Marriage – Eden’s Legacy or Sodom’s Curse?

 

Gay marriage is a contradiction in terms. Marriage has been defined since the literal first moment of the existence of the two genders as the joining of a man and a woman.
23The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

24For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh (GEN 2:23, 24)

The debate over rather to allow homosexuals to marry is fundamental to the survival of the American way of life. We have come now to a place where good is called evil and evil good. (Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!)

First of all, Homosexuality is a deviant behavior. It is a sin before God. Scripture is clear on this matter. Both the old and new testaments proclaim this with no uncertainty or wiggle room for interpretation.  This question is a question of morality; are we a moral nation or a degenerate one? Do we accept morality as having certain absolute codes or is it strictly a question of relativity? Leaving aside for the moment the most important aspect of the morality debate, the judgment of God,  let us remember that without a moral underpinning a free society cannot stand. One of the great philosophers of the great enlightenment Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu made the following observations on moral absolutes or to use his word virtue; “ There is no great share of probity necessary to support a monarchical or despotic government. The force of laws in one, and the prince's arm in the other, are sufficient to direct and maintain the whole. But in a popular state, one spring more is necessary, namely, virtue… When virtue is banished, ambition invades the minds of those who are disposed to receive it, and avarice possesses the whole community. The objects of their desires are changed; what they were fond of before has become indifferent; they were free while under the restraint of laws, but they would fain now be free to act against law; and as each citizen is like a slave who has run away from his master, that which was a maxim of equity he calls rigour; that which was a rule of action he styles constraint; and to precaution he gives the name of fear. Frugality, and not the thirst of gain, now passes for avarice. Formerly the wealth of individuals constituted the public treasure; but now this has become the patrimony of private persons. The members of the commonwealth riot on the public spoils, and its strength is only the power of a few, and the licence of many.”

The first argument that the gay rights activists will use is the claim that marriage is a right hence cannot be denied gay couples.  Never has “marriage” been an inalienable right. Federalism allows that the all matters not specifically enumerated in the constitution are relegated to the states. The states therefore have the right to choose whom they will and will not issue a marriage license to. 2012 saw the first electoral success for the gay rights lobbies and no conservatives are actively seeking to use the power of the judiciary to take away those state’s decisions. In Fact the “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) was passed by a Republican house and signed by Democrat Bill Clinton with the expectation that some states would allow for gay marriage, and its key provision is to allow states the authority to recognize or not to recognize same sex unions from other states. Marriage is a spiritual institution and a cultural one that states recognize and encourage because it is beneficial, yes even essential, to society. States however did not invent marriage; they simply recognize “what God hath wrought”. Calling gay couples “spouses” does not make it so. A man cannot marry another man any more than he can marry a lamp post or a sports car. Marriage is what it is and not even the US Supreme Court can change that.

Don’t get me wrong, gays and lesbians have rights. They have the freedom to speak out on their beliefs, they have the right to keep and bear arms, they have the right of assembly and no one can take away their personal property without just compensation. They have the right to due process and they have the protection of the law against harm to their persons or possessions. They can engage in whatever deviant behaviors they wish in the privacy of their homes without the fear of unreasonable search and seizures.  They can find sympathetic clergy that will perform a ceremony over them; they can choose to live in the committed relationship they always talk about. They have no desire for liberty, what they want is for the rest of the country to be coerced or straight out forced to acknowledge their reprehensible arrangements as morally equal to “what God has joined together.”

Certain issues are presented by those who support gay marriage which should be addressed, such as death benefits or hospital visits, conservatism offers the solution without casting aside morals in a manner reminiscent of Sodom.  Federal regulations should allow for insurance companies to decide who they want to insure and who they do not. Some companies either for matters of principle or economics would love to extend their benefits to the “non-traditional” partners of potential customers while other providers would market to the more conservative consumers by only insuring traditional families. Likewise companies could determine rather to recognize common law arrangements, etc. the market is perfectly capable of dealing with these matters. Likewise anyone wanting to grant visitation to a partner other than a wife of children should merely have to go and have a paper drawn up in advance that says in event of my incapacitation I want the “so and so” to be allowed access  to visitation and to make decisions on my behalf. That simple, gays and lesbians can sin if they choose, live as free moral agents without using the heavy hand of judicial activism to force their conduct on the rest of us.

So you see my views, which are the Christian views, are not bigoted but they are principled. We don’t want to see gays and lesbians mistreated or punished, we do however want them to see the error of their ways and come in repentance to the Cross of the Lord for forgiveness and healing. We want them to bend the knee to God willingly, it is not the Christian, nor the conservative, way to force anyone to comply with our morals, and we simply ask the same respect in return.

The Gay Agenda is not the only threat to marriage. It may not be the most pressing, just the hottest topic. Next time we will look at the greater threats to marriage (AKA our civil society) then in the third part we will remind ourselves what marriage was meant to be!

Keep on the firing line.

PS our prayers go out to the people of Boston and the families who suffered loss or injury in yesterday’s terror attack. God bless you and bring justice to the evil bastards responsible.