I’m writing this to address the liberal minded people out there and the moderates who are quickly jumping on the band wagon of supporting the gay marriage movement in hopes that you would read this and open your perspective on the issue.
Gay Marriage isn’t just a civil rights issue, It’s a separation of church and state issue.
For those of you who don’t know your history, marriage is an institution that was ordained by God and incorporated into religious practice since the beginning of civilization, and then much much later adopted by the federal government to identify families for tax and legal reasons. If you don’t like that the government piggy backing it’s legislation on religious institutions like marriage, then that is a different issue then modifying the definition of marriage. You could change the tax laws and allow for contractual arrangements for all those instances that require legal relationships. This could be useful to more than just homosexuals. But you CAN’T redefine a religious sacrament that predates the constitution to make yourself feel better.
If you disagree, as a homosexual, then I have one challenge for you. Procreate.
There has been much work done in the past decade to provide equal rights to everyone despite their sexual preference, with the exception of pedophiles, animal lovers, and polygamists. There are some issues that really need to be dealt with when it comes to health care decisions and identifying next of kin. But it seems like a simple next of kin document and some form of power of attorney document would take care of most of those issues. This is where the concept of civil unions has come in to provide for those issues in one document. But in America, the gay movement says that that is not enough. Why? European gays don’t mind civil unions. Mainly because they don’t care much about God or what Godly people think of them. In America, this generation of homosexuals is looking for more than rights. They are asking for everyone’s approval. They want to be told it’s more than allowable, that it’s normal. But it’s not normal. It’s not equal to a man and wife. You can have equal rights, but you are not guaranteed equality. If you disagree, as a homosexual, then I have one challenge for you. Procreate. Show me how you contribute to the whole of society through re-population. See, in the Christian belief, marriage was designed for the purpose of producing offspring. To “Go forth and multiply” was the command by God to Adam and Eve. You may say that you don’t believe in the bible or in God all together, so these arguments don’t hold up. But then I ask you, why are you trying to change the religious institution of marriage? Why not be content with the rights and liberties of civil unions.
The reason that so many are moving towards supporting the gay ajenda for marriage rights, is that they have fallen into a slipper slope argument that begins with a bad premise.
- Gay people are a minority group like racial minorities, who are being oppressed because of they are different.
- Civil Unions are a lesser status then marriage and an insult to equality.
- Non-support of Gay marriage makes you a close minded bigot raciest hate monger.
- Gay marriage doesn’t harm anyone, so why bother being against it.
If it was genetic, they would be extinct by now…
First of all, I have to admit, I’m a white guy in his early 30’s, so I’ve never experienced real racism first hand. But I do love to hear the stories of the stories of the sit-ins and demonstrations that revolutionized our countries race relations. America was wrong about a bunch of issues when it came to interacting with different cultures. We destroyed the Indians culture to dominate it with one we were more comfortable with. We engaged in the heinous act of slave trade and for a long time after looked down upon dark skinned people and pigion holed their potential. We poked fun and stereotyped the Irish when they migrated to our shores. We vilify Latinos for political posturing. We suck at race relations as a country. But to measure the struggles of homosexuality up to the struggles of racism, to me, feels like an insult to the civil rights movement. People are not born gay. This is a story some would like for you to believe, but the tough truth is that it is just a sexual and relational preference. It isn’t a genetic disposition, because that’s impossible, since gay people don’t pass genes down. If it was genetic, they would be extinct by now, or at least in an ever decreasing population.
Homosexuality is more comparable to the hippie movement of the late 60’s and early 70’s. It’s a lifestyle, not a race. And people hated hippies too, and even kicked them out of stores and restaurants. But that wasn’t racism. That was seeing someone who’s culture and values were perceived as a danger to you and your offspring and reacting to protect your culture and values. And now, several centuries later, we can all agree that the drug and free love atmosphere of that movement wasn’t all that they had hoped it would be and did in fact do a lot of damage to those who got lost in it.
Some hard line conservatives are bothered by the fact that I’m okay with civil unions. My feelings are that as long as they don’t try to mess with my rights and religious practices, then I have no right to oppose them because I believe it to be immoral. I’m comforted by the fact that my beliefs are based on principles that have survived this kind of thing in the past and will outlast this phase of history as well. Allowing for civil unions won’t turn any more people gay, just as not allowing them doesn’t stop homosexual behavior. But I do have issue with messing with the identity of changing the definition of marriage. I want my children to grow up seeing marriage as a sacred and life changing event that is the celebration of the beginning of a new family.
it’s a slippery slope when the government starts defining religious institutions
I don’t blame homosexuals for the downfall of marriage. It has been under attack for a long time by the culture off divorce and separation. But that doesn’t mean we can further distort it’s meaning. It means that now, more then ever, we need to stand up for it and defend it from harm.
Who does it really hurt? It might not seem like much if you are not a person of faith, or hold anything to be sacred. But it’s a slippery slope when the government starts defining religious institutions and legislating who is allowed to partake in them. Will the next step be laws that define who is eligible for salvation. Who can be baptized and how. The government has no place in that. And in case you didn’t know, the bible is very clear on this. Those eligible for salvation are everyone. Including gays, rapist, murders, and even overly opinionated jerks like me.
If you think I have it completely wrong, then leave a comment and tell me how. Or even better, write your 1000 word essay on the issue. But whatever you say, don’t call me close minded. I have given this a lot of thought, and being against something is not the definition of close minded.