"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."
(Abraham Lincoln "Gettysburg Address")
We have all been seeing a lot of equals signs on Facebook and the Internet lately. The gay marriage question is appearing on all fronts, and its catchword is "equality". Equality is a deeply important idea to Americans. It is written into the very fabric of our country, and we as a nation are particularly sensitive to it. The quotation cited above from President Abraham Lincoln reminds us of the grave struggle which our country underwent before granting legal equality to people of all races. The early pilgrims and settlers of this continent came seeking equality in the matter of religious freedom. The suffragettes had to work long and hard to achieve the recognition of the equality of women in matters such as voting. And few now would dare to say publicly that Blacks are not equal to Whites, that Presbyterians and Catholics do not deserve equal treatment, or that women are inferior to men. While thousands of prejudices still exist in the United States, the ideas of inequality or unfairness are by and large repugnant to the sentiments of this nation as a whole.
And so we come to the question of gay marriage. Our emotions and ideals have long been prepared, our fear of being labelled as bigots too often overrides our rationality, and the catchwords and shibboleths have long been hammered into our ears. And so, when it comes down to it, to a very great many of us, even Christians, the idea of gay marriage seems reasonable, even logical. Why should we deny legal status to those who have different sexual preferences to us? They cannot help being the way they are, who are we to discriminate? We believe in separation of Church and State, so why are we clinging to some outmoded religious idea that homosexuality is wrong? Why should these people who love their partners and desire a committed relationship be the outcast of society? Haven't we moved past prejudice, discrimination, and inequality in our country yet?
But I will dare to say here that we have been victims of propaganda, and that the question of gay marriage is not a rational or logical one, but rather a platform built on emotion and sentiment. In a way it reminds me a great deal of the so-called "pro-choice" question. The only rational argument about abortion is to determine if an unborn child is really human. But the pro-choice movement has largely ignored that question (or flat out lied about it), and has deluged our emotions and sensitivities with the questions of privacy and women's choice. Most of us really don't want to be seen as chauvinistic asses, so these points are very effective. Many men who would never dream of pressuring their partner into an abortion take pride in supporting a women's right to procure an abortion, proclaiming loudly, "I'm a man. What right do I have to tell a woman what to do with her body?" The propaganda has been devastatingly effective. But it was never about women's bodies or women's rights, it was about human rights-- the right of an unborn child to see daylight.
In much the same way the gay rights movement has often sidestepped the rational questions of the problem, and has instead deluged our emotional targets with a barrage of words such as "discrimination", "equality", and "marginalization". And this propaganda has been effective as well. Countless straight men and women, Christians, and married couples now proudly proclaim their support of gay marriage, feeling benevolent and satisfied that they have been fair and broadminded, sensitive to those who are different from themselves. We have been emotionally bullied into silence for fear of being labelled as bigots.
Perhaps only one thing has been more effective than this propaganda in the advancement of the gay rights cause, and that is the weakness of the churches. Too many denominations who accept traditional marriage on the basis of Scripture have not bothered to find a philosophical or logical structure from which to approach a secular world that does not believe the Bible. Too many others, readily accepting divorce and contraception, have never really understood traditional marriage to begin with, and so have little answer to give the homosexual community. By and large the only Christian group that can effectively contend with the secular world on this issue is the Roman Catholic Church. But even here, too many decades of liberalism, poor education, homosexual priests, and sheer heartbreaking silence have left us gravely handicapped. It is time to pray, study, think, and speak.
What, then, is the rational question(s) which must be addressed on the issue of gay marriage? There are three, which are all interconnected. 1. What is marriage (what is its most accurate definition, its purpose, and its scope)? 2. Can gay unions be accurately included within an accurate definition of marriage? 3. What is the effect of marriage upon society, and what effects may we expect from an alteration of its meaning and its structure?
I do not here intend to create an argument against homosexuality or gay marriage. That will be reserved for the next several posts on this subject. But let me frankly say that emotion has nothing to do with this debate. We all have emotions. The man who leaves his wife of many years whom he no longer loves for the woman whom he passionately adores has followed his emotions. Yes. But that is not the question. What has he done to society, his children, and himself? That is the question. And the questions before us today, as we consider the problem of gay marriage, are not equality, love, emotion, etc. Nor is the matter of heterosexual marriage an emotional one. In both cases the question is "What is marriage, and what results may we expect in our society with its dissolution?"
When a movie shows a devoted gay couple; when a TV show presents parents who are opposed to their son being gay as bigots; when a liberal asks you "What right do we have to forbid two men who love each other the same benefits as a man and a women receive"; or "Why should two committed, loving women not have the right to adopt a child to raise as their own"; or when you read the editorial that declares that the opposition to gay marriage can only be a religious one, and we are a country who believes in separation of Church and State; when you hear all these things, smile a little, for you are listening to cheap and tawdry propaganda, and it will not fool you in the least.
And so we come to the question of gay marriage. Our emotions and ideals have long been prepared, our fear of being labelled as bigots too often overrides our rationality, and the catchwords and shibboleths have long been hammered into our ears. And so, when it comes down to it, to a very great many of us, even Christians, the idea of gay marriage seems reasonable, even logical. Why should we deny legal status to those who have different sexual preferences to us? They cannot help being the way they are, who are we to discriminate? We believe in separation of Church and State, so why are we clinging to some outmoded religious idea that homosexuality is wrong? Why should these people who love their partners and desire a committed relationship be the outcast of society? Haven't we moved past prejudice, discrimination, and inequality in our country yet?
But I will dare to say here that we have been victims of propaganda, and that the question of gay marriage is not a rational or logical one, but rather a platform built on emotion and sentiment. In a way it reminds me a great deal of the so-called "pro-choice" question. The only rational argument about abortion is to determine if an unborn child is really human. But the pro-choice movement has largely ignored that question (or flat out lied about it), and has deluged our emotions and sensitivities with the questions of privacy and women's choice. Most of us really don't want to be seen as chauvinistic asses, so these points are very effective. Many men who would never dream of pressuring their partner into an abortion take pride in supporting a women's right to procure an abortion, proclaiming loudly, "I'm a man. What right do I have to tell a woman what to do with her body?" The propaganda has been devastatingly effective. But it was never about women's bodies or women's rights, it was about human rights-- the right of an unborn child to see daylight.
In much the same way the gay rights movement has often sidestepped the rational questions of the problem, and has instead deluged our emotional targets with a barrage of words such as "discrimination", "equality", and "marginalization". And this propaganda has been effective as well. Countless straight men and women, Christians, and married couples now proudly proclaim their support of gay marriage, feeling benevolent and satisfied that they have been fair and broadminded, sensitive to those who are different from themselves. We have been emotionally bullied into silence for fear of being labelled as bigots.
Perhaps only one thing has been more effective than this propaganda in the advancement of the gay rights cause, and that is the weakness of the churches. Too many denominations who accept traditional marriage on the basis of Scripture have not bothered to find a philosophical or logical structure from which to approach a secular world that does not believe the Bible. Too many others, readily accepting divorce and contraception, have never really understood traditional marriage to begin with, and so have little answer to give the homosexual community. By and large the only Christian group that can effectively contend with the secular world on this issue is the Roman Catholic Church. But even here, too many decades of liberalism, poor education, homosexual priests, and sheer heartbreaking silence have left us gravely handicapped. It is time to pray, study, think, and speak.
What, then, is the rational question(s) which must be addressed on the issue of gay marriage? There are three, which are all interconnected. 1. What is marriage (what is its most accurate definition, its purpose, and its scope)? 2. Can gay unions be accurately included within an accurate definition of marriage? 3. What is the effect of marriage upon society, and what effects may we expect from an alteration of its meaning and its structure?
I do not here intend to create an argument against homosexuality or gay marriage. That will be reserved for the next several posts on this subject. But let me frankly say that emotion has nothing to do with this debate. We all have emotions. The man who leaves his wife of many years whom he no longer loves for the woman whom he passionately adores has followed his emotions. Yes. But that is not the question. What has he done to society, his children, and himself? That is the question. And the questions before us today, as we consider the problem of gay marriage, are not equality, love, emotion, etc. Nor is the matter of heterosexual marriage an emotional one. In both cases the question is "What is marriage, and what results may we expect in our society with its dissolution?"
When a movie shows a devoted gay couple; when a TV show presents parents who are opposed to their son being gay as bigots; when a liberal asks you "What right do we have to forbid two men who love each other the same benefits as a man and a women receive"; or "Why should two committed, loving women not have the right to adopt a child to raise as their own"; or when you read the editorial that declares that the opposition to gay marriage can only be a religious one, and we are a country who believes in separation of Church and State; when you hear all these things, smile a little, for you are listening to cheap and tawdry propaganda, and it will not fool you in the least.
1 comment:
Within the church there is much that is left undone. The Bible says, "All have sinned and fallen short of the grace of God. There is none righteous, no not one." Saying that does not justify the sin of abortion or homosexuality, or divorce, but it explains why Jesus had to come and lay His life down for all of us. The real problem is in not wanting to turn from sin and justifying sin at every turn. However, to seek forgivness at any level and repent and turn from that sin brings God's favor back into the life of the one who creates the problem for themselves and others.
You have expressed yourself well, however there is a universal need that goes beyond the church and takes you right into the presence of God Himself. When that happens everything changes including the church, whether Protestant or Catholic. I know it to be true. I have been changed by His own presence at work in my life and I will never be the same again.
Post a Comment