of people have been harmed by the Sexual Revolution.  Children of Divorce, Reluctantly Divorced Spouses, Heartbroken Career Women, who have good educations and jobs, but fewer children than they wanted, and many other groups of people, have all been taken in by the false promises of the Sexual Revolution.

• “The kids will be fine as long as their parents are happy.  Kids are resilient after all.”
• “Divorce is always mutual. Everyone is better off after a divorce.”
• “Successful, educated women can “have it all,” including complete control over their fertility for their entire lifetimes.”

Rather than trying to “work through a reasonable argument,” why not reach out to these wounded men, women Read more…

In an article on the Republican mega-donor Paul Singer and his attempts to steer the GOP away from the social issues, I am quoted thus:

Dr. Jennifer Morse, who founded the Ruth Institute, agreed that if the Republican Party changes its formal views on marriage, “the millions of ordinary people of all ages, races, and religions who value marriage as a pro-child institution will be politically homeless.”

The Ultimate Argument: we have money and you don’t.

“Resistance to the Sexual Revolution has always been lackluster and half-hearted among the top donors of both political parties,” Morse said. “I fear that [Singer’s] money will be the one and only deciding argument and that the GOP will align itself with the rich and powerful on this issue.”

You can pretty much guess what the thrust of the story was: Mr. Big Money Bags creates secret strategy meeting with the Gay Lobby to plan how to spend His Money to advance Their Agenda. Discussion of impact of said agenda on Ordinary People: not so much.

Read the whole sickening article here.

If you are fed up with being taken for granted by the Elites of both political parties, join our crusade to Inspire the Survivors of the Sexual Revolution. Consider becoming a  of the Ruth Institute. 

 

One only has to look through a few comments on websites, Left or Right, to see that the lesbian lawsuit for breach of warranty and wrongful birth over a mixed race baby has struck a very negative chord.  Decent people, Right and Left, feel all wrong about a mother suing the sperm bank because she didn’t get the child she ordered.

I certainly agree that it is all wrong.  I just want to put the blame squarely where it belongs. Not on the sperm bank for “medical malpractice.”  Not on the lesbian mother for saying, “I’m not going to let them get away with not being held accountable.”

No, I place the blame on the Elites who have imagined, sustained and defended the Sexual Revolutionary ideology.  This ideology is indefensible, unsustainable and is causing unimaginable misery.

The mother, Jennifer Cramblett, is just the latest in a long string of ordinary people who have built their lives around lies. Fantasy ideologies may look good on paper or in a legal brief. But when a real person tries to build her life around ideas that are untrue, that real person can run into real problems.

Ms. Cramblett is not a celebrity lesbian.  She does not have a law degree or work for a prestigious activist organization or have a TV show. She works at an ATT store. I do not see any of the Establishment Gay Legal organizations hovering around her case. (I’m guessing they Read more…

I suppose you have heard the dismay over the lesbian couple who ordered a white baby from a sperm bank and got a black baby.  They are suing the sperm bank for “Wrongful birth and breach of warranty.” Not surprising: it is after all, a commercial transaction.  Suing the business is what dissatisfied customers do. The plaintiff, Jennifer Cramblett, says that she wants to make sure the offending business establishment is held accountable and that no other family endures the same lapse in customer service that she did.

So I have a modest proposal for regulating the sperm bank industry. My proposal will address the problem at the front end, making such mistakes less likely, instead of addressing it at the back end, with a law suit after damaged goods have been delivered.

Are you ready for my modest proposal?

I propose that sperm donors be required to deliver the product in person.

Yes, in person. Read more…

The Ruth Institute expresses sorrow but not surprise, at the Supreme Court’s decision to allow challenges to natural marriage to stand.

And thanks allies who labored to defend marriage.

Press Release from the Ruth Institute

October 6, 2014 San Marcos CA—The Ruth Institute expresses its sorrow but not surprise, at the Supreme Court’s decision to allow challenges to natural marriage to stand. President Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse stated, “Here at the Ruth Institute, we have known for some time that the Elites of this society have both the desire and the power to create genderless marriage, so-called gay marriage.  By refusing to hear the legal challenges to the courts that have overturned state marriage laws, the judicial Elites have taken another step toward gutting the institution of marriage. ”

Dr Morse predicted that this will not be the last step in the campaign to redefine and reshape the family, using the power of the government.  “Redefining marriage redefines parenthood. Governments have already begun rewriting birth certificates and marriage licenses. Children can now have three legal parents. The government will no longer be constrained by biology in its determination of parental rights and responsibilities. How this will amount to more freedom or equality for anyone, I cannot imagine.” Read more…

Why should we stand for the family, or for marriage, or for life or for any of the culturally-conservative issues?

Living in California during the Proposition 8 debates, I had a front row seat watching the “elites” mangle the meaning of marriage. The judicial elites have handed down a disastrous series of federal court decisions, solidifying governmental commitment to the ideology of the sexual revolution. The entertainment elites seem to celebrate every family form except the natural family of a loving father and mother
married faithfully to one another and raising their own children together. The media elites continue their shameless manipulation of public opinion. The economic elites pour money into political and propaganda campaigns designed to prop up the structure of the sexual revolution. Academic elites continue behind-the-scenes scribbling, advocating for recreating marriage, the family, and even the human body, in their own image. Read more…

In this story from New Zealand, two male friends (who are not gay, by the way) are about to marry each other.  Part of their motive:

Engineering student Mr. McIntosh, 23, and teacher Mr. McCormick, 24, will tie the knot to win a “The Edge” radio station competition and a trip to the 2015 Rugby World Cup in England.

Also, they really like each other. They have been best buds since they were six years old.  They expect the marriage to last at least 2 years.  Marriage has been an “easy in, easy out” proposition throughout the industrialized world since the advent of no-fault divorce. So why shouldn’t these guys get married for a chance to win a cool prize?

Gay rights groups are offended.

Otago University Students’ Association Queer Support coordinator Neill Ballantyne, of Dunedin, said the wedding was an “insult” because marriage equality was a “hard fought” battle for gay people. “Something like this trivializes what we fought for.”

Sorry Neill. No go. You evidently did not realize that when you changed the law, you changed it for everyone. Two men can get married for any reason they want.  The law does not require them to prove that they are actually “gay,” or that they “love each Read more…

I recently got this message from a Facebook friend.

Just so you know, I would “like” and “share” all the divorce stories that you’re posting- only it would compromise some family relationships I have that I am responsible for. God is good and has afforded much forgiveness and reconciliation- I do not want to challenge their faith or give away hard earned ground. I just wanted to let you know I’m paying attention, even if there is no evidence of it. That means others are probably doing the same. Keep the faith!!

Here is my response to her.  What do you think about this issue?

Thank you my friend. This means a lot to me. I hope you are right that others are quietly paying attention.

I sense that you are concerned that your loved ones are not ready to look too closely at the harms their divorces caused others. You want to keep them close to you and to God. You do not want to drive them away with more reality than they can stand.

I understand. You may very well be correct about this in this particular instance. I trust your judgment.

I’m just guessing here, but maybe this is a situation of a divorce now regretted? Or a divorce that caused harm to others, perhaps a child, and that looking at that harm would be too Read more…

Did you hear about the controversy brewing on Twitter? A congressional candidate and “left wing liberal” named Mike Dickinson has created a bounty of “100k” for nude pictures and/or sex tapes of Kendall Jones. You may recognize Kendall’s beautiful face from Facebook or elsewhere. She’s the cheerleader who is an accomplished hunter. Dickinson’s Twitter stream has many, many requests like this: Read more…