I have a very different opinion regarding the issue on a Constitutional Amendment to limit marriage to a man and a woman than most outspoken Christians.
First of all, I should start by saying I believe homosexuality is immoral. We know this because it is unnatural and, more importantly, the Bible says so. Of course I don't think homosexuals should get married. However, I do not think we have any right to say such a union would be illegal. Please don't take that to mean I believe I am somehow superior to homosexuals. I have sin in my life as well. God dosen't make different levels of sevearity of sin.
Marriage is a spiritual matter. To me, marriage is recognized by the Church, not the government. Therefore, since marriage is recognized by the church, we, the members of the Church, have no reason to recognize a homosexual marriage (spiritually, that is). We (the Church) will never be forced to spiritually recognize a marriage that is preformed by the government. This is guaranteed in the First Amendment. I believe that it should be none of the governments business whom is married to whom. If the government wants to recognize a particular marriage, who says we (the church) have to recognize it spiritually? Who are we to be enforcing our morals on other people in this case? Do we expect non Christians not to sin? That is like expecting someone with pneumonia not to cough.
My argument was that it is unwise for us, as Christians, to try to enforce our viewpoint on the law in this case. Laws should be designed to protect society and ensure personal freedom. When two consenting adults decide they want to "get married" who are we to say the government shouldn't recognize their union and grant them whatever tax and estate privileges that heterosexual couples get? That is the issue here. In what way are these two people threatening others? I still believe they are immoral, but my personal viewpoint is irrelevant. Just because something is immoral in my point of view, or even from a Christian perspective, doesn't mean it their behavior should be illegal.
We have laws against speeding because if you exceed the speed limit, you are more likely to get into an accident. Innocent people are hurt or killed in accidents, therefore it should be illegal to speed and it is right and necessary to enforce such laws. Who is hurt in a homosexual marriage? Who is forced to live their life a way that they don't want to? Nobody. The argument I always hear is "this amendment will protect the sanctity of marriage." Really? Who's marriage? Are you telling me that your Christian marriage is somehow weakened or threatened if two homosexuals get married? Of course not! Because your marriage is based on Christ and theirs is based on a piece of paper issued by the government. Therefore I believe it is simply unwise for Christians to be so zealous about the homosexual marriage position because it does nothing but re-enforce stereotypes that Christians intolerant and judgmental. If this amendment were passed today, do we expect the gay community will say "Gee, now that there is an amendment in the Constitution, I better stop being gay and find a Christian wife, live in a monogamous lifestyle, and raise Christian babies."?
In closing:
1) Just because the government may recognize a marriage legally for tax and estate purposes, doesn't mean we, as Christians, have to recognize the marriage spiritually, which should be the real issue with marriage.
2) Our laws are based on protection and personal freedom, not biblical morals. Our laws are NOT based on the Ten Commandments or the Bible. (More on this Right-Wing talking point in a later entry) Is there a law against worshiping other God's? no Is there a law against making false idols? No. Is there a law against using the Lord's name in vain? No. Is there a law against not honoring the Sabbath? No. Is there a law against not honoring your father and mother? No. Is there a law against murder? Yes. Is there a law against adultery? No. Is there a law against stealing? Yes. Is there a law against giving false testimony? Yes if you are under oath, no if you are not. Is there a law against coveting? No. That's 2 and a half out of 10. Why do we keep saying our laws are based on the Ten Commandments? I believe the 10 commandments and other biblical moral principles are a step above the law, and are not and should not be the laws of our government or society. Every time we say "our laws are based on the 10 Commandments," we (Christians) look and are foolish because it isn't true.
3) It is unwise to look foolish to the outside world. Paul writes in Colossians that we should be wise in the way we act towards outsiders. Fighting for these viewpoints to become law is foolish and does nothing to spread the Gospel or tell others about the LOVE of Christ.
4) We have to protect our right to express ourselves in whatever we do. This is a basic American principle. If homosexual couples are not allowed to live their lives the way they want, who's to say that one day my rights might be violated also? The way I make sure I can do what I please and worship however I want is to make sure that those who I disagree with can do what they please and worship however they want.
5) If the amendment were passed, it would accomplish nothing except giving the secular society more ammo when they claim Christians are judgmental and intolerant.
I am NOT saying Christians should not be active in our government. We should be. We should be more active. I just feel the things we have chosen to be active in are foolish. We should be trying to bring about change, within the boundaries of the Constitution, which benefit our society.
No comments:
Post a Comment