This is the second in a series of posts that deal with a variety issues concerning the conservative movement in America and how a Christian lifestyle and a conservative worldview can co-exist. If have not already, please read Christian Conservatism: how these two worldviews can co-exist and not contradict first, and then come back to this post.
Marriage is a covenant made between a man and a woman before God. This is defined in the Bible in Malachi 2:14. We know that is specifically between a man a woman and not between a man and man or a woman and a woman because what God's Word says in Leviticus 18:22.
So, if we believe that God's Word is absolute truth and that His law is the law that we should all live by, then we must come to the conclusion that marriage is a covenant made between a man and a woman before God. Therefore, the Church should only recognize marriage in this context.
This is an area where I feel the Church has dropped the ball and the government has picked it up. The government does not enforce the Law of God but rather enforces the law of freedom. How then can the government govern marriage? Put simply, it cannot govern marriage effectively.
The government has tried so desperately to govern this holy act and is actively failing. For you see, by it's very nature, someone who is not a believer cannot be married at all. A Muslim can sign a certificate giving him the ability to file his taxes jointly with the woman he calls his wife and he can promise her to not have an inappropriately intimate relationship with another person, but that does not make it a marriage. There is a key element missing. It must be a covenant made before God. A legal marriage is merely a tax status.
This begs the question, "Why can man file his taxes jointly with a woman but not with another man?" "Why can't a group of people who would like live under one roof and have a polygamist family not do so?" Neither of these actions hinders the freedom of anyone else.
A man a woman can meet at a bar, go to a motel, have sex every which way imaginable, and as long as the woman doesn't get pregnant, end the relationship right there and no one cares. They can do this and decide they want to continue to have sex every which way imaginable, stay committed to each other, have children, share an income and not get "married" or get "married" and that's fine.
Two men can move into the same living quarters, have sex every which way the please, share an income, adopt a child, and pay each others' student loans and credit card bills. As long as they don't call it a marriage and file their taxes separately, it's fine. But the minute they decide they'd like to tack on the title "marriage", visit each other in the hospital, and file their taxes together, it's illegal. Why? It isn't hindering anyone's freedom that isn't willingly involved in the situation. Why do we suddenly get up in arms when people who decide to live a homosexual lifestyle want to do these things?
A man and 6 women can all move into the same living quarters, have sex with each other every which they please (including at the same time), share an income, adopt children, and pay each others' debts. The minute they decide they'd like to call what they're doing "marriage", visit each other in the hospital, and file their taxes together, it's illegal. Why? It isn't hindering anyone's freedom that isn't willingly involved in the situation. Why do we suddenly get up in arms when people who decide to live a polygamist lifestyle want to do these things?
I honestly can't tell you why. I haven't the slightest idea. Are these things morally wrong. We've established that. But, if what makes something illegal is that it hinders someone else's freedom, and these things do not hinder the freedom's of anyone other than the people who have willing decided to place themselves in those situations, then why has our government abolished these things?
It is not the responsibility of the government's to uphold a moral law. Not all men place themselves under that law and as men we cannot force morality on other men. But man must be governed somehow. And that standard to govern by is freedom.
We shouldn't be voting on homosexual "marriage" because those who do not believe in the Word of God cannot be married buy it's very definition. The government should not be able to tell me that I CAN get married to a woman any more than it should be able to tell me that I CAN'T get married to another man. It's not the government's responsibility or business. It is only the business of the Church's.
So, the next time a conservative (who is a libertarian at heart) tells you that he is against the government institutionalization of homosexual marriage, ask him why he isn't against the government institutionalization of heterosexual marriage. The next time a non-Christian liberal says he's for homosexual marriage in the United States, ask him why desires to have the government involved in a Christian practice and to have that Christian practice forced on him.
The state and federal government should stop using the term "marriage" and adopt the term "civil union" universally. This would solve the debate over legalized gay marriage and plenty of other debates, because there would no longer be anything to debate. Marriage is a Christian practice. You're not a Christian, you can't get married. The Church should go back to performing marriage ceremonies strictly for people who are in the Church.
The sooner the Church takes back from the government the responsibility of governing Christian practices the better off this country will be.
No comments:
Post a Comment