In August of
2010 I wrote a weblog entry titled ‘On
Love Songs and Love.’ My first
paragraph today is an extension of my views on the latter part of that earlier posting.
Subsequent paragraphs today expand the notion of ‘love’ into God-ordained marriage.
I wrote then:
Love is an attitude, an orientation
of character that has as its focus the pleasing and well-being of another. It
is a giving for another, a giving of one’s self, not a ‘trying to get’ from
another ( yet in the giving process one does, in fact, get as well). It is
achieving a ‘oneness’ with another person and a losing of the separateness of
and focus on one’s self. It is a ‘standing for’ someone, not a ‘falling for’
them; you stand in love, you don’t fall in love. Love is a synergy; it is
complementary by definition. It involves
care, responsibility and unfailing commitment, respect and appreciation. Lovers
are “each in love with the other for the sake of perfecting their mutual work.”
(Rumi)
A purportedly
Christian nation should remember that God said, in the beginning, that “It is
not good that the man [or woman] should be alone.” He established, from the beginning, that marriage
between a man and a woman should be the solution for that unnatural state of
being alone. The marriage, by God, of
the man Adam and the woman He brought
to Adam to be “an help meet [appropriate or ‘to conform to’] for him” set the
pattern of all that should legitimately
follow.
Homosexual
‘marriage’? Gay ‘rights’?
What has illegitimately followed with some sad
and lonely souls (only about 1-2% of the population in the United States is
homosexual according to the latest analysis, notwithstanding the stridency of
the proponents which is out of all proportion to their actual numbers—see The Atlantic, June 29, 2012) is the
coming together of two persons of the same sex. To excerpt a line from an old song, these
lonely people are “looking for love in all the wrong places.”
What makes it so wrong, in addition to the
fact that God called this distortion of human intimacy an “abomination,” is
that it is so unnatural. It cannot lead to God’s fundamental
commandment to “multiply and replenish the earth.” Common sense tells you that
two keys do not make a lockset—and two locks do not make a key. Metaphorically it takes a key and a lock (a lockset)
to perpetuate and lend stability and give a future to the human race. Two men can be close friends, and two women
can be likewise but to call it a marriage is to rewrite the dictionary, the moral
code, and the decree of Almighty God.
Love and
passion and commitment and recognition of natural
gender roles establish marriage and, if honored and given wings to grow, gives purpose to the earth-life experience of
all humans and permanence to human society. Supreme Court Chief Justice Burger some years
ago said, in the last throes of our pre-social revolution age, “To hold that
the act of homosexual sodomy is a fundamental right is to cast aside a
millennia of moral teaching.” This and like acts are wrong and they are not ‘rights.’
Human
sexuality as an expression of love, not simply as an ‘activity,’ finds its
highest human expression in the holy
matrimony of a man and a woman where their vows and behavior toward each other
are not simply a legal contract but a covenant. It is a procession of the soul from within
outward; it enlarges and encompasses and invites children and never constricts
or demands or demeans. It puts on the
yoke and aspires to vast and universal aims. Married love is a private and
tender relation of one to another, which is the furtherance and enchantment of
human life. It does not inherently
introduce disease (physical—consider AIDS; or emotional—consider profound gender
confusion in children) into the relationship. The purification of the hearts of the lovers
from year to year and the invitation of children by their approved and natural sexual
intimacy are components of a morally authorized marriage. This level of love is the process which leads
to the deification of persons—the two who have married, and the natural
extension of their union—an eternal family.
Homosexual ‘marriage’
should not be honored with this noble title; it is an institutional desecration
and a counterfeit of the highest magnitude. ‘Gay rights’ is a demand for respect and a
demand for validation that is inherently disrespectful of God and his highest
creation and invalid as a protected inalienable right. ‘Marriage’
of a man to a man or a woman to a woman is simply an attempt to try to dignify
their deviancy or legitimize the illegitimate and it should not be given the
status or protection or promotion by government or by law. This type of behavior does not build or
stabilize society therefore does not merit governmental involvement under the
law.
I do not
believe in criminalizing a private consensual deviancy between adults or
subjecting these individuals to ridicule, but I am disgusted by it and do not
want it taught in our schools as 'normal' or supported by our tax-dollars. If the couple’s deviancy were private and not
paraded about and flung into the face of the larger normal society as a
challenge and a demand for privileges that are protected by law as a basic
stabilizing societal influence, as in a genuine marriage, I would think most
Americans would let it pass in the name of ‘tolerance.’ I would.
But redefining this
fundamental, historical, and God-given institution of marriage to accommodate a
minority’s deviance is unacceptable to me and may be the final insult that
brings down God’s wrath upon what has become an unholy nation by its
acceptance.
