For Faith & Family | A Constitutional Tipping Point on Marriage | Comments http://faithandfamily.com/ This feed provides all comments on "A Constitutional Tipping Point on Marriage." en web-master@erlc.com ℗ & © 2008 ERLC Comment 1 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment1 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment1 Dr. Land

We are doing our dead level best to get this crazy ruling overturned and get back to “heartland values” here in the heartland.  This judge is up for re-election in 2010 and you can bet conservatives will be out for blood (and there are many here).  In the meantime, we are hoping the higher courts will overturn this thing and invalidate the couple of same-sex marriages that were performed by a Unitarian minister last week. 

By the way, your photo must have been of a Nebraska farm.  We grow corn in Iowa! 

Richard Nations
publications editor
The Iowa Baptist

]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:54:55 CST Comment 2 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment2 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment2 I find it very interesting that the SBC would elect to compare gay marriage issue to slavery and state’s rights.

The schism over slavery was a big part of the SBC birth in 1845 from three originating Baptist groups.  The SBC was born of the belief that slavery was biblically sanctioned.  It wasn’t until 150 years later in 1995 that they finally apologized for their racist beginnings.

Now they have matured and naturally changed such an onerous position. 

When will they mature on this issue?  I pray it doesn’t take them another 150 years to open their hearts and minds.  Gay people are just like everyone else and this form of religious bigotry will soon fade into the tarnished pages of history too.

]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2007 12:36:36 CST Comment 3 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment3 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment3 One could wish that we could return to sanity.  I suffer from culture shock in these United States. I cannot understand why same sex marriage should even be considered. It is hard to believe we have come accept same sex constitute a family. It is a mockery of the sacredness God gave to marriage. It is not what God said and He knows best for societies.  When our forefathers wrote the constitution, I don’t think they ever thought we would come to this.  The First Amendment, our freedom of speech, to allow people to print and show filth was not even in their thinking. They had a clearer view of right than people do today. Some things are just wrong.  We can never go to sleep, when we do, more of God’s goodness is taken away and more of Satan’s anything evil goes is before us.

]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:59:48 CST Comment 4 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment4 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment4 Governor Mike Huckabee is the only Presidential Candidate who has already signed a pledge to make a U. S. Constitutional Amendment forbidding same-sex marriage and making it legal for only one man and one woman to be married.  Governor Romney now favors the same, but I haven’t seen him sign a pledge.  A group of evangelical Leaders are compromising the Word with Senator Fred Thompson, who has more campaign funds and they think more electable.  The problem with Senator Thompson is his pledge to pass a Constitutional Amendment on marriage that allows legal marriage to be defined state-by-state, which would be no different than having judges allow same-sex marriage.  The Democratic Candidates are in favor of same-sex unions or make it a state-by-state issue.  Some grass root Christians are committed uncompromisingly to Christ and His Holy Word.  They have vowed not to vote for anyone who allows same-sex marriage even if they lose their vote for the Presidential candidate.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 00:02:21 CST Comment 5 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment5 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment5 My comments must be 1000 characters, but I have more to say, so I post them in pieces. I hope this is acceptable.

It is clear you have concluded - and almost never question - that legal marriages for same-sex couples will harm either the “institution of marriage” (an abstraction - not one couple enters the institution of marriage, they enter THEIR OWN marriage) or will negatively impact marriages of heterosexual couples. I believe you think this in large part because you do not strictly distinguish the privileged legal relationship given to those who are married by the civil authority from the meaning given to “marriage” by you applying your religious doctrines. Becoming legally next of kin through civil, licensed marriage protects any couple in hundreds of ways. You don’t even begin to see that there is a huge Constitutional question of equal protection of the laws here. Your religious focus clouds your ability to see the real constitutional issues.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:01:46 CST Comment 6 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment6 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment6 How is “freedom to define marriage” a right, except one seeking to exclude and punish people who do not believe as you do about their homosexuality? Who owns this “freedom to define marriage?” Baptists? All Christians? Only those who vote? The majority! But majority (the greater number prevails) is nothing, morally, but “might makes right!” It is a decision-making principle, not a basis of right. Since majority views change, if majority rule is the basis of right, then right is always changing. (Similarly, “the will of the people” always changes, with each vote, poll, or guess by whoever’s pretending to know what it is!)

I believe hostility to homosexuality so blinds you that you cannot think clearly on this issue. Indeed, I believe your leaders want you to choose not to think clearly and logically, because that is the only way you can give your church standing to object to the free choices by otherwise qualified adults to marry one another even if of the same sex.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:10:54 CST Comment 7 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment7 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment7 You have opposed mixed-race marriages (laws punished those who married someone of a different race) - Loving v. Virginia in 1967 is a parallel issue.

(Opponents of mixed-race marriages don’t speak up now, after the Loving case and social changes in America. My [non-Baptist] father often preached we would never get to the Moon because God had set the limits of our habitation as the Earth – you can find the Scriptural citation for that. After the Moon landing, Dad never made that point in his sermons again. He never said he had been wrong – he just stopped saying it.)

The marriage of a same sex couple in no way affects the marriage of any other couple, just as in religion, your ability to believe as you choose does not prevent me from having a similar ability. (Let’s not get into absurdities like - what if you believe it’s okay to kill babies? Certain conduct is proscribed by law for good reason based in general consensus and a clear distinction between belief and action.)

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:23:14 CST Comment 8 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment8 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment8 This matter is like discussing freedom of religion, so what Jefferson observed in Notes on Virginia in 1782 applies:

“...it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

A marriage by a same sex couple neither does others harm nor prevents them from the free exercise of their beliefs on how marriages should be. The legal content of marriage is the same for non-Baptists and Baptists. Legal marriage - allowed for imprisoned criminals - for anyone who are of opposite sexes and otherwise qualified. Legal marriage does not address love, children, families, or anything but establishing the privileged kinship relationship for the couple. While marital status is used in relation to children, there is no requirement to have children, to have sex, or even be in love to execute a marriage license. The legal side is morally neutral - with typical exclusions: age, insanity, no brother-sister-cousin marriages.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:29:22 CST Comment 9 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment9 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment9 Finally… Try thinking about this issue again by focusing solely on the legal content of marriage in America. It is there that equality should be mandated and the emotionally-based, religion-based arguments apply only when you explain to other Baptists that the church doctrine requires that they should not marry persons of the same sex (even if other people do so because they believe differently).

Your wish to exclude same-sex couples from the protections of the law by changing the Constitution (and thereby getting that pesky “equality” idea out of the way) is immoral, I believe, and perpetuates an evil against many of your fellow citizens. I hope these considerations lead you to think again and I trust that if you really THINK again, you will reach a different conclusion.

Best wishes for all of you.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:35:59 CST Comment 10 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment10 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment10 This is a product of the Church not teaching their children in the way they should go.  There isn’t any moral truths and their opinions are from a non-christian base.  I feel that the Church should find a way to teach children at a low cost through a foundation or trust concept so as to not have our children taught this moral corruption.  I feel that we some times come across as being against the Homosexual but in reality it’s love that wants us not to see them go to HELL.  The individual that said it’s the SBC that separated because of slavery should also note that it’s also northern Christians who were the abolitionist.  The SBC should be an example of religion without faith. 
Marriage is a church sermony and should have benefits only within the church.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:46:34 CST Comment 11 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment11 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment11 I think the biggest test of morality is being able to accept someone who is different than you because you share one important thing in common, humanity. I once had a conversation with a catholic acquaintance that believes homosexuality is a sin. However, she supports marriage equality. The reason is because she thinks it is the moral thing to accept all and to show her acceptance and respect. She feels that she can do this without compromising her own personal belief on the matter. Therefore, I believe you can be against homosexuality but for gay marriage. Do you think God will see it as sin? Or perhaps the ultimate acceptance of you fellow man? Gay and straight humans are humans and should be treated with the same love and respect. Thats what I believe is moral and thats what I believe the Judeo-Christian tradition tells us. Voting for marriage equality isn’t a vote for homosexuality, its a vote for humanity.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:31:20 CST Comment 12 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment12 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment12 Baptists have so divorced legal authority from the other social biblical authorities of church and family that there is no clear thinking.  I see this as a fault of biblical education.  In this vacuum even Baptists pick up believing “the futility of their own mind”.  Roger Winters has many good points but the one he neglects to write about is where good and evil come from.  He is right in accusing the Baptists of their own brand of “baptised” humanism but he neglects to see his own borrowed-from-religion presupposition that good and evil even exist, i.e., the basis of his own humanism.  I would encourage the Baptists to really exegete the four God-ordained spheres of human authority: civil, church, family, and self.  Marriage touches on every one of these.

]]> Fri, 14 Sep 2007 21:15:42 CST Comment 13 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment13 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment13 Mitch says..."This is a product of the Church not teaching their children in the way they should go.” ...

but if by that you mean gay people are that product, you are most incorrect sir. 

Gay people are born independently of any teaching, academic, theological or otherwise.  You can’t teach someone to not be gay by “catching” them at some critical certain age.  That is preposterous.

We are born gay, live gay and die gay.  Happily. 

There is a fundamental myopic misunderstanding of human sexuality by many within the church.

]]> Mon, 17 Sep 2007 09:06:29 CST Comment 14 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment14 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment14 What makes homosexuality so different from other targeted groups like people of color, women, the poor, and those of minority faiths? For one gay children are the products of straight parents. You generally share race, class, and religion with your parents and sex with one of them. Families are our biggest support system in life and for many gay children they are denied this basic safety net. You teach us that we are different, inferior. You bombard us with media messages that demonize us, or we get “liberal” media messages that turn us into clowns or people only obsessed with sex. . . “gay sex.” These aren’t accurate messages. That is prejudice.

All my life marriage was a right. You hear about marriage starting at a young age from stories and Disney movies. Marriage is glorified, something to be excited about. When I realized I was gay I also realized that to many Americans I am also inferior and will not be able to enjoy the same basic rights. I am not allowed to get married.

]]> Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:18:54 CST Comment 15 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment15 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment15 Marriage is based on love. I have never heard a convincing argument that suggested non-heterosexual people are incapable of love. So if we can love, then we SHOULD be able to marry. Your religious beliefs are your own, they are personal to you. No one is forcing a Church to perform gay marriages if they don’t want to. Marriage, like religious beliefs are a personal matter to be decided individually.  Allow marriage for all in order to promote equality and eliminate another oppressive barrier that has become institutionalized in our society.

To me oppression is whats really EVIL

]]> Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:24:54 CST Comment 16 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment16 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment16 Responding to #10 where the concern is expressed that homosexuals would go to HELL if folks didn’t somehow intervene with us. Here’s a great example of the “humane” basis of persecution. Here is the reason “The Golden Rule” isn’t “golden” at all, but blood red: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” sounds good on the surface, but if your reasoning is to save non-believers (that is, people who CHOOSE to believe differently from your religion) from your idea of HELL, then you can justify almost any persecution (try the Inquisition) in the name of “doing good.” You’d say, “If I were in danger of going to HELL, then I’d want you to torture me hideously until I recant. This is to force others to believe as you do. HELL is YOUR myth. Kindly keep it to yourself. Don’t visit it on others. You are decidedly NOT GOD!

]]> Tue, 18 Sep 2007 19:01:29 CST Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:53:56 CST Comment 17 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment17 http://faithandfamily.com/fff/article/a-constitutional-tipping-point-on-marriage#comment17 Mitch says… “I feel that we some times come across as being against the Homosexual but in reality it’s love that wants us not to see them go to HELL.”

I would think that being FOR me includes being for a hate crimes law, employment non-discrimination, marriage equality and equal status within the church. 

Somehow his cocksure sentiment that I am going to HELL doesn’t jive with his expression of agape. 

If more people focused only on their own salvation and left the rest to God, I suspect there would be a greater harmony in the church.  Why do I have to be just like he is in order for grace to abound?

]]> Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:53:56 CST