If you’re on Facebook, you may be seeing red. This red:
As the Supreme Court begins to examine the push for a redefinition of marriage, many who support redefinition are posting this. The idea is that what is desired is equality. That homosexuals should have the exact same definition of marriage as heterosexuals, and that anything else is discrimination.
I prefer seeing this red:
Thanks to Gary for posting this on Facebook yesterday – not sure if he originated it or not.
The assertion here is the logical consequence of redefining marriage not around what it does, but rather around the arbitrary wishes of individuals. If the logic is that marriage is defined only by providing maximum equality, then this same logic (if successful now) will be utilized – in relatively short order I predict to redefine marriage not only along the lines of gender but along the lines of numerics. Two guys and a girl have the same right to be treated equally in the definition of marriage as one guy and a girl. Two girls and a guy have the same right as one girl and a guy.
I’ve written about the importance of this issue before. I am stunned by what I will charitably describe as the complete naivete of those who demand the redefinition of marriage while insisting that it will not change anything (other than allowing same sex marriages). I trust that these same folks will be equally vigorous in their support of every other redefinition of marriage that must necessarily follow (logically, if not legally) from their support of the effort to redefine marriage to include same sex marriages.
I don’t have much hope that marriage will escape legal redefinition. If not this week, then eventually. I just wish that people were more willing to engage in actually talking about the issue intelligently rather than relying on oversimplified graphics to settle the discussion. (For the record, I would say the exact same thing about most Christian symbols that people stick on the bumpers of their cars.)
Living Apologetics 
March 28, 2013 at 6:47 pm |
I saw that pink & red equal sign on Facebook a few days ago…lots of my liberal friends and family, as usual, flying their, “if it feels good, do it”, flag for the world to witness how PC they are. Meanwhile, anything they may have that is remotely close to a conservative moral compass flies right out the window. Lots of “likes” and pats on the back. I don’t dare voice my opinion…I’d be labeled a racist…that’s what some are equating traditional marital beliefs to…I’m now considered a racist because I believe in my Christian religion and what the Bible teaches me. Remarkable how something so good is viewed as so evil by the liberals. I wish there was more dialog and less finger pointing. I’m all for meeting in the middle and I totally agree that gays should have the same human rights that heteros have…I just want a little respect for the word marriage and its definition. Call it a union or something else. But please, don’t call it marriage because to me that is religiously in error. If I have one or more kids that are gay, you bet I want them to be treated like everybody else! But I will teach them to respect the religious meaning of marriage and guide them in finding a union for them and their partner that doesn’t demean our Christian beliefs. I’m scared to see what’s next… Having the right to marry your dog or a plant because you love each other?
March 28, 2013 at 10:13 pm |
The bullying tactics used to push this are most disconcerting. It’s not a discussion, it’s not a debate, it’s a name-calling bully on a playground demanding that you do what he tells you to do. It doesn’t matter if he’s telling you to do something that isn’t right, or isn’t healthy. It doesn’t matter that you may have very good reasons for not doing what he thinks you should do. And, as with most bullying situations, it doesn’t matter that the vast majority of other people on the playground think the bully is a bully. All that matters is that the bully is bigger or louder or threatening enough.
Disagree with the bully? He’ll boycott your business. Disagree with the bully? He’ll trash talk you all over the media and take your words out of context and accuse you of terrible things. Disagree with the bully? Guess what – you’re really the bully! Surprise!
I encourage people to remember that this is not strictly a religious issue, though. Certainly Christianity condemns homosexual behavior – as does Islam and Judaism. Buddhism and Hinduism are – to the best of my knowledge – at best silent on the matter in their sacred texts. Classifying this as a Christian issue is true, but it’s also not nearly the full story in terms of religions.
But religion is not the main issue. The main issue is what is marriage for? Is it strictly the personal pleasure of two (or more) people (or objects)? Is it a matter of what makes these two (or more) people happy personally? Or is marriage the foundational societal unit, the building block on which all of society is founded? Is marriage primarily a purpose grounded outside of oneself, and identified by the ability of creating children and raising them to responsible adulthood?
This is the discussion that isn’t happening. This is the discussion that is being ignored in favor of bullying. I agree that a secular state should guarantee certain basic rights to homosexual couples. But this needs to be a fundamentally different thing than redefining the institution of marriage. I wish people would talk about these things. I wish people would risk being challenged and frustrated and having to really think about these things clearly.
Instead, people just get bullied.