In the gay marriage controversy, we are repeatedly told that “if people are in love, why should we not allow them to marry?” But love is not the present standard for marriage. We prohibit minors in love from getting married unless parents approve. We prohibit brothers and sisters who are in love from marriage. It is illegal for two women in love with one man who loves them both to marry. It is illegal for two men in love with one woman who loves both men to marry.
The issue is not love but the moral baseline today of “consenting adults may do as they please if they do not endanger themselves or others.” As the pop song says, “What’s love got to do with it?” The inevitable result will be gay marriage, polygamy, polyandry, group marriage, incestuous marriage and legalized prostitution. There is no compelling argument to prevent any of these with the new lower baseline of morality. Why should consenting adult gays get to marry, but not polygamous Mormons or Muslims? Would not gays against polygamy be the new “haters”?
We Christians would be wise to embrace a more libertarian position on legal sexual morality, teaching with clarity and conviction the biblical truth that “what is legally permissible is not necessarily morally right.” Biblically based Christians already do this with regard to premarital sex (fornication) and extramarital sex (adultery), not passing laws against either, but calling each sin. Sadly, many church goers (not saying they are or are not believers) fornicate and adulterate as they passionately fight against gay behavior and marriage.
Nero married a young boy and also had another wedding where he dressed as the woman bride, yet Paul commanded, “honor the king” not for Nero’s morality but in respect for his office and governmental authority. Imagine Obama doing what Nero did and honoring him!
If we wish to fight for man-woman marriage, we should use sound research in sociology and psychology, not religious dogma. A secular society seeks secular arguments, and sound social science supports biblical morality. For example consider, “Ten Arguments From Social Science Against Same-Sex Marriage” by the Family Research Council. Sure, the leftists will reject the arguments, but they cannot be dismissive by shouting, “separation of church and state!” And must address the compelling benefits of home with a father and mother.
There is also a growing trend of adults raised in LGBT homes who are now strong advocates of man-woman marriage. These approaches are far more productive in addressing gay marriage, then quoting a Bible verse.
Of course the far greater tragedy is the capitulation of pastors and churches to affirming LGBT behavior and gay marriage. The active LGBT are not only welcomed, they lead as married clergy. Should the LGBT have the legal right to lead their religious group? In a free nation, the answer is yes. But legal us not always moral, and the freedom of speech in a free nation should allow one to call cohabitation, adultery, and homosexual behavior what God’s word calls it, sin.
This freedom issue leads to another point–secularism and oppressive totalitarian governments usually go hand in hand. We can expect more of what happened recently to the pastors in Houston who had their sermons subpoenaed by an activist lesbian mayor to check for sermon “hate speech” that she defined as anything against gay marriage (her demands were withdrawn, but she tested the waters). Let’s get ready for some book-of-Acts persecution in spending witnessing time in jail or worse for our preaching. Should we sense God’s special call to outspokenly confront sexual sin in high places of government as John the baptizer did, we should also be ready to have our head served on a platter.
As a pastor, my calling is to get Christians to act like Christians and reach non-Christians, not get Christians to pass laws to make non-Christians act like Christians. As the old saying goes, we are commissioned to fish for people, and attempting to clean the fish before catching them is futile and only scares them away.