The Fundamentalists are Correct About Gay Marriage
A
number of liberal Christians and
religious humanists accept the
concept of “gay marriage”.
These folks are indifferent to
what their Bible teaches about
homosexuality. Evidently, they
hold an intolerant attitude
towards Biblical instruction and
a tolerant attitude towards what
the Bible forbids! This issue
begs a question, “Why should
anyone accept the Bible
(Christianity) when you don’t
believe it yourself? This
Philosophical Christian (PC)
crowd lacks passion and
integrity in their stated
beliefs. Say what you will, I
think it is fair to question
their commitment based upon the
mixed message they convey with
the duality of their position.
Yes,
I’m in agreement with
Fundamentalists opposing “gay
marriage”, but for differing
reasons other than religion.
No, I didn’t have a
relapse of religion nor am I
contemplating pulling a “C.S.
Lewis” comeback. Certainly, I
am not writing this for shock
value. Other than the
Fundamentalist crowd you might
have a difficult time finding
those that oppose gay marriage.
Humanists are quick to accept
and defend those practicing
homosexuality but not as vocal
when it comes to making a
statement about gay marriage.
Certainly, this is a
delicate question where liberty
of thought is respected.
I
realize that this might be the
first article that a new visitor
might read when they come to
Ex-minister, so I need to
clarify a few things. I assure
you that you won’t get any
homophobic messages here. In
fact, for the record, this is
the fourth time I have broached
the subject of homosexuality.
Frequent visitors to this site
might be surprised with this
title, especially after reading Both
Ways and What
You Probably Didn't Know About
the Birds and the Bees.
Both of these articles
provide a strong anti-dote
against homophobia and encourage
those of faith to be more
understanding and tolerant. I
must confess my past reluctance
to express myself on this matter
due to my trepidations about
being misunderstood.
I’m
with the Fundamentalist on this
issue, but for totally different
reasons. Religion confounds this
issue. While some Christians
rebel against the scriptures,
others conform to the Bible but
forget their “hate the sin,
but love the sinner” halos! I
can’t help but think that the
push for gay marriage helps to
fuel the fires of homophobia.
Isn’t
it evident that people
perpetuate homophobia due to an
innate failure to properly
reason? The cures for homophobia
and religion both lie within the
hands of reason. Since reason
cured me, I think that it can
work for most anybody. In my
case, reason changed my mind and
cured my homophobia by
unplugging me from Christianity.
Both Christianity and
homophobia are unreasonable, but
the case against gay marriage
isn’t. I’m of the opinion
that this formula will continue
to work wonders, all one has to
do is to keep presenting reason.
Now that the groundwork is laid,
I will proceed to present my
case.
There
are two issues that should be
distinguished here. One is
tolerance and the other is gay
marriage. I’m all for
tolerance and against gay
marriage. How might someone
outside of faith oppose gay
marriage? This was an easy
question when I was a
fundamentalist minister.
I simply elevated the
sheep to the authoritarian level
of the Bible. Today, I chuckle
when I hear a television
evangelist proclaim the
authority of God’s word!
But don’t be so quick
to think that in the absence of
any “Heavenly instructions”
that their isn’t any credible
earthly source that has defined
marriage! I will skip past the
dictionaries and politicians and
look to the noteworthy and
credible United Nations.
The
United
Nations
General
Assembly
adopted
the
Universal
Declaration
of
Human
Rights
(UDHR)
in
December
of
1948.
This
Declaration
addresses
marriage
in
Article
16:
Article
16
Men
and
women
of
full
age,
without
any
limitation
due
to
race,
nationality
or
religion,
have
the
right
to
marry
and
to
found
a
family.
They
are
entitled
to
equal
rights
as
to
marriage,
during
marriage
and
at
its
dissolution.
Marriage
shall
be
entered
into
only
with
the
free
and
full
consent
of
the
intending
spouses.
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Do you want to fight the UN? Many fundamentalist don’t care for the UN and harbor certain paranoia's about them! People of reason should normally respect the UN and consider this article as a fair rendering defining marriage. The utterance of spouses in line two should remove any “loopholes” of the “men and women” of the first line. Simply put, marriage is between men AND women.
I
sense that many people feel that
this is a sufficient definition
for marriage. Why should anyone
seek to re-invent the wheel and
confuse a familiar yet lucid
term? I
don’t condone the gay agenda
(whatever that is) but I am a
proponent of gay rights! I think
that marriage should be denied
simply because in “gay
marriage” one cannot be or
have a spouse. My opinion is
that any government that denies
most any benefit that a married
couple enjoys is lacking in
compassion and understanding.
There should be a way for gay
couples to unite without
pirating the terminology of
marriage. Marriage is a
wonderful union that doesn’t
need to be tampered with!
Furthermore, I expect the UN to
honor its commitment to protect
the family from the encroachment
of gay marriage!
I’m
familiar with someone whose
parent “came out of the
closet” about their suppressed
sexuality. Naturally, this was
quite a load for the kid to
accept. Shortly after this
confession the parent was in car
accident and was desperately
clinging for life in a
hospitable. The “friend”
that had loved and dwelt with
the parent was denied visitation
rights for some time upon their
beloved’s deathbed. In time,
the visitation was allowed prior
to the passing of my friend’s
parent. This is just one example
among countless others that
burdens gay couples. Society
often treats pets better than
they treat gay people! Where is
our humanity?
The
failure of the government to
properly intervene for those of
the same sex that love each
other is a humanitarian problem.
But before we get too personal
and point out the government. I
must ask who is the government?
Isn’t it a group of people
like ourselves that reacts when
society pushes it into action?
How dare any of us finger
the government when society
bandies this issue around like a
hot potato! It is high time that
some innovative leader steps
forward and is enthusiastically
supported as they seek to break
the inertia of this issue!
History is awaiting a hero to
step up!
After
introspection, this article is
about taking responsibility and
my love for humanity. I should
use my background of religion to
help seek a remedy! The gay
minority is largely up against a
rather large bully of the
religious right. This is why I
risk the fear of being
misunderstood because the
religious right impedes a
resolution of the issue.
Although the Fundamentalist is
right about gay marriage and has
the right to express their
viewpoint in the matter, they
are damn ugly to fight a
reasonable alternative for gay
people that desire to commit one
to the other!
Gay
people that insist on pirating
marriage and redefining it are
their own worst enemy.
Alienating folks by being
unreasonable and failing to make
proper adjustments will likely
eliminate the possibility of
resolving this problem until
well into the next century.
Often in negotiations, people
“ask for the moon” to better
position themselves for the
eventual compromise. It isn’t
the nature of Fundamentalists to
compromise and someone needs to
step in between these two for
the sake of humanity. Otherwise
we will continue to have
perpetual gridlock!
I
realize that gay couples love is
every bit as real as
heterosexual love is. Whatever
compromise is reached between
these two should be such that it
doesn’t denigrate, cheapen or
soften the feelings or
commitment that gay couples
share for each other. I don’t
have the answer to this enormous
challenge, perhaps a sufficient
term needs to be coined?
Earlier,
I mentioned taking
responsibility. It is easy to
watch others try to accomplish
something because it doesn’t
involve any risks to be taken
from your side. I could have
listened to my fears, remained
silent and secretly wish from my
heart for a solution. This type
of thinking is “BS” and
similar to prayer. Otherwise
known as a refuge for cowards
and couch potatoes! This is YOUR
life, get up off the couch and
start living it!
Brian Worley 12/02/2008 Ex-minister.org All rights reserved