... and it's not what you think.
I was reared in a very liberal part of the country, and have spent some of my life in the theater milieu. However, I made Jesus the Lord of my life, which usually places me with a conservative crowd. Because of the hand I've been dealt it's not for me to accept any pat answers or slogans about a lot of political issues. I have to think things through for myself.
The main argument my fellow Christians make against gay
marriage is that they believe the Bible is opposed to homosexuality. I’m not
going to argue about that. I’ve read some interesting verse-by-verse
interpretations that have a different perspective, particularly about some
passages in Leviticus. If you want an overview of the variety of opinions Bible
scholars have adopted on the subject you can start here if you like. http://peacetheology.net/homosexuality/the-homosexuality-debate-two-streams-of-biblical-interpretation/ I’m not a Hebrew scholar nor conversant
in ancient Greek, and I’m dependent on translators like most of us are. All I
can do when I come across contentious points is to fall back on what is
absolutely clear. God loves us all. We are all sinners. We need to forgive one
another and be patient with one another. We need to love one another.
The public face of Christianity has done a very, very poor
job of showing love to homosexuals. It can be argued that the enemy magnifies
this is in people’s minds. It can also be argued that the worst offenses are
committed by people who invoke the name of Christ only as a rallying cry and
have not submitted much of their heart to Him at all. Be that as it may, there
is no doubt that anti-gay behavior of every sort continues to happen, and
televangelists continue to make money declaring that God doesn’t allow the
sexually immoral into Heaven. Point of clarification: God doesn’t allow any
sinners into Heaven, including liars. This is why Jesus was sent to atone for
our sins and wipe our records clean - liars and the sexually immoral alike.
The second argument people make in opposition to gay
marriage is that our laws should be based on Bible principles. I don’t even
know where to begin with this one. Our laws are not based on Bible principles
now. If they were it would be illegal to dishonor one’s parents, or to take the
Lord’s name in vain. Our prison population would be unsustainable. Add to the
roll call everyone who had said something untrue and harmful about someone
else. These three examples are among the Ten Commandments, the most important
and clear-cut of all God’s Laws. What can you say about the American economy,
which is largely based on coveting what others have? This is not illegal. The
law of the land and the Laws of God have not been in complete harmony since
Israel was a theocracy, thousands of years ago. Much has changed in those
years, not the least of which is Jesus’ arrival, bringing forgiveness of sins
and a call to not only follow God’s laws but to love one another and forgive
them. He placed his Holy Spirit in the ones who followed him, which, in part, brings
ethics into the heart of the individual. Jesus didn’t come and rewrite the laws
of the Romans. His was a different Kingdom. Governments come and go. They can
be fairly good and they can be downright evil. We can’t expect the government
to be the arbiter of morality. Nothing good can come of allowing our ethics to
be determined by a system of government. Government is about power, both in the
way it’s acquired and how it controls people. As Lord Acton said, “Power tends to corrupt, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
The
third reason we often hear for prohibiting homosexual marriage is that it
erodes the foundation of a sacred institution and the family. I’m sorry to say,
that ship has left the harbor. As most people know, the current divorce rate in
the U.S. is about 50%. The rate for church-attending Christians is not much
different (Barna says one thing, other researchers say another). In 1965 the
percent of people 25-34 who were married was around 80%, but by 2010, when
living together had become commonplace, it had dipped to around 44%. http://www.prb.org/Articles/2010/usmarriagedecline.aspx
Assuming half of those marriages end in divorce, that leaves 22% of Americans
following the heterosexual married-for-life plan. When heterosexuals accuse
homosexuals of eroding the foundation of a sacred institution I am reminded of
Jesus telling his disciples that before they point out that someone else has a
spec in his eye they should remove the plank in their own.
A
fourth claim in opposition to gay marriage that sometimes comes up has to do
with the financial impact of all the people who would now be eligible to
receive government benefits that weren’t before. A recent poll shows that only
about 3.4% of Americans identify as gay. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/10/19/how_many_americans_are_gay_or_lesbian_gallup_survey_says_3_4_percent.html It’s likely that it will
mostly (but not exclusively) be lesbians who are interested in marriage. So we
aren’t looking at a lot of people compared to the number of heterosexuals who
have willingly given up heterosexual marriage benefits.
The
fifth claim, and the last I will address, is that when you give an inch they’ll
take a mile. Once we capitulate on gay marriage they will be clamoring for
legalizing incest and pedophilia. I say, let them clamor. The American people
make a big distinction between something that affects children, and a
“victimless crime,” and they will not cave in to either of these. Lately there
have been articles circulating about the legalization of gay marriage in Canada,
and pastors and others being arrested for speaking out against it. We are not
Canada. Freedom of speech is a Constitutional right here, and something we must
protect.
My
radical proposal is this: the government needs to get out of the business of
defining what marriage is. Everything that is now called “marriage” under law
should be rewritten as “civil union.” A civil union would be a legally binding
relationship between any two consenting adults for whatever reason they choose.
The sacred institution of marriage would be completely under the authority of
the religious sector. It would look like this:
- A Christian or other religious couple wants
to get married, so they apply for a civil union like they do a marriage
license, and they go through a marriage ceremony in their church
- A non-religious couple wants to get married,
so they apply for the civil union, and do whatever they want for a ceremony (an
Elvis impersonator in Vegas, absolutely nothing, etc.), but there is no
“marriage,” with all the promises before God that they have no intention of
keeping
There
will be people who are married in some very weird religions you don’t agree
with, but if they find a religious authority to marry them, that is the way it
will be.
I
didn’t go where you thought I was going, did I? You thought I was making a case
in favor of homosexual marriage, when what I’m actually doing is saying that
marriage in America is so broken that it’s too late to make it more “sacred” by
barring someone from it. True sacred marriage needs to be lifted out of the
mire into which all these disposable marriages have sunk. I don’t see the
government being of any use whatsoever in doing it.
What
makes a marriage sacred is the vow you make with your spouse and God. There is
no sacred institution. Our Founding Fathers wisely separated church and state.
Finally, if you are a Christian and you don't feel terrible about the treatment gay people have historically received, and continue to receive, then you need to wake up. Seems to me we should be binding the broken-hearted. But that could be the topic of a whole other blog.
