Civil Rights: For The Bible Tells Me So
If you are at all interested in the religious argument over marriage equality, the Washington Post, in conjunction with Newsweek, has a running discussion on the topic that’s pretty fascinating. Three posts are up today on the front page of the Post’s online section: one stating a biblical argument for same-sex marriage, one against, and one saying that religion is totally irrelevant in the matter.
While I tend to agree that this is a civil rights issue, and if it’s truly religious then all state marriage is unconstitutional, as a theology major I can’t help but wonder about this stuff. I’ve been hearing more people make the compatibility argument regarding the Bible and same-sex marriage lately, largely because I’m doing a thesis on the Lutheran church and their struggle over same-sex affirmation.
I must admit, when I first began reading arguments like this I thought that it was but another example – this time a somewhat positive one – of people twisting their religion to fit their needs. I’m amazed at how quickly I was turned around on this issue.
In case you missed it, Jon Stewart argued along these lines to Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.) earlier this week; the video is posted below and is well worth watching. “Marriage” has had few consistent meanings over the course of recorded history, the argument goes, and if we still played by the same rules women would be the property of men, polygamy would be legal, and for wedding gifts you might get a nice slave or two. People who argue that allowing same-sex marriage would change the whole definition of the word have a very subjective and evolved understanding of “marriage” themselves.
What’s more, throughout Judeo-Christian history, homosexuality was looked at as nothing more than a choice to engage in one of the many available extra-marital sexual options. There were few, if any, committed same-sex relationships, and the idea of same-sex marriage would have been something akin to wanting to wed a one night stand today. Marriage has frequently been changed to accommodate developing social circumstances. If the gay community’s wants and needs have changed, and this puts same-sex couples in a position to act within the spirit of marriage, why should the boundaries of marriage not change again? A biblical argument against this is convenient, but not historically or theologically accurate.
What do you think? Should gays bother trying to make this argument? Or as a civil rights issue in a theoretically secular state, should people focus on taking religion out of the equation entirely?
.cc_box a:hover .cc_home{background:url(‘http://www.comedycentral.com/comedycentral/video/assets/syndicated-logo-over.png’) !important;}.cc_links a{color:#b9b9b9;text-decoration:none;}.cc_show a{color:#707070;text-decoration:none;}.cc_title a{color:#868686;text-decoration:none;}.cc_links a:hover{color:#67bee2;text-decoration:underline;}
First time here? See what we're all about... Get involved... Send us a tip!...
Well, I don’t think we should try to make religious arguments for or against marriage equality, because it’s impossible to win. Once while I was talking with a friend about the vagaries of Jewish kosher laws, she protested, “But that doesn’t make sense!” To which I replied, “It’s religion. It doesn’t have to make sense.”
Which is why I don’t think it’s possible to ever get anywhere by engaging religionists on their own turf. No quoting the Golden Rule or arguing the nuances of Leviticus. Unless you’re a true believer you won’t change anybody’s mind, and if you were really a true believer you wouldn’t be trying to change anybody’s mind anyway. So it’s lose-lose.
BUT… I think we should actively and aggressively push back against the idea that one group’s religious beliefs should determine the civil rights of people who don’t share those beliefs. We have to have the courage and smarts to finally confront the myth that religion makes one a good person, much less a better or wiser one than anyone else.
It’s a touchy point, and it has to be made deftly, but it’s a point we should be making very loudly.
If you haven’t seen it, do not miss Jon Stewart’s grilling Mike Huckabee on marriage (last night?). Stewart is witty, forceful and indignant, yet utterly respectful of Huckabee. As a debater he makes Dan Savage look like Eraserhead by comparison.
I’ve maintained for years that the whole marriage issue (straight and gay) is the biggest muddling of church and state this country has. The solution is quite simple: the state should recognize civil unions, and the church should recognize marriages. If you want one, but not the other, then go for it. Most people would opt for both. For all legal issues (insurance, visitation rights, etc.) you would need to have a state-recognized civil union. For religious purposes (regardless of your religion) you would need a marriage.
Of course, since this makes too much sense, the practice of separating the two will never be adopted in this country.
what i want to know is why the fact that practically every comparable nation on earth HAS done something to address this issue is never used as an argument. why is the united states always so comfortable being wholly out of step with the rest of the world? and it isn’t just on this issue. it concerns me.
Why would anyone care whether there is a biblical case to be made for gay
marriage? You might as well ask whether there is a religious or biblical case to
be made for or against slavery. The answer, of course, is that the Bible can be
cited in support of or in opposition to any human behavior and human need. That
is why, as voters and legislators, we ought not to be asking ourselves what the
Bible or particular religions say about anything and should stick to what seems
reasonable in modern society and legal under our Constitution.
Faith-based arguments on behalf of gay marriage actually give aid and comfort to
the sort of right-wing religious groups that threw volunteers and huge amounts
of money into the California battle over Proposition 8, because they legitimize
the idea that religious belief is a proper test for determining legal rights.
The theological debate about gay marriage will never be resolved. The legal
debate about gay marriage can only be resolved if theology is left out of it. I
don’t care whether the Bible says that gays should be drawn and quartered before
being publicly boiled in oil. Nor do I care whether David loved Jonathan more
than he loved any of his wives.
These ancient books should have no more to do with the rights of gay men and
women in modern society than Genesis should have anything to do with the
teaching of biology in twenty-first century schools. Ah, but I forgot for a
moment. A third of Americans believe that every word in Genesis is literally
true. And they will not be convinced otherwise by liberal theologians who regard
the creation story as a metaphor. The resolution of issues such as gay marriage
and the teaching of evolution cannot and should not depend today on debate over
the “true meaning” of superstitions and heroic tales recorded thousands of years
ago.
When I traveled to Mexico for a friend’s wedding, I was surprised by the fact that a ceremony there requires two separate “marriages”. There is the one performed by the local judge or govt. representative, and then that is followed by the more spiritual or religous one.
It was one of those “Duh!” moments, but since I’m an ignorant American, it never occurred to me that a marriage in the eyes of the Lord and a marriage in the eyes of the state would be two different things, and treated as such.
It makes perfect sense to me that, even if a certain church or religion won’t recognize your union, then your government will.
Leave your response!
Recent Coments
Most Commented
Most Viewed - 30 Days