So, yes, I know that is a harsh title. I chose the words carefully, because there are times when we all lie or manipulate to get our way. I don’t want to label anyone a “liar” just because they tell a lie, or a “manipulator” just because they manipulate at times. That would be condemning myself. But when a Christian publishes something that is so full of lies and manipulative statements that it nearly makes me hurl, I have to say something. Not to accuse one of being a liar or manipulator, but calling them out for resorting to lies and manipulation in a given situation.
Such is the case with the recent article entitled “Same-Sex Marriage as a Civil Right: Are Wrongs Rights?” by Albert Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Very interesting language in this article… to say the least. But I will let Mr. Mohler’s words speak for themselves and add my commentary.
(As a side note, I am not trying to convince anyone what to think on this issue or to change minds, but just to point out where bad logic, inconsistent theology, and efforts to manipulate followers is occurring I leave it up to you the reader to decide for yourself the character of the man making these statements.)
The article starts off as a nice way of viewing civil rights, a little heavy on the bleeding heart side…which leaves you bracing for the big “but”. It comes right after the big bold heading “When Rights Are Wrong” (Mr. Mohler words in italics, my commentary following)
At this point Christians have to think very carefully.
The manipulation starts. Because clearly Christians would never think clearly unless our leaders tell us how to before stating their point. Remember that all you clones-in-training.
But is same-sex marriage such a right? The answer to that question must be no.
Telling everyone the answer they must have is not only considered manipulative in leadership, but also a bad educational method (or incorrect pedagogy for those in the field). But obviously the answer has to come first before the explanation lest you think too much and see through his points.
Christians cannot accept the argument that homosexuality is an immutable characteristic.
Why not? The scripture does not say so either way. The Bible does describe a few things as sin that we now know is biological (in the mental health field, especially). Even the Southern Baptists accept some of those concepts (for the most part – some still label them as sin).
On that basis, why not grant theft or other sinful behavior the same civil rights protection?
Because that is failed logic based on a misunderstanding of law. Theft would still be illegal because it infringes on the basic rights of others. Same sex marriage does not infringe on the rights of people outside of the same sex marriage itself. We do not make things illegal because they are sin. We make them illegal because they infringe on the rights of others (please forgive that over simplification my lawyer friends out there).
Christians understand that marriage was instituted by the Creator, who designed marriage and the family as the foundational social unit of human society.
The scripture is not really clear on who created marriage – Adam or God. But you can see my previous post on this issue. There is nowhere in scripture that you find God saying that marriage and family are the foundation of society. We just assume that because it came first that it was supposed to be that way. What about “on Earth as it is in heaven” and “people will neither marry or be given in marriage” in heaven? Or how about the fact that God is not married? Did He really create it so that society had to be based on something that is not even part of His character?
Every human society has recognized this meaning of marriage, and all successful civil societies have honored, protected, and defended heterosexual marriage as the union that should govern human sexuality, reproduction, intimacy, and rearing of children.
The problem with this is that it is not true. I explored this again in a previous post, but the basic idea is that many human societies have had different meanings for marriage, and the “success” of a civil society has never been tied to its definition of marriage. Many societies that have upheld Mohler’s definition of marriage have failed, and many that have not upheld that view have lasted for hundreds if not thousands of years. And many times when they failed… well, when civil tribal societies were actually wiped out by disease brought from outsiders, or annihilated by superior weapons – you really can’t blame that on marriage.
But I guess one could technically say they were not civil if they were tribal, but that would be incredibly ethnocentric and ignorant to do so.
Those pushing for the legalization of same-sex marriage have been tremendously successful in convincing many people
Because people can’t possibly think for themselves? They are only “convinced” (brainwashed?) if they agree?
But this is a confusion of categories that Christians cannot accept.
Because apparently you are equal with Jesus and can tell us what we can and can not accept? Or are you trying to say that people just aren’t really a Christian if they disagree with you?
The argument for the legalization of same-sex marriage fails in terms of any constitutional logic that our nation’s founders would have conceived.
You mean like the logic that one group can’t force another group to follow their religious beliefs?
The Bible is clear in terms of its teachings on both sexuality and marriage.
Its not really that clear at all, but I have already pointed that out. (yes, after a while it does get a little tiring to point out the same blog post again and again for multiple points)
As Jesus Christ declared, God intended marriage as the union of one man and one woman “from the beginning” (Matthew 19:4–6).
Nice distortion of scripture. Jesus just says that we were created as male and female and that is a reason why a male and female would get married. He doesn’t speak to the definition of marriage. Oh, and way to leave out the complete scriptural story on this. Who needs pesky context when interpreting scriptures? Who cares about Matthew 19:3 where the Bible records the question that was asked of Jesus? I mean, it may completely change the way people read this scripture to see that Jesus was asked if it is lawful for an already married man to divorce his female wife. People might realize that Jesus’ response was to a question about a previously existing heterosexual marriage… but that’s not really important, right? Not when you have already told us what to think?
The legalization of same-sex marriage would confuse and greatly weaken the single institution that is most central to human society and most essential to human flourishing.
So… monasteries are weakened and confused and are not helping to flourish humans? I know Baptists don’t like Catholics in general, but way to be harsh on their leaders (who never marry).
Christians responding to demands for the legalization of same-sex marriage cannot accept the argument that the right to marry a person of the same gender is a civil right.
Since you haven’t made a logic case yet, why get demanding now? Oh… that’s right. You like to tell us how to think.
Christians must remember that our ultimate authority is the Word of God.
Seeing that you have already butchered the Bible…. but I guess denial is not just a river in Egypt. Or should I just say, check out the plank in your own eye dude!
At the end of the day, the argument over same-sex marriage is never just about same-sex marriage, and debates about civil rights are never just about civil rights. Deeper truths and worldview implications are always at stake, and it is our responsibility to make certain that we know what those are and stand humbly and compassionately for those truths, regardless of the cost.
And the ultimate manipulation hammer comes down. Yes, deeper truths and worldview implications are at stake, but the constitution was written to ensure that no one can force their deeper truths and worldviews on another group that does not believe in them. That is also core to Baptist belief, but I guess Mr. Moher has forgotten his heritage. But, I ultimately love the implication that those that don’t agree with Mohler are deceived, arrogant, and giving in to the world around them. Or that there is a greater cost for standing up against same sex marriage than standing for it. Oh, you poor things – someone might mock you in the media or even person. So sorry that has happened…. but when is the last time a Christian committed suicide for the way they were treated by the pro-same-sex marriage crowd? Do you know how many LGBT people will commit suicide this week alone from the persecution they face, mostly at the hands of Christians?