So anyway. Facebook has absolutely blown up goings on related to Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty. I shall not recap his comments. If you don't know what he said, Google is your friend.
It's been interesting reading the reactions people have had though. And I'm not talking about the media, Hollywood, politicians and so forth. I mean reactions from the rank and file. Specifically I refer to people on the conservative/Republican/Christian side of the argument.
For the first time it really feels like lines are being drawn about this issue. For the first time it feels like there are fractures in the opposition to "same-sex marriage". But I'll come back to this in a moment.
Earlier tonight I saw a friend-of-a-friend had posted a link to some crowd-source financing web page. The page is intended to collect funds so that a same-sex couple can leave the very deeply red state we live in and drive to California to get married.
This isn't a simple matter of challenging the law in the Texas Supreme Court in the hopes they find it unconstitutional. It would be pointless. The state's Supreme Court would have to rule against them because Texas didn't ban "gay marriage" with a bill signed in to law. Rather, the Texas Constitution was itself amended specifically to prevent not only "gay marriage" ceremonies from occurring within the state but also to prevent Texas from recognizing such unions performed in other states.
In other words there's simply no wiggle room here. If you reside in the state of Texas, there's simply no way for same-sex couples to get "married". There's no state law you can pass in Texas that will ever change that. Even if 100% of all citizens in Texas changed their minds tomorrow about "gay marriage" and decided to pass a law, it wouldn't do any good. The state's constitution would have to be modified. And that's a procedural pain in the neck.
I say all of that to draw an analogy. There's an entire segment of the supposed Christian community who are finally willing to "compromise" (ie, sell out) on this issue. This whole chimichanga related to Phil Robertson has brought at least that much into focus. There are craploads of people supposedly on my side of the aisle who have finally had enough. They're at their breaking points now.
Everybody? No, of course not. But a considerable number. I use the term "supposed Christians" up there (A) because these people are okay with their Protestant/evangelical churches officiating or in some way blessing same-sex unions, which is a patently anti-Christian attitude to have and (B) this even includes some Mormons I know. Mormons in general and these Mormons in particular may be good people but Mormons cannot be called Christians unless we either redefine the word "Mormon", the word "Christian" or both.
To be sure, Catholics far and wide may support "same-sex marriage" too but the difference is that the Church doesn't. And that I guess is the sum and substance of my point here.
Much like the Texas state constitution, the Catholic Church has taught infallibly that marriage can only be the union of one man and one woman. Period, end of discussion. Even if every single Catholic in the entire world up to and including any given Pope were to decide "same-sex marriage" is cool and totally onboard with God's plan, the Church's prior teachings on the subject are impossible to change.
The Catholic Church can't compromise on this. Can't. Cannot. Even if individual Catholics are more than willing to kowtow to the left about this issue, the Church herself can't.
But non-Catholic institutions lack the Church's authority and leadership. As with states which forbid "same-sex marriage" by law rather than Constitutional amendment, their own bylaws may forbid anything even remotely resembling "same-sex marriage" today but who knows what those bylaws might say tomorrow? Apply enough pressure and who knows? Maybe the Mormons and the Southern Baptists will accept "gay marriage" after all.
But the Catholic Church can't.
As a side note, let me say that in many ways I consider myself to be a sexual libertarian. In many ways, I don't care what people do or with whom they do it as long as (A) it's consensual and (B) it doesn't become my problem.
The issue with "gay marriage" is that any legal recognition of it will eventually become my problem in the form of my church being forced to recognize or perform "gay weddings". The gay lobby and its advocates can say anything they like to the contrary but let's cut the crap. Their movement isn't about "equality". If that's all they wanted, laws regarding civil unions could be modified as necessary to confer whatever legal benefits are conferred by marriage.
That isn't the issue. It's never been the issue. Ultimately the gay lobby wants society's blessing for that immoral lifestyle. Anything less is unacceptable. We've all seen the Internet meme of a picture of a "gay marriage" advocate holding a sign that says "I civil union you". The nonsensical sentiment is designed to illustrate the supposed absurdity and inequality inherent to civil unions over and against marriage.
It isn't about equality. It's about forcing everybody everywhere to accept the proposition of "gay marriage" simply because they desperately yearn for wholesale societal endorsement.
Not just "acceptance". Not just "tolerance". Endorsement.
Do you seriously think they'll draw the line at religious freedom? How's that working out so far? We've all heard the stories about Christian business owners being forced to participate in "gay weddings" in spite of the fact that theirs is a clear cut case of religious conscience.
The same gay lobby which has eaten those business owners alive in court will somehow spare churches and other religious groups? Fat chance!
When I express unequivocal opposition to "gay marriage", bear in mind that this is what I have in mind. When it comes to the "gay agenda", remember that I couldn't care less about the "gay" part. It's the "agenda" part that bothers me.
No comments:
Post a Comment