Are Christians Using Reason or Emotion?


Are religious groups “divisive” regarding the same-sex marriage issue? My friend Alison thinks so. She says religious opposition comes from fear, not love.
Perhaps she’s not considered that opponents of same-sex marriage might have reasons—not emotion–for their opposition. The implication is that if you don’t extend a man’s right to marry another man, you’re against liberty/equal rights. How bigoted. How unloving.
The argument for same-sex marriage is problematic because it knows no limitations. I stated in a previous posting that same-sex marriage would lead to polygamy, polyandry, marriage with one’s dog or five-year-old but this was rejected as “nonsense.” I’ll repeat myself: all of these combinations have been attempted in various parts of our land of liberty. Very true. Check it out.
You see, if we re-make or remove the traditional boundaries on marriage, where do you stop? Warren Jeffs (now in jail) over in Utah has numerous wives. I read a couple years ago about the woman wanting to marry her dog. Why shouldn’t they be granted permission to redefine marriage to suit their desires? At issue is that if you limit marriage at any point, you are “depriving” someone outside that limit from having equal rights. This falsely equates liberty with absolute liberty.
We can ask “Is it free?” but we must also ask the follow-up question “Is it good?” What we have left is an all-encompassing definition of family that simply does not work. For example, there can be no workable body of family law if there are no restrictions on what we call “family.” All ideas have consequences. But the worst ideas usually have consequences for someone else.
Same-sex proponents say that gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage; marriage under law is a union of equals. Really? That meant that when you were a baby, you could have been breast-fed by your father?
How can they say that men and women are interchangeable as parents but not as sex partners? After all, if gender really is irrelevant to marriage as they maintain—if men and women are interchangeable—then why argue for same-sex marriage at all? Why not just tell homosexuals, “Gender is irrelevant to marriage, so instead of making a fuss, why not just go ahead and marry someone from the opposite sex”?
I hope as you read these comments, you’ll see they are based on reason. Certainly, we get emotional about these topics. We must show compassion to those dealing with same-sex desires, just as we show the truth of a disciplined compassion to the person struggling with alcohol.
Marriage is an institution that predates every constitution, every judicial body, and every legislative body in the world. Let’s not change it to suit the mood of the moment.

Advertisements

About samuelehall

A follower of Jesus, husband, father of 3 adult children, writer and learner.
This entry was posted in Feared Classes, Risking change/changing the risk and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s