When I think of same-sex marriage (or gay marriage) I think of a few specific topics. #1. Civil Rights. #2. Human Rights. #3. Religious Freedom and #4 Time.
The rights belonging to an individual by virtue of citizenship, especially the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and by subsequent acts of Congress, including civil liberties, due process, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from discrimination.
As American’s we have allowed our country to change over time. Women were not allowed to vote, a thought that is absurd at best, by today’s standards. Blacks were slaves and not allowed to vote, own property or have any freedom. Again, an absurd thought by the standards of which we live today. Change was needed, it evolved and happened.
Human rights are "rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled. "Proponents of the concept usually assert that everyone is endowed with certain entitlements merely by reason of being human. Human rights are thus conceived in a universalist and egalitarian fashion. Such entitlements can exist as shared norms of actual human moralities, as justified moral norms or natural rights supported by strong reasons, or as legal rights either at a national level or within international law. However, there is no consensus as to the precise nature of what in particular should or should not be regarded as a human right in any of the preceding senses, and the abstract concept of human rights has been a subject of intense philosophical debate and criticism.
By the 21st century the human rights movement expanded beyond its original anti-totalitarianism to include numerous causes involving humanitarianism and social and economic development in the Third World. Many of the basic ideas that animated the movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War, culminating in its adoption by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948.
While the phrase "human rights" is relatively modern the intellectual foundations of the modern concept can be traced through the history of philosophy and the concepts of natural law rights and liberties as far back as the city states of Classical Greece and the development of Roman Law. Change was needed, it evolved and happened.
Same-sex marriage (also called gay marriage) is a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or social gender. Since 2001, ten countries and various other jurisdictions have begun legally formalizing same-sex marriages, and the recognition of such marriages is a civil rights, political, social, moral, and religious issue in many nations. The conflicts arise over whether same-sex couples should be allowed to enter into marriage, be required to use a different status (such as a civil union, which either grant equal rights as marriage or limited rights in comparison to marriage), or not have any such rights. A related issue is whether the term marriage should be applied.
One argument in support of same-sex marriage is that denying same-sex couples legal access to marriage and all of its attendant benefits represents discrimination based on sexual orientation; several American scientific bodies agree with this assertion. Another argument in support of same-sex marriage is the assertion that financial, psychological and physical well-being are enhanced by marriage, and that children of same-sex couples benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union supported by society’s institutions.
Court documents filed by American scientific associations also state that singling out gay men and women as ineligible for marriage both stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against them.
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
—Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
I will get to the religious component shortly. It too, seems absurd by today’s standards that we think that two consenting adults are prevented from being in committed relationships recognized and afforded the same exact rights, privileges and freedoms given to non-same-sex couples in marriage.
I believe that this IS an issue of both civil and human rights. This is not an issue that should be censored on a religious battlefield. Enough blood has been shed in the name of “God” and “Religion” in the course of time. Nonetheless there are those who will plant their feet firmly in the ground and choose to have faith in the fact that their beliefs are the word of “God.”
I submit that they the Bible, God and most forms of religion do not restrict marriage between JUST a man or women, and further do not condemn homosexuality.
Although no one really knows for sure, the Bible was written over a period of at least 1,600 years. You can arrive at the number by adding the number of years from before the time of Moses, to just after the apostle John finished the book of Revelation.
Why we do we start before Moses? Many people believe that Job lived before God's people left Egypt. That happened around 1450 B.C. The book of Revelation was finished around A.D. 100. So, from 1500 B.C. (just before the time of Moses) to A.D. 100 is 1,600 years.
You have to keep in mind, also, that Scripture was being written only when God guided someone through inspiration (2 Timothy 3:16). This means there were long stretches of time when no one was writing anything. For instance, there was a "silence" of over 400 years between the death of the last Old Testament prophet, and the coming of John the Baptizer. Though some say that the New Testament was written 100-300 years after Christ died. Some will say that it was written before the close of the first century by those who either knew Christ personally, had encountered him, or were under the direction of those who were His disciples. In either case it has now been at least 1,850 years since new scripture has been added, change or interpreted.
I have heard many arguments of how people interpret the Bible to defend their position against sex-sex marriage, or homosexuality. And I have yet to be convinced that they are accurate.
The word homosexuality was not coined or used until the late 1800’s so the word homosexual as we know and understand it today was not available when the bible was written.
Christians have used the Bible to support the American system of slavery. Proponents of slavery used three distinct appeals: nature, scripture, and social order. They argued that the nature of African people (often seen as the "curse of Ham") relegated them to servitude. This view was bolstered by a narrow reading of select scriptures. They also claimed that human society would collapse if the status quo were not maintained:
"The doom of Ham has been branded on the form and features of his African descendants. The hand of fate has united his color and destiny. Man cannot separate what God hath joined." United States Senator James Henry Hammond
"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God… it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation… it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." –Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America.
"The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example." –Rev. R. Furman, D.D., Baptist, of South Carolina
"There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral." Rev. Alexander Campbell
"The hope of civilization itself hangs on the defeat of Negro suffrage." — statement by a prominent 19th-century southern Presbyterian pastor, cited by Rev. Jack Rogers, moderator of the Presbyterian Church (USA).
"Proslavery [proponents] charged that abolitionists took [historical-critical interpretation of the Bible] to distort scriptural plain sense. The proslavery clergyman John Henry Hopkins, Episcopal Bishop of Vermont, bemoaned: ‘For I can imagine no transgression more odious in the sight of God, and more sure to forfeit His blessing, than the willful determination to distort His revealed Word, and make it speak, not as it truly is, but as men, in their insane pride of superior philanthropy, fancy it ought to be.’
Bishop Hopkins believed that a misguided sense of philanthropy had replaced the Bible as the standard of truth.
In one of the most revealing passages in proslavery literature, Bishop Hopkins further argued this point. Hopkins himself was racked by a moral unease about slavery’s goodness; nonetheless, he remained convinced that the hermeneutics of plain sense was the key to divine truth. He yielded his own conscience to biblical authority:
‘If it were a matter to be determined by personal sympathies, tastes, or feelings, I should be as ready as any man to condemn the institution of slavery, for all my prejudices of education, habit, and social position stand entirely opposed to it. But as a Christian, I am solemnly warned not to be "wise in my own conceit," and not to "lean to my own understanding." As a Christian, I am compelled to submit my weak and erring intellect to the authority of the Almighty. For then only can I be safe in my conclusions, when I know that they in accordance with the will of Him, before whose tribunal I must render a strict account in the last great day.’
Torn between the rational humanity of conscience and the irrational orthodoxy of literalism, Bishop Hopkins felt compelled by the hermeneutics of plain sense to support an institution he intuited to be evil. His personal dislike of slavery that conflicted with the plain sense of the Bible convinced him that moral taste was relative and so unreliable. Proslavery’s biblicism was so extreme as to render rational judgment in debate over moral issues a form of religious infidelity."
How incredibly sad — Bishop Hopkins ignored the prodding of God’s Spirit on his soul, and other positive, powerful scriptures contrary to slavery, because he believed the Bible compelled it.
Christians also used the Bible to deny women the right to vote. Using the same reasons as those who advocated for slavery (nature, scripture, and social order) some Christians have resisted every attempt to improve the standing of women in society, most notably fighting against allowing women to vote.
Nature and selected scripture were invoked to show that a woman’s place was in the home, not engaged as a citizen. Regarding the desire of women to vote, the Council of Congregationalist Ministers of Massachusetts said:
"The appropriate duties and influence of woman are stated in the New Testament…. The power of woman is in her dependence, flowing from the consciousness of the weakness which God has given her for her protection…. When she assumes the place and tone of man as a public reformer… she yields the power which God has given her… and her character becomes unnatural."
Opponents even called into question the character of those who supported equality: "Who demand the ballot for woman? They are not the lovers of God, nor are they believers in Christ, as a class. There may be exceptions, but the majority prefer an infidel’s cheer to the favor of God and the love of the Christian community. It is because of this tendency that the majority of those who contend for the ballot for woman cut loose from the legislation of Heaven, from the enjoyments of home, and drift to infidelity and ruin." — Justin Fulton, 1869, in opposition to women’s right to vote.
Those who fought against women’s suffrage most often used selected verses from Paul’s writings to make their case.
The Bible was used to condemn interracial marriage. In June 2007, the United States celebrates the 40th anniversary of Loving v. Virginia, the landmark civil rights case that struck down laws forbidding interracial marriage. Here is what the judge in the state case wrote:
"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix. " — Statement by Virginia trial judge in 1959 case that led to 1967 U.S. Supreme Court striking down laws in 16 states that prohibited interracial marriage.
Incredibly, this judge was invoking the same prejudiced understanding of God, nature, and social order to make his ruling. And this was nearly a hundred years after the lessons of slavery!
Parts of the Bible, when applied in isolation without the context of the whole of Scripture and without the guidance of the Spirit, have been used to justify slavery, segregation, racism, and the subjugation of women.
So, the questions we submit are, Where else is that same error being committed today in your life and the lives of those around you? When are the same arguments (nature, isolated Scriptures, and social order) used to condemn others?
All of these historical arguments about race and gender sound hauntingly familiar people of developmental disorders, emotional disorders, to people of varied gender identities (transgender), and to people of varied sexual orientations. Even people of advanced age or unique physical features have been subject to the prejudice of "normative" society. We’ve been told we’re contrary to nature, even condemned in scripture, and that any recognition of our rights or relationships will, at the very least, strain social order.
Christian love seeks to encompass all humanity in the embrace of God and to teach each of us to love one another as we love ourselves. There are ways to read read the Bible — spiritually, intellectually sound ways — that are affirming to all. You can hold to an anti-anyone interpretation, but that is your choice. The Scriptures do not compel it.
The Bible has been used by fallen humans as a tool for both oppression and liberation. God, however, promises to be on the side of the oppressed and the liberators.
I submit that the greatest commandment of any religion and the basis for the final word of the Bible is love. Love of yourself, for each other and the greater good of this world.
Change is needed, it is evolving and is it happening.
In a time that up to 70% of Americans do not attend worship on a regular basis, it is clear that change is occurring as it relates to how individuals view religion today. There are more than one religions practiced in the US, world wide there are more than 43 religions, spanning over 3,000 different divisions of each religion.
I also submit that if a particular religion does not want to perform same-sex marriages it should not be forced to; if that is their doctrine or dogma. I do think that they should, however, not be exempt from any discrimination laws and if they use any funds or influence in any way with regards to political action they should lose any federal tax exempt status as guaranteed by the Federal Government. It is a shame that tens of millions of dollars have gone to “fight” same-sex marriage legalization. Think of the many uses that money could have gone for in the name of humanitarian need.
The time has come to bring divisiveness, injustice, intolerance and in some cases hatred to an end. It is time that people be aware that if there is a gay “agenda” it is only to secure civil, human and religious; freedom, rites, and rights offered to those who are not homosexual. No longer should “God” the “Bible” or other instruments of faith be used to defend, advance or proclaim laws, rites, or rights for a few. We are one people. We are one universe. Change is needed, it is evolving and is it happening.
Sources:
www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.com
http://en.wikipedia.org
http://www.religionfacts.com
“Serving all without exception-Open-Affirming-Inclusive-Care-Services-Worship”
105 S. 49th Street, Suite E
Omaha, NE 68132
(402) 575-7006
[Text CEREMONY to 90210 for text info!]
INCLUSIVE CARE- Pastoral Care, Funeral Ministers, Rites of Passage, Sacraments
INCLUSIVE SERVICES- Premarital Coaching, Life Coaching, Coaching for Couples
INCLUSIVE CEREMONIES Wedding Officiants, vow renewals, commitment ceremonies, and holy unions
INCLUSIVE WORSHIP- Lincoln, NE 1st/3rd Sun. 12pm-1 Fellowship. 1pm-Worship
INCLUSIVE OUTREACH- Community service outreach and volunteerism
www.ceremonyofficiants.org Wedding and Ceremony Officiants
www.allaboutweddings.com All About Weddings
Inclusive Life is a member in good sanding with American Association of Wedding Officiants. We also partner with other industry experts like Wedding Wire, Eventective, Gathering Guide, Decidio, Wedding Manor, WedPlan, and My Wedding to provide networking abilities for those selecting officiating services as well as other ceremony services. Inclusive Life is very proud to be a member of “All About Weddings”, a local organization focusing on bringing together premier local vendors that provide wedding services.
No comments:
Post a Comment