Denny Burk serves as the editor for The Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and he posts regularly at Denny Burk.

The Washington Post has a disturbing article about the legal challenges facing same-sex couples who were married in Massachusetts but are now seeking divorces in other states. The basic quandary is this. Whereas states have laws providing for the division of assets, custody of children, payment of alimony, etc., states that do not recognize same-sex unions have no legal provisions for the dissolution of same-sex "marriages." A case in point appears in the first paragraph.

When her three-year-old marriage broke up, the 44-year-old doctor assumed she and her ex would split their property and jointly parent their two children. Her stay-at-home spouse wanted sole custody and the right to move the children out of Massachusetts.

In pretrial motions, both parents made the same argument to a judge: The children should be with me; I'm their mother.

For years, family court judges leaned toward a maternal preference when it came to custody disputes. But what to do when both parents are women, or neither is? Judges in Massachusetts have been grappling with that question since gay and lesbian couples began filing for divorce in 2004, seven months after the state Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage.

The remainder of the article turns out not to be an objective news piece (which it purports to be), but an implicit argument aimed at pointing out the inequities of states that do not recognize same-sex "marriages" and thus divorces of the same.

Those who choose to end their marriages soon discover that the trauma of divorce is compounded by legal and financial difficulties that heterosexual couples generally are spared.

"One of the benefits of marriage is divorce," said Joyce Kauffman, a Boston divorce lawyer who has handled a dozen same-sex divorce cases. "But for a lot of couples, that benefit is very complicated and very costly in ways that heterosexual couples would never have to experience."

I don't know of anyone else besides a divorce lawyer who could say with a straight face that divorce is a benefit of marriage. Yet this is precisely how low the cultural expectations have sunk when it comes to marriage. Unfortunately, this Post article seems to have embraced those expectations.

A law professor at Northwestern University is quoted at the end of the article saying this:

You have to have a way for people to get out of these things — otherwise, you have multiple claims on the same property and no protections for people entering into new marriages. I think states that try to adopt these rules refusing to recognize the marriages just haven't thought it through.

This professor could not be any more wrong. Opponents of same-sex "marriages" have thought this through, and we are of the opinion that the union of one male and one female is the only kind of union that should be privileged in law. All other unions are perversions that should not receive any kind of legal sanction from the state.

The irony of this whole situation is that now pressure will mount on states to recognize same-sex "marriages" from Massachusetts by putting pressure on them to make legal provisions for their divorces. This is but an incremental step toward the normalization of the "marriages" themselves in law. And make no mistake, this is precisely what the activists aimed to do when they fought for and won recognition in Massachusetts.

We'll be watching this development very closely.

John Piper is encouraging attendees of the 2008 Desiring God pastors conference to bring their father and son and the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood is doing the same for its annual pre-conference event.

CBMW will examine the topic of women in ministry at its annual "Different by Design" half-day conference to be held from 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., Feb. 4 at the Minneapolis Hilton, prior to the pastors conference.

Sponsored by Fidelis Foundation and CBMW, the event will feature J. Ligon Duncan III and Susan Hunt as keynote speakers. Duncan serves as senior pastor for First Presbyterian Church of Jackson, Miss., and is chairman of the board for CBMW. Hunt is a speaker and author who also serves as consultant to the Presbyterian Church in America's Women in the Church Ministry. Duncan and Hunt co-authored the 2006 Crossway book Women's Ministry in the Local Church.

Twenty-year CBMW council member John Piper described the Desiring God conference as "a way of building into their manhood a sense of what a great calling it is to be a man, a father, and a leader of the church."  David Kotter, executive director for CBMW, agrees and adds, "The preconference also enables them to catch a vision for one of the greatest challenges facing pastors today: the debate over biblical manhood and womanhood."

Each attendee will receive a free copy of Women's Ministry in the Local Church, as well as a clearer understanding of how to implement the book's contents in a local church.

Online registration for the half-day Conference is $20. Audio files are available from "Different by Design 2007".

The following is an interview with the co-authors of a new book from Vision Forum entitled Passionate Housewives Desperate for God: Fresh Vision for the Hopeful Homemaker. Gender Blog gave an overview of the new work in an article yesterday.

Gender Blog: What compelled you to write this book?

Jennie: Stacy and I were disturbed by a trend that appeared in the broader culture and also penetrated the church-the "me-first" movement that was applauded in publications as diverse as Christianity Today and Newsweek and World Report. Wives and mothers were urged to put self first if they expected to be happy and stay sane. We were amazed that such an unbiblical idea had gained traction in print and online. I received emails from several concerned readers of LAF (ladiesagainstfeminism.com), who wanted to know if I'd write a biblical refutation of the self-first teachings. Shortly after that, Stacy called me to tell me about a book she'd outlined that would hold out Christ's life as our model: dying to self, crucifying the flesh, and living for the Lord by putting others first and trusting the Lord to sustain us. When I saw her outline, my jaw dropped. She'd put down every single point I wanted to bring up in an article. That's when Stacy invited me to co-author the book with her, and I was thrilled to be a part of it.

Stacy: Jennie and I discussed her concerns over Christian women who were being duped into believing that the only way they were going to be happy and sane was if they pampered themselves, met their own needs and demanded their "right" to have it all. We were in agreement that women needed to be told the truth, straight up. My original purpose and direction for the book related more simply to the erroneous picture of "homemaker" the general public was getting. Though our family doesn't even own a television, I heard about the types of shows that were becoming popular-shows where homemakers were portrayed as desperate, miserable, adulterous, and even murderous. Supposedly, they only "pretend" to be happy and content-and Hollywood is willing to show us what is "really" going on behind the scenes.

GB: Just how profound is the danger that feminism poses for our wives and daughters?

Jennie: Feminism is very dangerous. It hasn't changed since the Garden of Eden and still holds out the same lie: "What God says isn't good enough. You've got to make up your own mind." Feminism divorces girls from God-given, God-blessed femininity and urges them to pursue masculinity. It's really ironic. I think "feminism" is the wrong word, because it's anything but feminine. Satan wants us to turn God's created order on its head. He doesn't agree with God's pronouncement that the creation of male and female was "very good" (Gen. 1:31). Egalitarians do their best to convince girls that male headship and biblical roles for women are part of a long-gone past and should be rejected. But rejecting God's order does not bring greater happiness or fulfillment. I know, because I pursued the path of feminism for several years during college and for a couple of years after. I rejected the inerrancy of Scripture for a time, because "enlightened" professors at my Christian college told me "all that was written by men who were a product of their times." I am ashamed that I didn't take a firm stand against such heresy, but I didn't want to appear unintelligent or backwards, so I embraced it instead, forcibly silencing my doubts in the name of "higher education." I Timothy 2:14 tells us that women are prone to deception. We might not be flattered by this, but it is the truth! We need to guard our hearts and the hearts of our daughters from the smooth tongues that would lure them away from the biblical role God has graciously given them.   

Stacy: Whitewashed feminism is a more clandestine form of feminism that has crept into many modern churches. I'm sure you've heard the term "evangelical feminism." These feminists are typically not the radical, secular kind; they claim to hold Scripture in high regard, yet they do not accept the biblically defined role distinctions between men and women, and they reject male authority to varying degrees. This more subtle version of feminism is particularly dangerous due to its beguiling cloak of Christianity. While its face may be more polished, and its manifestation less extreme, at its core, it is no different than its "secular" counterpart. It's simply whitewashed feminism.

This type of feminism can be especially dangerous to our daughters, but ironically, our daughters can actually be part of the attack on feminism. Our daughters love being women and understand their roles through God's design. As we raise our daughters to embrace the feminine aspects of their creation and joyfully hold to a biblical view of womanhood, then we will see a whole generation of godly wives and mothers who are inoculated against the lies of feminism and who teach God's truth to their own children. They'll have seen the beauty and truth of the Scriptures lived out in real families and they'll want no part of the feminist lie.

GB: How can local churches better serve stay-at-home moms?

Jennie: I think a lot is accomplished by simply affirming the biblical role for women from the pulpit instead of giving ground to the egalitarians by remaining silent for fear of offending. So many wives and mothers struggle because they lack godly teaching and affirmation of their role. Saying "thanks" on Mother's Day is nice, but preaching the Word and encouraging women to love and apply themselves to their callings is far more important. It's also important to demonstrate scripturally that homemaking isn't just for women with children. Often women who aren't able to have children feel left out or like second-rate citizens in God's economy. The Titus 2 commands for women apply to all of us. Older women need to be reminded that their role doesn't end when children leave the nest. There are young women out there starving for godly mentors to come alongside them. Young unmarried women need to be encouraged to invest in the lives of the families in the church through acts of service (helping in a home when a new baby arrives, taking meals to shut-ins, visiting widows, etc.). There are so many things for women of all ages and stations to do in the church. When we neglect or forget those tasks, we leave a vacuum-one that has been filled badly by the welfare state. Time for churches to boldly and courageously set forth God's commands for women and bless them when they are obedient and faithful!

Stacy: One thing churches can do is stop making moms feel guilty for not being involved in every program the church offers. Don't ask mothers of young children to teach classes, organize events, or take on various jobs at church. Support them in their focus to care for the needs in their homes. Remember that many times they are already overwhelmed with what they are doing - they don't need additional burdens to juggle or distractions that will keep them from their more important tasks. While there are certainly many ways women can and should serve the church during different seasons of life, a woman whose responsibility it is to care for her husband and children should not feel torn from her family or feel that she's doing "lesser work" when she's serving in the home.

GB: How important is it that we encourage our "passionate housewives" as they carry out their crucial but difficult task of homemaking?

Jennie: I think it goes without saying that there's not a lot of encouragement for women to be homemakers and submissive to their husbands today. So many women have written us to say that they felt alone in their beliefs and without support. It is truly critical that we encourage a revival of biblical roles for women (as well as men) and give all the support we can to those women who are faithfully serving the Lord. The majority of feminists would have us believe that homemaking is brainless, meaningless work. It is anything but! It isn't just about laundry and dishes and changing diapers. It is about being the helpers to our husbands that God has called us to be. It is about extending hospitality, caring for the sick and needy, reaching out to the lost, and raising up the generation behind us to wholeheartedly follow the Lord. It's a full-time job!

Stacy: We hear from women all the time who are thankful for the encouragement that Passionate Housewives, LAF, and Your Sacred Calling give them. Many are starving for like-minded fellowship, and can't find Titus 2 mentors in their own churches because so many older women are not available due to their own careers and personal pursuits. We think it's very important to provide "passionate housewives" who are in the trenches with as much encouragement and support as we can. And we encourage husbands and older women to remember how important it is too. These mothers are training up future generations for God's glory - we should be very supportive indeed!

Are you a Christan woman who is wearied by the "Stepford Wife" stereotype or the myth of the Happy Days homemaker of the 1950s?

Jeannie Chancey and Stacy McDonald have produced the biblical antidote to such popular but false portrayals of the stay-at-home mom with their new book, Passionate Housewives Desperate for God: Fresh Vision for the Hopeful Homemaker, published by Vision Forum.

The goal of the book is clear: to debunk dangerous myths that exalt androgynous power women, the desperate house wives whose worth is measured by the degree of their self-ambition, the shape of their bodies and their money-making skills.

Stacy McDonald says she and Chancey wrote the book with the intention of weighing popular notions of womanhood upon the scales of Scripture and then pointing women to a far more biblical worldview of womanhood than is peddled by such popular culture icons as "Desperate Housewives."

"One of the reasons Jennie and I wrote this books is because there are ‘desperate' women who need to hear the truths of Scripture," McDonald writes. "They need to know about God's wonderful solution to their desperation-and that it won't be met by chasing after more ‘me time.'"

The book is a biblical tour-de-force in defense of biblical womanhood and deals with numerous topics, including:

• The false gospel of self.
• The beauty of a God-centered, Gospel-exalting marriage.
• Why real women are passionate about true womanhood, marriage and motherhood.
• What the Bible teaches about servant hood, servitude and slavery-and the difference.
• Real-life examples of biblical womanhood.
• Why being a homemaker is not a waste of God-given talents.

McDonald also authored Raising Maidens of Virtue: A Study of Feminine Loveliness for Mothers and Daughters. McDonald and her husband James have 10 children and operate Family Reformation ministries (http://www.familyreformation.org/) in Central Illinois.

Along the way, McDonald argues that "evangelical feminism" is merely a baptized version of its secular counterpart.

"Like a filthy and unruly stray dog on bath day, feminism has been scrubbed and perfumed and presented to us as biblical," she writes.

"The biblical directives given to women to be wives, mothers and keepers of the home are minimized or set aside as quaint but unnecessary options. Although they still view homemaking as a legitimate life choice, in their opinion it certainly shouldn't be viewed as enough and definitely not the best."   

Chancey, a former feminist, and her husband Matthew have eight children and live in Alabama. Her website ladiesagainstfeminism.com exposes the damaging effects of feminism and celebrates the beauties of biblical womanhood.

"Mine is not a story of perfection," Chancey said. "I was once a Christian feminist; I've seen the other side. I know how empty it is. I've done my share of straying, most of it due to my own pride. I went from die-hard homemaker-in-training to dedicated career woman-and then God gripped my heart.

"My journey into and back out of feminism is one that took me from a rich home life to the lonely pinnacle of barren ‘accomplishment,' then back gain to a blessed home and family."

Tomorrow, Gender Blog will feature an interview with the authors, Chancey and McDonald.

Gwen Rockwood, a columnist for the Northwest Arkansas Times, gave a nice piece of anecdotal evidence for the God-ordained differences between boys and girls in a recent column detailing a highly unsettling trip to the restroom for her five-year-old son, Adam.

In a column, which was written in 2006 but was reprinted last week in the Times, Rockwood describes an incident in which the "gender rules" clicked properly for the now six-year-old Adam such that "In the last few months, he has become very clear on the fact that he is a boy, and his dad is a boy, and his friend Luke is a boy."

The moment of enlightenment as Rockwood recounts it: "It (Adam's concern to assert his maleness) was all fine and dandy until a few weeks ago when I took the boys to lunch at a crowded fast food restaurant, and Adam needed to go potty. I left his 2-year-old brother Jack at the table with the friend I was meeting for lunch while Adam and I headed for the restrooms. Just as we reached the bathroom door, Adam stopped short."

"Does that say, ‘MEN'?" he asked, pointing to the men's room door.

"Yes, it does," I answered.

"And this door says ‘WOMEN,'" he said.

"Yes, it does. Let's go in," I said as I hurried him through the door.

Rockwood describes the scene in the ladies' room-it was crowded with women who were washing hands, chatting and reapplying lipstick. Young Adam, realizing he was a boy encroaching in the women's room, suddenly became very anxious over the circumstances.

"I can't go to the woman potty, Mom. I need to go to the man potty," he told mom. This mild confrontation continued with Adam insisting that he properly belonged in the men's room. In the end, young Adam performed the duty at hand, but only through tears.

Rockwood, who began her column with the words "In this evolved age of parenting, we like to believe we don't influence our kids with the same old gender stereotypes," concluded that she had learned an important lesson from her son's insistence that "I cannot use this potty, I am not a woman, I am a man."

Wrote Rockwood: "Life is confusing enough for a 5-year-old without someone suddenly bending the gender rules he worked so hard to learn...you can bet that my husband will be chaperoning our sons to the bathroom. After all, a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do."

Through her little boy's bathroom angst, Rockwood has stumbled upon a very clear biblical truth: "God made them male and female." While I would argue that little Adam did not so much "work so hard to learn" the gender rules as he did respond to the way his Creator has knitted him together, the point holds: men and women are not the same and children know this intuitively.

Social engineers and activists are laboring hard to foment for a gender-free society, but God's design and God's wisdom in His creation of men and women as very different but complementary creatures will ultimately have the final say-especially in the innocent honesty of a young boy demanding to use the proper restroom.