Why Gay Marriage Is More Than a Legal Issue

The gay marriage debate continues to boil over, tempting our nation to inaugurate a new era of McCarthyism. Back in the 1950s, anyone suspected of communism became a pariah. Now that seems to be true of anyone who supports traditional marriage.
Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy, in answer to an interview question about the principles of the popular fast-food company, said, “We are very much supportive of the family—the biblical definition of the family unit.” This set some people’s teeth on edge. But the heat rose when some discovered Cathy said a couple of weeks earlier, “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes marriage.’ ”
That may be prophetic, but in our culture it is impolitic to say this. Cathy’s comments raised the ire of Chicago alderman Joe Moreno, who said he would block the company from building a restaurant in his ward. He was supported by Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, and, from a distance, Boston mayor Thomas Menino, who wants Chick-fil-A to vacate the premises of his town ASAP. As Menino put it, he’s “angry” about such “prejudiced statements.”
And this, even though Chick-fil-A followed up with a statement saying it strives to "treat every person with honor, dignity and respect—regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender.” And then there’s this not unimportant fact: There is absolutely no proof that Chick-fil-A has ever practiced prejudice of any sort.
So apparently how you actually treat homosexuals is not a sufficient test of one’s Americanism. Now you need to think right to get into the good graces of government. This has struck even some pro-gay marriage advocates as a bit over the top--some would say Stalinist. As theChicago Tribune’s Eric Zorn put it, “Don’t ask The Man to do the dirty work of attempting to marginalize and silence your opponents.”
Back in the spring, there was a similar dustup over the issue. On May 8, North Carolina citizens voted to ban gay marriage by a hefty margin of 61 to 39 percent. The next day, President Obama said on national television, "I think same-sex couples should be able to get married."
The comments following both events were predictable. From gay marriage advocates, there was talk about civil rights and history being on their side. Proponents of traditional marriage, meanwhile, resonated with this statement from Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: "We cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society."
To sum up what we at Christianity Today have said before: We believe gays and lesbians should not be denied fundamental rights granted to every other American, nor should they suffer slurs or intimidation in any shape or form (and neither should those who oppose gay marriage). Further, we continue to believe that marriage should be defined in our nation as a moral and legal bond between a man and a woman. For, among other reasons, societies that fail to shape themselves by the most basic and universal of divine laws and institutions cannot have a happy future (Cathy is right to be concerned). This seems built into the very order of creation by our loving Creator.
Careful readers will notice that we do not get panicked or outraged when gay marriage sometimes gets the upper hand in the ebb and flow of national debate. As much as we want the state to recognize and protect traditional marriage, we're not depending on the state to do so. In fact, the state has already done plenty to undermine traditional marriage—no-fault divorce law being perhaps the most egregious example. Since its advent in 1970, this policy has destabilized marriage like no other.
Star Trek Into Darkness

(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).












Comments
Displaying 13 of 24 comments
See all comments
Daniel Leister
I think the reason that intolerance is viewed as "negative" is because it is negative. For someone to tell someone else that they don't believe what they are doing is right is in some ways oppressive. I don't agree with people who do drugs and mess up there lives. But it's not my place to criticize what they do and shun them. We teach our kids in school about the effects of drugs, alcohol and tobacco; negative effects. But now it is absolutely insane that we can include that their are people in the world that live a life of alternative persuasion and we should not treat them with any less respect than we do everyone else. But, people will disregard the separation of church and state (this is done to show ALL religions respect and acknowledgement) to say that I think what you are doing is wrong because the bible says. The bible is not the Constitution, because the Constitution says that "we find these truths self-evident that ALL men are created equal".
casey uggen
wow, church, we really need to repent for the way we've esteemed our own marraiges before we start trippin out over the state it may become if the homosexuals get involved. try this, instead of divorce, we start DYING for our spouse instead of neglecting our responsiblily in COVENANT (which is just a reflection of our standing with the Lord) then maybe we can say something. take a stand? yeah, but repent first, and start obeying God in our marraiges. all we are looking at here is a group of people whose whole relationship starts & ends with a spirit of lust, and those can't last. when i was of the world, i had many many gay friends who were always in constant turmoil in thier so-called relationships because of the lack of faithfulness. thier ability to marry will only exponentially increase the divorce rate, along with our own participation, so get with it and, unless you have a probelm with the gospel, start dying in your marraige for the sake of your spouse. purified by fire!!
Kirk diment
We are not a theocracy so religious arguments, either for or against same-sex marriage, cannot be used in determining the merits of government-sanctioned same-sex marriage. Sexual orientation is not a choice and it is not a lifestyle. If it were, then people should be able to change. However, there have been no therapies that pass scientific scrutiny that show sexual orientation can be reversed. Even most Christian therapists have given up on the notion that sexual orientation can be changed and instead focus on living a celibate life. If two gay people are committed, deeply in love, and want to live a monogamous life together, why should they be denied the social, legal, and financial benefits that government-sanctioned marriage affords? Religions that are either for or against same-sex marriage could institute their own laws pertaining to marriage within the church. Theocracies are dangerous. We need to preserve our right to worship as we see fit within our own congregations.