Issue Position: Marriage Equality

Issue Position

When the issue is marriage equality, I find it necessary to begin with other matters which, at first, may seem unrelated.

My father had many good qualities. If you ever did business with him, you met them. However, as honest and decent as he could be at work, at home he was verbally abusive.

You could say I had reason to avoid my father. However, there is no one so evil as to deserve to be abandoned by his children. The world is a hard enough place to live without our causing more unhappiness. What does it matter whose unhappiness it is? It is not as though I could teach him a lesson by abandoning him. So, I traveled to visit my father regularly until the day he died. It was not my job to punish him.

When it comes to marriage equality, there are really two issues at stake. The first is what we think of homosexuals, and how they should be treated, generally. The second is marriage equality. Even if we think homosexuality is a private matter, we may be opposed to marriage equality.

There are many people in the world who feel anger toward homosexuals. They don't necessarily admit to their anger, but their voices give them away. There are others, of course, who seem to love all humanity but want homosexuals to change. They explain their view by citing the Bible, Leviticus 18:22. "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination."

Never mind the obvious fact that Christians do not feel obliged to follow the rules in Leviticus. Let us suppose that homosexuals are an abomination. Where in Leviticus does it tell anyone it's their job to punish homosexuals? In the absence of such an instruction, I see no reason why we should contribute to anyone's unhappiness. If you believe homosexuality is an abomination, let God deal with it. Judge not, lest ye be judged.

By the way, it isn't only Leviticus we ignore. We choose what Biblical morals we invoke or ignore. Who among us, today, believes that rebellious children should be stoned as required by Deut. 21:18-21? If we choose to punish homosexuals, it is our choice, not the Bible's.

Now, as to marriage equality, let us first consider the legal rights that the state gives to couples who are married by the state. Denial of these rights to homosexual couples makes their lives less secure than they could be. It contributes to their unhappiness. Is it our place to deny homosexuals these rights? Surely the answer is "no." However, the question remains: Should we allow homosexuals to secure these rights through something the state calls "marriage"?

It is common for English words to mean more than one thing. Set the question of marriage equality aside for a bit. What the state means by "marriage" is already different from what any religion I know anything about means by "marriage." The state does not mean what the Bible means, and that's that. We cannot say that the Bible defines what the word "marriage" means. The Bible is a translation from languages that do not include the word "marriage."

Most religions already regard it as necessary to make the difference between what they mean by "marriage" and what the state means by "marriage" clear to those who would marry in the church. A clergyman who fails to make this difference clear is derelict in his duty.

In the end, it is a semantic argument, and not worth the anxiety we have spent on it. I will support any bill that reduces the unhappiness in this world. Semantic arguments are not going to influence me.

Source