Essay on same-sex marriage
This excellent essay was written by a Christian scholar in support of same-sex marriage. It touches on some wonderful points, such as the separation of Church and State and why Christians should be glad it's there, looking beyond the letter of the Biblical words to their intention (and realizing the historical and cultural bias inherent in them), etc.
And, without directly saying, "Y'all are idiots," he very clearly points out that the arguments claiming churches will be forced to marry against their beliefs are bogus.
Excerpts:
"What Iowa declared unconstitutional was restricting civil marriage to heterosexual couples. Their ruling does not require Roman Catholic Churches to start offering holy matrimony to lesbian couples. What the Vermont legislature enacted was a law granting civil marriage rights to same-sex couples. There is nothing in this law to say that Southern Baptist preachers can’t refuse a gay couple that comes to them asking to be wed. Separation of church and state guarantees the right to do just that."
* * * * *
"Is a policy of restricting civil marriage rights to heterosexual couples discriminatory? If we accept the prevailing research conclusions from social and behavioral scientists, then the answer is yes. If you’re gay or lesbian, it’s because of a fixed sexual orientation that you didn’t choose and cannot ordinarily change. And your sexual orientation determines with whom you can sustain a romantic sexual relationship.
"A policy that limits marriage rights to heterosexual couples therefore ensures that only those lucky enough to be straight can have their romantic relationships recognized by law. Gays and lesbians can marry someone they can’t love, but they’re denied what straight people take for granted: the right to legally marry the person they love.
"This is legal discrimination. And legal discrimination violates a secular value that everyone should care about, no matter what their religious beliefs. After all, if legal discrimination can be permitted without justification, then it becomes possible for the law to discriminate against Christians just because they are Christian. And if sectarian religious values were sufficient to justify legal discrimination, then it would be justified to discriminate against Methodists on the basis of, say, Presbyterian teachings."
And, without directly saying, "Y'all are idiots," he very clearly points out that the arguments claiming churches will be forced to marry against their beliefs are bogus.
Excerpts:
"What Iowa declared unconstitutional was restricting civil marriage to heterosexual couples. Their ruling does not require Roman Catholic Churches to start offering holy matrimony to lesbian couples. What the Vermont legislature enacted was a law granting civil marriage rights to same-sex couples. There is nothing in this law to say that Southern Baptist preachers can’t refuse a gay couple that comes to them asking to be wed. Separation of church and state guarantees the right to do just that."
* * * * *
"Is a policy of restricting civil marriage rights to heterosexual couples discriminatory? If we accept the prevailing research conclusions from social and behavioral scientists, then the answer is yes. If you’re gay or lesbian, it’s because of a fixed sexual orientation that you didn’t choose and cannot ordinarily change. And your sexual orientation determines with whom you can sustain a romantic sexual relationship.
"A policy that limits marriage rights to heterosexual couples therefore ensures that only those lucky enough to be straight can have their romantic relationships recognized by law. Gays and lesbians can marry someone they can’t love, but they’re denied what straight people take for granted: the right to legally marry the person they love.
"This is legal discrimination. And legal discrimination violates a secular value that everyone should care about, no matter what their religious beliefs. After all, if legal discrimination can be permitted without justification, then it becomes possible for the law to discriminate against Christians just because they are Christian. And if sectarian religious values were sufficient to justify legal discrimination, then it would be justified to discriminate against Methodists on the basis of, say, Presbyterian teachings."