This may surprise some of you, but I get weekly emails from the Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank from what I can tell and I like to read their weekly emails to see what conservatives are thinking, as if having the majority of my friends be conservative isn't enough. Many of my friends like to refer to me as liberal, and perhaps I am, but I also think it largely depends on the issue at hand. For example, on abortion, I would be labeled a conservative. On healthcare, I would be labeled a liberal. And so on and so forth.
Anyways, this week's email was talking about how there was a march for marriage at the capital. People were up in arms apparently at the thought of gay people marrying. It seems this has been in the news quite a bit lately, which I've been largely unaware of since I don't have TV anymore. I get snippets of news from a daily email highlighting some articles but am still pretty out of touch as far as TV news goes.
Last week's email by the same group talked about the importance of children having a man and a woman raising them. I remember couchsurfing with a gay man back in 2008 or 2009 and having some real questions about gay marriage back then that are surfacing again. If groups like the Heritage Foundation are so adamant about marriage having to be between a man and a woman; then what about our high divorce rate? What's worse/better, 2 men or 2 women raising a kid or a single woman or man who is divorced or never been married in the first place?
This week's email quoted some 11 year-old as asking the question who didn't she need - her mom or her dad? Their point was that no one could answer her. Did they bother asking the kids whose parents were divorced who they didn't want when their parents split up?
Perhaps we're asking the wrong people in the first place. Maybe people groups who have an amazingly low divorce rate should be asked what they think as they're obviously doing something correct with their own marriages. As a single, never-been-married person, it shouldn't matter what my opinion is on the matter. Similarly, someone who is up in arms one way or the other and yet is divorced doesn't necessarily have an opinion that matters much either I would argue.
Why is homosexuality such a big deal when it comes to churches? We seem to have no problem whatsoever inviting people who are divorced, even for non-Biblical reasons, into our churches. But those gay people, keep 'em out! If they want to come to Jesus they better change their orientation first. Right? Because for every other sin we're so concerned about the person cleaning up their lives before coming to Christ, right? What if we just accepted people right where they're at, for who they are right then and there? What if the Church became known for offering love and acceptance, rather than hate and rejection?
Do I support gay marriage? Who cares? I know I'll have friends who are appalled at my flippancy on the subject, but I really don't care one way or the other. Several years ago, I had a Sunday school teacher say that every nation that has embraced gay people has then fallen shortly thereafter. I'm pretty sure if America falls it won't be because of allowing gay marriage. It will be because of our debt and the way we treat the least of these. There are some pretty harsh words throughout Scripture for those who are rich and do nothing for the needs of those around them. Fat cows of Bashan and so on. There are also quite a few words for debtors as being slaves to the lenders and I have a hard time thinking that doesn't or won't apply to us as a nation in a fairly short time and perhaps it is already happening now.
No comments:
Post a Comment