For several years there has been a growing controversy over "gay marriage." I do not understand why, because there is such a simple solution.
The controversy arises when the needs of some people are diametrically opposed to the moral values of others. Gays need the same protections and rights as heterosexuals, but heterosexuals often do not want to accept the gay lifestyle because of religious, moral reasons.
The problem was created because the government broke the law - violated the First Amendment. Marriage always has been a religious rite. The state and federal governments, in violation of the First Amendment, co-opted and took over control of marriage, making it something that had to be sanctioned by the state, rather than God. "Separation of church and state" was ignored. This resulted in a religious rite, meant for followers of the church, to become a state institution.
The solution, then, is to separate the two in a just and fair manner - to allow gays to fulfill their needs without infringing on the personal moral values of others.
Currently, marriage is not just a state-sanctioned ceremony - it is also a religious rite. One that is often abused, even by heterosexuals.
PROPOSAL: All couples, regardless of gender, would have the right to enter into a civil union, sanctioned and regognized by state and federal government, with all the same rights currently attributable to marriage. These would be CIVIL UNIONS, regardless of gender, and would be the state-sponsored "norm" for all couples - even heterosexual couples.
Marriage, on the other hand, would be a separate RELIGIOUS rite, as it was designed to be, to be entered into as an option by religious people, to be performed only in a church, and only by an ordained person of the cloth. At least one member of the couple must actually belong to the church in which they are to be married, to maintain the sanctity of the marriage rite. Marriage would not create any new rights or priviledges not already given in Civil Unions.
Therefore, any couple who can pass muster with their church may be married in that church, regardless of sex. Church tenets that do not allow gay marriage would not perform any. Those religions that do not have a problem with gay marriage would perform gay ceremonies.
The end result: gay couples will have the same rights, responsibilities and protections as heterosexuals, granted equally to all by the state and federal governments. Those whose religion objects to the gay lifestyle would not be sanctioning or supporting gay unions - their church makes that call.
In this way, marriage would retain its religious sanctity and those with moral objections need not be concerned. And gays would have the same status as heterosexuals, from a legal standpoint.
If we remove the state from marriage (which should never have co-opted it in the first place, as that is a breach of separation of church and state), the problem is no longer real.
All couples wishing to unite would enter a civil union, for legal standing as a couple. Those whose religion and moral structure requires union in the eyes of God would ALSO marry, in a church, by an ordained person of the cloth (both rites can be performed simultaneously).
If gays believe themselves to be otherwise moral and have a need to unite in the eyes of God, they need only find a religion that agrees with them that the gay lifestyle is not an abomination in the eyes of God.
And, if no such church can be found, perhaps it is time for them to create one.
For here is a little understood fact: religious tenets are not meant to be molded to people. It is people who are supposed to be molded by religious tenets. Therefore, if a church uses a Bible that includes the belief that homosexuality is a sin, then that church should never be allowed to support the gay lifestyle. God's word is not for us to change.
So if gays need a church of their own, they need to found one that is based on a Bible that states something to the effect that while God may see the lifestyle as an abomination, he also sees gays as His children, and does not love them any less, and can bless their unions in spite of their faults.
After all, NONE of us are without sin, are we? So when you come right down to it, and using the "logic" that gays cannot marry because they are sinners, none of us should be allowed to marry, for we all come up short in the eyes of God.
While separating marriage from the state is the best solution considering the nature of Mankind, in a perfect world the simplest and best solution would be to let all adult couples marry, and let God decide who He will condemn, if anyone.
If you are not a moral person, you should not care who marries whom. And if you are a moral person, you would do well to remember "Judge not, lest ye be judged".
'Nuff said!
No comments:
Post a Comment