My Evolution on Gay Marriage.
**Commence eye-rolling at over-used politi-speak**
I used to think that the idea of “gay marriage” was appalling and one of the worst evils that could befall our nation. Arrogantly casting aside the time-honored traditions of “live and let live” in the interpretation and application of the US Constitution, I was willing to fight to the death for a Constitutional Amendment defining Marriage as being a covenant between one man and one woman. As I’ve gotten older, however, I have had a bit of an enlightenment in relation to this topic that causes me to say that my younger self was incredibly wrong. My endeavor here is to rectify what damage I may have done and correct my own worldview.
To those who identify themselves as homoseuxal, I offer my deepest and sincerest apologies. Apologies for the stupids and the crazies who call themselves followers of Christ who (1) failed to love you well and (2) failed to reach you with the Gospel and even now sit back hurling epithets and calling you the scourge of the nation. Apologies on behalf of those who simply went along with you being isolated as an “other” category of humans… simply because of your sexuality. Apologies for those who pushed traditionalist non-anatomic definitions of gender and led to confusion about identity. Apologies for those who sought to define those with same-sex attraction as something other than fully human.
To the rest of us, those with same-sex attraction are simply human. They are not a different people group, they are not a different race, they are not a different species — as such, they should not be denied the civil rights afforded to any heterosexual individual. They want to live their lives the way they see fit — just like all other Americans… except those that think they have a right to that which they didn’t earn, but that is a different topic. Why are we shocked that in a world like this there are people who are attracted to the “wrong” gender?
The problem that we have is defining marriage. Ultimately, there is a subsection of the American public that demands that Marriage be declared a universal civil right of all Americans. The problem is that marriage is not primarily a civil right… it is a religious one. If we define marriage as being between one man and one woman, that is actually religious persecution against both the Mormons and the Muslims. Why do marriages take place in a church? Because the marriage vows, much more than mere promises, are covenants made before God. Thus, the government can attempt to define marriage however it wants, but real “marriage” doesn’t change…because it is a religious rite that is distributed by the church.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. — Amendment 1. The Constitution of the United States
So, looking at this topic, it becomes clear to me that attempting to define marriage is out of bounds for the Federal Government. By the time we are talking about laws and amendments to define marriage, we have so crossed the line of what Government is allowed to do that we have forgotten there was even a line there. Thus, it is my official stance on the topic that the Government needs to gracefully bow out of this discussion. Not just shelving the “gay marrriage” debate, but dropping the marriage line entirely. If our concern is Power of Attorney, you can sign that to whoever you like. If it is Tax Credits, let’s reform the Tax Code. In essence, the government needs to neither endorse or deny marriages… that is the job of the church.
So what about California? Proposition 8. Admittedly, I’m shocked that California passed it. I’m even more shocked that the electorate confirmed it. But what I say next is going to shock a lot of people… I don’t give a flying toss about the implications on the Gay Marriage debate if SCOTUS overturns Proposition 8. I do, however, care about the implications if SCOTUS overturns Prop 8 for what it means in the relationship between the states and federal government. If SCOTUS overturns Proposition 8, the federal government will have seized the power to strike down portions of state constitutions that it doesn’t like. With the current climate of 13 states having passed laws or amendments declaring their own sovereignty and another 8 passing laws declaring that federal agents attempting to enforce federal gun regs will be subject to prosecution, this is a collision course to getting messy really fast. If the Supreme Court can strike down the will of the majority of the electorate in California, none of us are safe from the tyranny of the Courts…regardless of our sexual orientation.
There is another civil war brewing. The first one put an end to state autonomy… what will the second bring?