Tags
gay, government, homosexual, laws, marriage, same-sex, videos
No, marriage is not a private matter, because it affects every aspect of culture, our national society, our local communities, our neighborhoods.
It affects you and your family and your children in ways you may not have imagined…yet.
There is a documentary out entitled The Problem with Same-Sex Marriage, a must-see film put out by the Family Research Council.
This is what happens when marriage is redefined:
The Problem with Same-Sex Marriage, posted with vodpod
Like this:
One blogger likes this post.
I seriously doubt my marriage has affected you in any way, Joel. I find it amazing that you’ll advocate violence (TNT: Ted Nugent Theology) which Christ has said MUCH against and then turn around and refuse rights to marginalized people despite Christ commanding us to treat all people as equals.
It seems your theology is custom-tailored to your politics. Which is fine. Go for it.
And speaking of the video, a montage of lobbyists and anti-LGBT activists spouting unsubstantiated misinformation doesn’t seem that compelling to me.
//AW
Adam,
What you call a “marriage” indeed affects everyone for the worse. It lies about one of the purposes of marriage- to produce legitimate offspring. It further lies about what those children need- that being a mother and a father. It teaches men that man is free to do whatever he wishes with his body and that pleasure is the highest good. Furthermore, it speaks lies as to God’s intended design- that a man should leave his mother and father and cleave to his wife.
Essentially, when you affirm the legitimacy of sodomy, you are in effect calling God a liar and wading into abject unbelief.
So, if a heterosexual couple wants to get married but can’t get pregnant you would refuse them? And whet are you more opposed to, the acts implicit in a homosexual relationship or the love between two people. Because if you keep focusing on demonizing the ACT then your argument switches from a denial of the right to marry to policing people’s consensual, private actions like sex or prayer.
1. I am torn between wondering if the first comment above is serious or some sort of tongue-in-cheek insider joke. Help, someone.
2. There is no such thing as homosexual marriage, save as a winked at fiction. Marriage is between men and women. That is part of the definition. No same sex relationship can be called marriage. Ever. Never.
3. I am getting plenty pukey sick of this oft repeated vacuous arguement that no harm is done to anyone by the marriage of homosexuals. As if a homosexual couple has to have sexual relations in my living room while pointing an M16 at my head in order for it to be of harm to me, or my family, or my church, or my country, or my culture. Seen or unseen, obvious or less so, private or public, evil always has consequences. Always.
4. Based on Romans 1 it seems to me homosexuality represents the bottom rung of human depravity. Can SOMEONE please tell me if this is true, or close to truth, how can something so clearly, so obviously, so REMARKABLY condemned by God become the basis for marriage?? How does wickedness form the basis for a supposed union between two people… not permitted that union to begin with?
5. If you had told me when I was a young man of high school age in the 60′s, or in the Army in the early70′s that not only would homosexuality be accepted – but encouraged and praised and the focus of feigned “rights” I would have surely thought you in the final stages of some dreaded, incurable insanity. If you had told me in those days that people would forcefully advocate for “homosexual marriage” and that government would actually begin to take it seriouisly and legislate for it – I would have passionately argued that not only is that the most morally repugnant of suggestions, but an absolute, complete and total impossiblity. So much for the Amazing Calvnistic Kreskin.
6. We must fight this with every legitimate tool at our disposal. We must pray God spare our culture, our country, our families. Already I see young Christians capitulating to this, collectively shrugging their shoulders – not even really sure “what the big deal is.” Oh God, have mercy on us!
If Marriage needs to be defended politically, has legislation been introduced to bar adulterers from remarrying?
Tim, your question perplexes me. Am I to read behind it the notion that “defended politically” (I confess, I am not sure what that phrase means. Does it mean defended in the public arena?) is somehow a….bad thing? Because adulterers remarry we ought capitulate to homosexual “marriage?” Or we dare not speak to homosexual “marriage” because the state does not deal with every sexual or behavioral breach fairly or with equity? ? Is this your thesis? Does uneven application of moral standards
mean we ought jettison every law rooted in Christian moral standards? Are we to say to the State, “it’s ok freinds, you arent getting EVERY law right, you are remiss about some moral issues, so marriage doesnt need to be defended. Let it go. Let anyone marry anyone, or marry their pet hamster, or anything for that matter.” My view is this: anytime the pagan State gets it right, we ought thank God. Anytime the State goes against Biblical truth, we ought (within our finite ability and consistent with the grace given us) urge the State to more Biblical behavior. The battleground right now is concerning “homosexual marriage.” Let’s not give way to an ungodly understanding of that issue based on a false, abstract application of parity.
My thesis is a relatively simple one. The mainstream political Christian church here fights tooth and nail against gay marriage and homosexuality to a disproportionate degree, one that does not align with a coherent sexual ethic or political stance. For as little (and as vaguely) as homosexuality is mentioned in the Bible, it is almost surprising how much it is talked about.
And I disagree about the battleground. I think it is unfortunate that straight Christians, in the midst of a very noticeable overall trend of failing marriages, have decided that gay marriage is the true “threat.” But we have a long history of focusing on the specks of others (even non-believing others!) at the sake of our own very weary, very splintered eyes.
Personally, just as the Christian tradition has changed its stance on the Biblical admonition against allowing women to wear gold and braid their hair (1 Tim 2:9), I think it might be time to revisit homosexuality. Truly no writer in the 1st Century church expected the possibility of a committed, non-adulterous homosexual relationship, since the possibility of them did not then (nor for a while) exist.
But even if you disagree with that point – and that’s more than fine, I recognize that it is something my generation is more apt to align with instead of others – I think if Christians want to make an impact on marriage in a non-Christian nation, then they should work to their utmost at glorifying and preserving their own, and act as examples of something Better. Not work for political action (which is really just a simple phrase) against gay marriage (I can’t see much Biblical justification for political Christianity anyway).
As a Christian with many gay friends and family members, I applaud the recognition that our gay brethren are entitled to the same civil rights as all other citizens, including the right to marry a partner of the same sex. Although a growing number of synagogues and churches bless samesex marriages, the legalization of same-sex marriage is a secular issue. As a young Christian, I take offense with those who try to force people to live by their personal theological slant. Also, I am offended by rightwing Christians who are obsessed about the private love lives of others. Religious rightwingers, stop being such busybodies and start doing things Jesus did, like feeding the hungry and helping the poor. I am so glad my generation of Christians are not obsessed with the gender people happend to fall in love with the way the older generation tends to be.
Hey Dave. Can I call you Dave?
Dave, the thing that bothers us “pinko commie leftist” Christians is the fact that the ONLY things that conservative Christians focus on in the public arena is abortion and gay rights. Those things are important and we need to have reasoned, adult conversations about them, but that’s not what the entirety of the Gospel is. There are other things that God commands us to bring into the public square like social justice, mercy, peace, generosity. God commanded Israel’s laws to be set up in such a way that there would be no poor among them. He also commanded the nation to welcome wanderers and immigrants. Why are these policies overlooked?
Personally, I take offense at the actions of the military. I consider it a sin to kill. Period. And being in the military is much more of a choice than being gay and it harms MANY more innocent people. And when you think of it, if you attend a tax-free church then that means you are benefiting from taxes paid by the LGBT community and then turning around and denying them rights.
They are literally funding your chosen lifestyle at their own expense as you deny them basic human rights.
That is FAR from Christian.
“Personally, I take offense at the actions of the military. I consider it a sin to kill. Period. And being in the military is much more of a choice than being gay and it harms MANY more innocent people.”
What is it the Christian left is fond of saying? “Never put a period where God put a comma.”? You have done that very thing by repeating the old Anabaptist heresies, e.g. that Christians cannot serve in the military or as magistrates.
I would cite the examples of when killing is permitted and even mandated by Jehovah- self-defense, capital punishment, et. al.; however you have already demonstrated your willingness to ignore anything from Scripture which disagrees with your fantastic pronouncements as to what is right and wrong.
If your family is ever in need of police intervention, be sure to tell the dispatcher that you want NON-Christian officers to respond- in the event they need to shoot someone to save your life. Otherwise, these men and women will fail to live up to your personal standards of Christian conduct that Anabaptists love to impose on others only that they should appear more pious.
I am asking this sincerely, not with a mindset of “I already know the answer,” but could you please point to how the New Testament interprets OT violence? Or perhaps where it is mandated in the NT?
Personally, I haven’t found support for violence, murder, or killing in the NT – no support even for capital punishment – and the first interpreters like Clement seemed pretty unequivocal in seeing no room for the death penalty as well. (Obviously they are not Scriptural, but they are smart thinkers and readers of Scripture).
I am, again, genuinely curious in your Scriptural case for killing and the death penalty.
Oh, I do many things that anger “leftists”. I would argue against throwing around the term “heresy”. Unless you really mean that my pacifism is sending me to “hell”.
I find it ironic that you are upset that my worldview is narrow and (if codified into law) would restrict your freedoms. The difference is this: I believe that my pacifism is MY choice. I will not force others to act accordingly. I’ll make an argument for it, but I don’t care to see any laws passed restricting people’s right to defend themselves.
I would ask you do the same.
Basically, if you’re against same-sex marriage, don’t get same-sex married.
Adam,
Why the name calling and labeling? Dialogue and difference need not be hostile…is hostility Christ like?
I agree that the Church has failed to promote generosity, giving to the poor and having strong marriages that are a testimony to the love and fidelity of Christ in our lives and marriages.
I notice that Christ avoided politics in the Bible, he was concerned over His flock, their choices and their actions as His children. No one has denied you your “basic human rights”. And me stating that homosexuality is a sin as defined by the bible does not in any way deny you your rights. My stance is as a Christian, as one you tries to obey the word of God even if I do not fully understand nor fathom its full meaning.
The world may do as it pleases in my view, they follow a different master. I will not try and force them to follow the biblical standard when they reject its author, that would be foolish. Rather I agree with you that we as Christians must also focus upon ALL the commands and let the differences be seen not just heard. MY only question is can you rightfully pick and choose which of of our Lord’s commandments you follow and still say you follow Christ?
It is not a matter of sin, for I am a chief sinner. I however am not fighting against the commands of my Lord, rather falling upon His mercy, grace and forgiveness. It is not my right to say I will give to the poor, yet engage in fornication because the bible is silent on masturbation. It is the heart, always the heart…has it been renewed or does it still fight against God?
I pray that mine surrenders to His majestic love more every hour, day, week etc.
What name calling? The only thing I called him was Conservative. I don’t think he’d take umbrage to that. And don’t confuse a passionate retort with hostility.
I’m not picking and choosing anything. I’m just suggesting that we not legislate our Christianity on others.
Adam, it might be beneficial for you to watch this short clip on legislating morality. Totally biblical.
And yet, Joel, that video conveniently doesn’t touch on the difference between the legislating morality based on socially necessary laws, and legislating based on comprehensive morality. He mentions robbery, murder, and driving over the speed limit – yes, these have social consequences – but there is legwork that needs done to go from those laws to laws against things like homosexual marriage, or sodomy, or adultery.
We can legislate some morality, but there is always a line in the sand.
That wasn’t my point Tim. My purpose in suggesting the video to Adam was to point out that we already ‘legislate Christianity on others’, which, of course, Adam says we must not do. Laws in place against things like theft, murder, etc, are based on Christian (biblical) standards.
What I meant was that we shouldn’t legislate our religious views on a pluralistic society. The shorthand I used was “Christianity”.
The laws that correlate with Christian principles are laws against sins that force themselves on an unwilling participant. When someone steals, there is another who was stolen from. What I am saying is that I have NEVER heard a reasoned, logical argument that proves same-sex marriage affects anyone negatively. I heard the same platitudes and cliches in this trailer that I’ve heard for decades and those hold no water.
I don’t want to slip into hyberbole here, but I dont think saying I am “stunned” by the comments listed after mine is an exageration. I am stunned. Homosexuality is excused, exonerated, explained away and generally given a full kiss of essential acceptance – while the military is seen as evil. Ok, homosexuality= good. Military = bad. Wait. I am going back to read these comments again. I MUST have misunderstood 90% of you.
Ok, done. Here we go. There is no ambiguity in either the OT or NT in regards to homosexuality. Z E R O. It is a violation of creative order, it is a sin, it is wicked, it will bring the judgement of God. End of story. I could list Scripture in support of this, but surely this crowd knows these verses and simply —- what ——- ignores them in deference to the preferences of pop culture? And if Scripture forbids homosexual conduct, then how in blazes could God endorse the “marriage” union of two men with each other?? And in response to Adam smack dab above me, how does ANY sin not affect negatively? I see in all this the danger of subjectivism replacing the objective truth of Scripture. When my generation passes in the next 10 or 20 years, I wonder if young Christians of today will have enough spine mixed with Bible undestanding to withstand evil. I worry about that for the sake of my (thus far) three grandkids – and yet – Lord, you are sovereign even in the darkest night. And it seems like it is getting awful dark…..
Hi David,
I would really like to move past the vitriol and accusations that seem to come up between us, and really talk about this. This is an important issue for the time – that we both agree on. I also think both of us would like Christ made manifest in every human’s life – whether they have been in straight relationships, gay ones, adulterous ones, or whatever. This is an important unifying place, and one I thank God I share with people like you, vendlerius, Joel, Adam, and others.
Of course, there are differences. I can certainly see how my take on homosexuality could appear appalling to you. For my generation, too many of us have seen what it looks like to have the hammer of dogma smash any humanizing of those we disagree with – like homosexuals. Some of us have thought hard about whether or not it is a sin, and some of us believe it is sinful but still advocate a more loving approach to it, and many of us don’t believe it is really within our reach to ban their choice of marriage in a country that is certainly not Christian, but built on what we would call libertarian ideals today.
For Christians like myself, OT rules against homosexuality hold little sway, and NT verses about it are seemingly quite vague. But even if they were not as vague as they are (oftentimes it is the translations that use the word homosexuality for a Greek term that refers to general fornication or sexual immorality), I would be curious to think about this, the same way many of us have thought about Paul’s comments on women (do you think women are “saved’ through childbirth?).
Mostly, I see Christ as a figure always looking to speak personally to us. He doesn’t tell all of us to sell everything we have, but He did to the rich young man. Perhaps He will convict a gay man to give up his lifestyle. Perhaps he will ask me to give up my straight lifestyle. I don’t think all morality happens this way, but I do think there is evidence for a Living Word, that is Christ, who is The Word, much more than the Bible is the Word.
Well, I hope these thoughts don’t anger you too much. It’s certainly not my intention.
To those of you who seem to dislike the military but think homosexuality is the cat’s meow, wouild you point me to the OT passage where God destroys with fire from heaven a military camp because it was a military camp in the way He destroyed Sodom?? Can you point out to me a counterpart to Romans 1;26-32 (and homosexuality) —about the mitary or soldiers?? Have all of you read the OT? Was God not a God of war for His people? Did He not have generals? Did He not command the death of His enemies? How then does ANYONE read the BIble and come up with a view that condemns all war (which is not condemned in Scripture) but then accept and endorse homosexuality (which IS condemned in Scripture)? Up is down, good is bad for some of you folk.
@Adam “So, if a heterosexual couple wants to get married but can’t get pregnant you would refuse them? And whet are you more opposed to, the acts implicit in a homosexual relationship or the love between two people. Because if you keep focusing on demonizing the ACT then your argument switches from a denial of the right to marry to policing people’s consensual, private actions like sex or prayer.”
These are the same strawmen arguments that are raised by those who wish to legitimize this behavior. Of course the answer to your first question is no. As for your second question, it is equally fallacious- you set up a false dichotomy and then preselect the answers that I am to choose from. I am opposed to men and women blatantly doing what the Scripture forbid, what nature itself testifies is a perversion of natural gifts given by God, and the attempts to call it “love.” Scripture tells us love rejoices in the truth. So for you to call this depravity, that flaunts itself in the face of truth, love is evidence that you have no basis for any of your arguments whatsoever.
@Tim: “Personally, I haven’t found support for violence, murder, or killing in the NT”
Try Romans Chapter 13.
Thank you for the referral, though I have to admit I was hoping for a bit of exegesis. This section always mystifies me, because by dating-accounts, this letter would seem to appear during the beginning of the Roman violence directed at Christians. I find it so interesting that Paul suggests obedience and submission during this time period, and I can’t say I have made sense of it. Perhaps you could help?
Yeah, I would like some further explanation. Did you mean a different passage? Let me see… “Obey rulers”…”Pay your Taxes”…”Love Others”…”Do not murder”…”live properly”…”Don’t get drunk”..”Don’t quarrel”…”Be near to Christ”.
I love that passage, but I’m having a hard time figuring out where God supports violence in there. Clarify?
I’m being evacuated fromDC right now, but I can’t take the blatant disregard for scripture, truth and logic going on here. Excuse my misspellings.
Sodom wasnIt destroyed because of homosexuality and to argue otherwise is either dishonest or just plain ignorant. And yes, god preserved his people militarily in the past, but god has NEVER glorified violence. David was unfit to build the temple. I throw up strawmen? Really? Wow.
Just… wow…
Adam, if you’re a member of the House of Reps, I wish you’d just say so
That’s funny you would say that…
Many of my clients are congressmen that I’m sure you’d be a huge fan of. I get tired of helping them send “Obama is a Socialist that Eats Babies” e-newsletters, though.
vendlerius – Reading your post was sweet icing on a fruitcake with far too little cake and way too many fruits. Thank you, and God bless you brother!
Adam: God doesnt “glorify” violence? Well – hold on sir. Call this “glorify” or no, but I find this a fascinating anecdote to your various assertions, Rev 19:11-15
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse, and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, aind in righteousness he doth judge and MAKE WAR. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the ARMIES which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp SWORD that with it he should SMITE THE NATIONS: and he will rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepres of the FIERCENESS and WRATH of Almighty God.
Sounds pretty militaristic. Sounds pretty bloody. Sounds pretty non-pacifist. Sounds pretty much like “glorified violence.”
And amazingly, it ain’t in the OT ! Gentlemen, take your seat, I rest my case.
oooookay…
Taking a highly figurative passage and basing life-and-death decisions on them is a bit worrisome, but sure. I’ll take it. Please note that it is God Himself doing the judging/smiting. Not us or our choices. God does not honor us for killing people in revenge for terrorism or in our selfish national interests.
And stop trying to assert that I don’t love the OT. It’s as perfect as the NT.
Maybe it’s a generation thing, but conservative Christians who freak out over homosexuality really come across as kooky, mean-spirited, uneducated busybodies. My generation has grown up with openly gay/bi friends and family, and we are not falling for all the old myths and lies about our gay loved ones. As Christians, we are not to force our beliefs on others or oppress people who are different. We are to love them. There is a beautiful Christian couple with kids in my church, and I would much rather hang around them than some sanctimonious homophobe who is filled with vitriol towards others because of who they love.
Malcom, my dear young man. A “generational thing?” “Freak out?” “Kooky, meanspirited, uneducated busybodies?” Tolerance and endorsement of sin does not make one enlightened, it just makes manifest one is not a Christian. Have you not read Deut 23:17? Lev 18:22? Lev 20:13? Rom 1: 2:24-28? I would assume given the tenor of your comment you do not believe God to the ultimate author of Scripture, but if you do – is God “kooky?” Is He caught up in some God-generational thing? Is God a “meanspirited, uneducated busybody?” Do you Malcom not realize that Christians advocate for truth NOT based on THEIR preferences, but on the revelation of truth as found in Holy Scripture? Would you have us to defer to whatever is socially in vogue at the expense of God’s Word and Law?
Joel, I read these sorts of comments and I am torn between a (I trust) holy zeal to confront wickedness, versus a desire to just turn of my computer, and hide away somewherer for the rest of my days and weep for this generation(and those in it who name Christ yet cling to evil notions of Egypt). I wish Malcom was a total aberation, but sadly, I find that many youth do, in ignorance or desire to fit in, embrace the culture of death and wickedness while presumably trying to follow Christ
I wasnt going to comment here again, but I feel compelled when I see such utterly confused,unbiblical notions and nonsense passed off as “wisdom.”
.
I can appreciate those feelings, more than you know.
Oh boy. Even if one has a fundamentalist view on homosexuality, it does not justify being disrespectful toward gay people or trying to force your particular theological beliefs on them. Same-sex orientated people are entitled to make choices regarding whom they will love, marry, and share their lives with just like all people. No one’s personal theology should be forced on another, Christian, fundamentalist, or otherwise.Too many religious fundamentalists are intoxicated with a desire to control others with their religious dogma and philosophy. Most people are not fundamentalists. Moreover,since some churches and synagogues support same-sex marriage, it’s a religious freedom issue. Who says fundamentalist religion should dictate to secular society what the law should be for everyone? IT should not. Respect means allowing people to do things you disagree with, even if you think their actions are sinful. Equal Protection under the law is not defined by a particular sect’s religious dogma, and certainly not by the very narrow views of fundamentalists.
Shelly, would you happen to be a woman?
of course
Then you are not, biblically, a pastor at all. Thanks for stopping by.
Reading “Pastor” Shelly, I am provoked to wonder, as I often have, why such do not just create their own religion. Feminist, liberal, homosexual endorsing and Bible denying. They could create a new religion, made of a few “luv” passages from the Bible, combined with all their own post-modern pop goo nonsense —-create some new “holy” book of vicious anti-true-Chrisitan diatribes, and presto chango, they have their own religion! They can Rev. each other and play church, and marry Sue to Sally, or Fred to Fido, preach against Christian values and doctrine to their heart’s content, and leave Christians alone.They can even leave the name “Christian” to us and call themselves “FemHomoLibLeftians. C’mon – First FemHomoLibLiftian Anti-Bible Church does have a certain delicate yet sophisticated modern ring to it, does it not?