Home

Lets see - is Gay Marriage a political issue or is it a religious issue? Or is it
really a non-issue that we have elevated to a divisive political issue through
religious zeal?   Normally I keep my religious beliefs to myself, But this one
just nags and nags at my all-too- liberal mind; it stirs feelings down deep down
inside. So I guess it's time to let 'em out!

I read and I read, what destruction will occur if gay people get married, how it
is a threat to my family and to the whole family structure, how it will rip down
the walls of our society and contaminate our children and grandchildren.
Then generally, these allegations are followed by how sinful and how
unnatural it is and that is all wrapped up with a Bible verse or two.

So now some of us think we must pass Constitutional Amendments banning
gay marriage because it is sinful, or our society will be ruined.

Our laws are generally constructed to protect us, our individual freedoms, and
to maintain civil order. There is nothing in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution
that is directed at morality. Though our Forefathers were guided by their
Christian background when they fashioned these masterpieces, they were
much wiser than we. Our Nation's founders were well aware of our human
weaknesses and that we, being very un-Godlike, wouldn't do a very good job
legislating morality. That is why they stayed away from religious issues.

We get all messed up when we try to mix Religion and Politics. The sanctity of
marriage, that everybody is worried about destroying here, results specifically
from vows taken by 2 people in a religious setting. Individually churches in
their varied forms should determine what they will and will not allow within their
walls. The contract of marriage ( a legal document) is just that; a legally
binding contract between 2 people. In this country the legal contract for
marriage is required, whereas religious sanctification is optional. It is no more
right for the churches to determine who can participate in a legal contract,
than it would be for the government to step in and decide who in your church
can take communion. In the execution of a legal contract, all people should
have equal standing.

First of all, I wouldn't worry too much about gay people harming the marital
structure of our society. Statistically, gays number less than 10 percent of the
population and couldn't even begin to keep up with the marital destruction
caused by us, the other 90%, including me.   In America, the country that is
worried about gay marriage destroying the family: we continue to lead all of
the countries of the world in divorce. There are, by the way, no gay divorces
in that statistic.

Lets explore, though, the religious aspect of why we think we have a right to
ban Gay Marriage!

Is gay marriage unnatural? Seems to me, if 2 heterosexual males married,
that would be unnatural; or if 2 straight females married, that would be
unnatural;   but if 2 gay people of the same sex get married, that's natural.
Natural equals the many and mysterious ways God chose to create things in
nature. Natural is way different from what we call the norm or normal, that
off-shoot of 'the majority' or the top of the old "Bell Curve". We are not all
created the same. We don't get the opportunity to choose what or who we are
going to be. I am a white, male, left handed, heterosexual and I don't
remember anyone asking me if that's what I wanted to be. Though the sisters
did try to change that left-handed thing way back in grade school, with no
success. We are all born who we are and that's a natural fact.

It raises my hackles every time I hear the expression "Those who have chosen
the gay life style". What hubris and what an ignorant thing to say. Being gay is
not a chosen life style, it's just life. Gay people are just living the natural life
God gave them. None of us has much control over who attracts us sexually.
If that isn't already evident to you, please answer these two questions.

1. Could you in your wildest dreams scrap your hetero life style and become
gay? And, as a man, engage in sex with another man or if you're a woman,
with another woman?

2. In this society, why would anybody choose a life style, that can socially
cause them pain; cause them to be regarded as unnatural sinners; and cause
them to be ostracized because of our homophobic intolerance?

It is totally illogical to me to think, that an average 6 year old girl or boy ( the
age I would guess reality starts to set in) would arbitrarily decide to go against
all they see around them and decide; I think I'll be gay... And then suffer for
the rest of their lives, trying to hide their undeniable feelings. I don't
remember having to choose whether to fall in love with Alfred or Arlene, when I
was 7! Arlene won hands down and Alfred was just the guy I played baseball
with. ( P.S. if you answered yes to question 1 and haven't already "outed"
yourself, please seek counseling; you need to be freed from the socially
imposed guilt associated with your repressed but completely natural
homosexuality).

Is being gay sinful? "Thou shalt not be gay." Don't remember that
Commandment.   I have done a bit of research on this question, though. The
various scholars on both sides of the issue disagree (no surprise).
Conservatives say yes and liberals say that a loving homosexual relationship
is not addressed in the bible. Actually the 'abomination' of homosexuality
usually refers to forcible rape in it's many forms.   The one thing that is clear
from either side is that it is not up to you or me to judge what is sinful for
anyone else. And it is certainly not up to you or me to exact the punishment for
sin. In fact, judging of others is described as one of our greater sins. That's
because God is pretty sure He doesn't need our help.

If we use Old Testament laws as our guide, not only would we condemn that
abomination of homosexual behavior, we would have to include a couple other
Old Testament abominations: Jews can't eat with Egyptians nor eat lobster,
shrimp or snakes. Or how about this one: it was an abomination for women to
wear men's clothing (e.g.. pants). So Girl, pitch those slack and shorts and
start wearing dresses ... or prepare to be labeled a sinner.

Wasn't the purpose of Christ coming here, aside from securing our salvation,
to free of us from Old Testament law? Weren't His messages those of love,
compassion, understanding and tolerance? When we accept Christ as our
personal Savior let's not get confused. Our salvation was God's work, not
ours. The grace we received was not because of anything we did or who we
are, it's God's gift to us. Let's not presume, now that we are saved, we can
don the cloak of self-righteousness. Remember we are just saved - we're not
now Saviors! we're not imbued with new powers to take over God's work in the
judgment department! I'm sure God has to giggle when He sees our clumsy,
vain attempts at doing that.

Recently, we have devised a rather simplistic method to solving current day
questions. It goes like this;" What would Jesus do in this situation?" And no,
He would not drive an SUV. Let's pursue this approach. See where it goes.
Tell me, would Jesus be outside a courthouse or a cemetery, brandishing His
sign and Bible alongside *Reverend Phelps as he damns gay people to Hell?
No, not the Christ that Sister Ann introduced to me! No, Sister Ann's Jesus
would be preaching about loving each other, about taking care of each other,
showing compassion to everyone, just like Christ did in His own life. Sister
Paulette's Jesus didn't send the Apostles into the temple to kick out the money
changers. Jesus did it himself, for He was the only one authorized to do so.
I'm more inclined to think my Jesus would be standing between Reverend
Phelps and Gay people, facing Reverend Phelps and reminding him that only
the sinless can pick up stones. I'm sure Jesus would also be pointing out that
only God has the power to know what is in the mind, hearts and souls of His
people, and He doesn't need any help from Reverend Phelps or us.

What would your Jesus be doing?

*(For those of you who don't know Reverend Phelps, he is our self-proclaimed
messenger of God who, with his band of religious terrorists, shows up at Gay
funerals, with his Bible, bullhorn, and signs condemning the person who just
died from AIDS. He is there to heap more grief and pain upon the family.)

A Christian government, I think that's what we are striving for nowadays. At
least that what I think many of you are trying to convey when you send me Fwd
after Fwd trying to convince that a Christian government is what our
Forefathers intended. That is regardless of what the First Amendment says.
How is it in this Christian government you can subscribe to passing a law, to
restrict a liberty of someone based upon what YOU think is sin? Seems to me
that what these amendments are trying to do is trump Jesus' words:"Judgment
is mine alone says the Lord, your God". I wonder what God thinks about the
idea that we don't think His words are enough. I wonder what He thinks about
our feeling we must pass a law putting us in charge of making it right?! I'm
sure God would concede we certainly have the experience in sinning; but I
doubt He would be willing to concede His power to judge it.

Be truly honest with yourself. If gay people get married, what effect will that
have on your life? I suspect many of you don't personally even know a Gay
person. If you do, do you want to single them out for pain? Would you stand
face to face and call them an unnatural sinner? Or would you prefer to
relegate yourself to being one of Larry Flynt's faceless wolves lurking in the
crowd waiting to devour the sheep? That's exactly what you'll be doing when
you vote for the gay marriage ban.

Put down the stones and extend a hand!

Take Care
Paul

For those of you who would like to take a proactive role in defeating the U.S.
amendment please go to this website http://www.hrc.org/ and click on "Turn
up the Heat" on the far right hand side of the page write your Congress
people. Congress will be voting on this amendment in mid July. Thanks.

And for the Missourian's in the crowd, go to the polls on Aug 3rd. and vote
NO to Amendment 2.