The Marriage Equality Sham

We live in Indiana. The State legislature is considering a constitutional amendment to define marriage as union between one man and one woman. The other evening we received a telephone call from some group pushing for marriage equality and wanting to add our names to the list of all fair minded, right thinking Hoosiers everywhere.

It is a sham. From both directions.

I didn’t answer the phone. My wife did. I hope I get to the next time.

“Hello sir, do you support marriage equality?”

“No, I certainly do not. And you probably don’t either.”

“Well, sir, I most certainly do.”

“Really? So you support the right of 40 year old man to marry an 11 year old boy?”

“Well, sir, that involves a minor so…”

“But you do support the right of one man to marry 3 consenting women? Or 4 consenting men? Or a consenting horse? What with you supporting marriage equality and all…”

“Thank you for your time sir…”

No one supports marriage equality. “Equality” is a sham. “Legislating morality” is a straw man. “Thou shalt not judge” is hogwash. Everyone judges. Everyone. That is why we are told to judge with right judgment. Jesus said that. Everyone judges. No one supports marriage equality.

But I am not too impressed with those politicians pushing for the passing of this legislation. I’m pretty sure they know any such passage wouldn’t stand for more than two weeks in the current judicial climate. I mean, I know it, so I am just assuming people who are doing this for a living know it too.

No Statehouse is going to remedy what ails this land.

 

 

 

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “The Marriage Equality Sham

  1. You come across as pretty immature, compared to most pastors I know. But it’s your space. You are entitled to present yourself any way you like. I just don’t think you’ll draw anyone to support your position (that doesn’t already do so) by acting so snotty. What, exactly, did you accomplish by haranguing a minimum-wage worker on the phone? Did it make you feel better?

    • Well I am dreading turning 40 this year, so maybe this is just my way of coping. But, I am not really sure how calling me names helps anything.

      To answer some of your assertions: first, I did not talk to the person on the phone, so I did not harangue anyone. The third line in the post, the one that goes, “I didn’t answer the phone. My wife did. I hope I get to the next time.” That’s what that means.

      Secondly, to be honest, I am not really looking for anyone to support my position. I wasn’t the one calling strangers at 9:00 p.m. trying to get their support for the spread of wickedness.

      Thirdly, since I did not answer the phone, I did not hope to accomplish anything. With this post I only hoped to show the inherent fallacy, idiocy, hypocrisy, etc. of the whole “marriage equality” racket. Early reports indicate that I might yet prove successful since the very first response simply resorted to name calling and slandering. I didn’t expect anything less.

      Do you believe that anyone(s) should be able to marry anyone(s) or even anything(s)?

      • No, I don’t approve of marriages to children. There is such a thing as “age of consent”. Marriage ought to be a matter of choice, between two people qualified to make that choice. That child marriage occurs in tribal society is part of viewing human beings as being “ownable” property. It’s an aspect of slavery, and the buying and selling of humans still exists in our world.

        I think that if two consenting adults want to make a permanent legal commitment to each other, it should be an option open to them. It has no effect on my marriage, nor upon my church’s ability to marry people (or not). The “straw man” argument that it must somehow lead to bestiality or pedophilia is nonsense. It’s just a re-definition of the boundaries of marriage, which has happened periodically many times previously.

        It used to be illegal for people of different social classes to marry. It was at first legal for priests to be married, until it wasn’t, until it was again. It used to be illegal for persons of different skin colors to marry. It’s a rethink of boundaries available to consenting adults. Every past change has been about what consenting adults are allowed to do.

        I will say it’s probably an improvement that polygamy isn’t currently legal in developed nations, as it was in Biblical times. But at a point in history when survival was tenuous for all, and tribal society was the norm, I can understand it.

  2. Mike,
    Here are the problems I see with your arguments.

    First- it does not really matter how man has defined, or mis-defined marriage in the past, present, or future. Marriage has already been defined by a higher Authority. The only thing left to man is to accept God’s definition or reject it.

    Second, “if two consenting adults want to make a permanent legal commitment to each other” is your basis for marriage, why must it be limited to two? The polygamy argument is certainly not a straw man argument because IT IS ALREADY HAPPENING! A judge in Utah ruled his state’s polygamy law unconstitutional. A judge in North Dakota declared a man could be legally married to a woman in North Dakota and a man in a different state.

    Third, “if two consenting adults want to make a permanent legal commitment to each other” is your basis for marriage, why must it be limited to adults? I submit that the only logical reason is that people are still too grossed out by pedophilia and bestiality.

    The issue is authority. Man has rejected God’s authority in this matter. Therefore, the only thing stopping his further slide into perversity is his own comfort level with wickedness.

  3. I believe your article is right. It is not about marriage equality. If it were, then it would allow a brother to marry a sister or man to marry three other men or women. And truth be told, nothing prevents people from loving each other and/or consummating their relationships.

    To my way of thinking, this marriage equality is about making the gay lifestyle and marriage normal. The advocates want everyone to agree that gay marriage is normal and should be accepted by all. Afterall, two gay people getting married doesn’t hurt anyone? Well, sorry, but my disapproval doesn’t really hurt anyone either does it?

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