Okay I'm prefacing this with a few disclaimers.
First, I have many friends that are gay, and this is not intended to be read as an assault on the members of the gay & lesbian community.
Secondly, I think it should be well understood what my opinion of homosexual nature is. My opinion is this: like depression and alcoholism, homosexuality stems from a genetic predisposition for that condition. I will never argue that it is entirely one's choice as to what there basic preference is. However, just as we encourage those who live with depression and alcoholism to avoid those tendencies, we must, as Christians, acknowledge that it is an improper lifestyle, and something we should work to, overcome, or at the least control. I don't agree with the idea that "God made me this way," because God would not contradict himself. It is my belief that Satan intervened in the developmental processes, just as he does with alcoholism and depression.
I understand that whether you are for or against homosexuality my second disclaimer won't be popular, I stand firm in the my belief, given what I know, that it can't be so black & white as to say it is either a choice or genetics, with no other chemical mental occurrence do we make that argument. I don't write this to try to force this line of thought on you, but so that you understand where I am coming from and I would hope that anyone else writing on such a controversial issue would do like wise.
Now that I've done best to make clear my stand point on the issue of homosexuality it is time to move on to my primary topic for this article.
That topic is gay marriage. It has been in the news lately. Mostly in the realm of talk concerning Proposition 8, which across the board was put into place in every state constitution. But this ban is for marriages not civil unions.
Now it is not my goal to argue against civil unions, as far as the state is concerned a civil union is just as good as marriage, it allows all the same rights and privileges that a marriage affords, so far as the state is concerned.
So the argument that homosexuals should be allowed to have gay marriage in order that they might have the same rights as a married couple (joint custody of a child, shared insurance, etc.) is a straw man since they are arguing for something that is available through other channels.
Many comedians have made the joke that we should, "Go ahead and allow gay marriage so that the gays will be as unhappy as the rest of us." That's part of the problem, marriage isn't being treated with the proper respect. In fact I would argue that many people who get "married" are doing nothing more than signing a contract, as far as their concerned. Few people consider the full weight of marriage. It isn't some contract that is legally binding until your lawyer's can find you a way out of it. It's supposed to be a one time shot. "From this day forward," "Til death do you part," "Now and forever," do you know what that means? FOR-EV-ER to quote Outkast, "Forever never seems to be to long until your grown."
SIDE NOTE: Polygamy... I could careless I have found no sound doctrine in the bible that speaks out against multiple marriages in fact it seems to be endorsed by the Old Testament.
The problem stems from a lack of respect for the term "marriage". Most people today, regardless of their sexual orientation, are entering into "civil unions," not marriages. The difference being the inclusion of God in that relationship.
Now those of you who know me saw this coming, but... let's look at the first marriage the model for all marriages that have since existed, Adam and Eve. Now if you don't believe in Adam and Eve, as I'm sure some do not, then if you believe in a God of any kind look for the point I'm trying to make with this example.
God brought Adam and Eve together. Their relationship flourished under God's care in the garden. It was when they focused on themselves that marital difficulties ensued. Now I'm sure that some of you can imagine the kind of bickering that occurred after they were cast out of the garden. All of the "this is your fault" "no its your fault" that would have gone on and yet they stayed together. They returned their focus to God doing as he had commanded them. They had many children and taught them about God. And they lived on to incredibly old ages. Together.
Their are several examples of marriage in the Bible, some good some bad some that started out rocky, but ended well, but the key to every example of marital success in the Bible is a focus on God.
Returning to my point, some of you may misunderstand me to say that if homosexuals have a clear love for God, as many I know do, then marriage should be allowed for them. No. My point with that little offshoot is that Marriage should be respected for what it is, and what is was established as, not what we think of it as. Marriage is the joining together of a man and woman into one flesh, by God. Again, God's nature does not contradict itself. He would not castigate homosexuals, but then give them credence to found a relationship in his name that was against his design.
Does it happen, yes, adulterers and homosexuals get married, but its not true "marriage." It is a grasping at what God has designed as good. Just as God created attraction as a good thing, but lust (as Dietrich Bonhoeffer describes it) is attraction apart from God, and a homosexual marriage is a marriage apart from God.
In summation, God established marriage as a loving relationship between a man and woman with him as the focus. Anything apart from that is not marriage. This isn't just true for Homosexuals but any so union that doesn't have these three ingredients is not marriage. If a man and woman are married and focused on God but don't love one another it is a fool's errand, not marriage. If a man and woman love one another but don't have God as their focus, it is a ship doomed to sink, it is not marriage. If it is two men or two women who love one another (as true as that love can be) and are focused on God, then it a silhouette, a phantom, a mirage, but is not marriage.
You may not agree with what I have to say. In fact I'm fairly certain most people won't like what I've said here, at least not in its entirety, but no writer's purpose should be for their audience to hail and praise him; a writer's goal should be to make his reader's think and think critically. There would be no need for men to write if all people were in agreement about the issues.
-matt
