Gay Marriage: Can our Beliefs (creeds) be the Basis of our Argument?

Attempts have been made in the defense of traditional marriage to assert a Biblical position. God’s position on the sin of homosexuality can be laid down with great ease. However, the Massachusetts Supreme Court says they are not concerned with Biblical positions. They do not recognize the issue as either religious or moral. Their concern is to “define the liberty of all”. And homosexuals, they assert, have the right to civil marriages. To God-fearing citizens, the frustrating aspect of this silly debate is that our deeply-seated religious beliefs in right over wrong are being thrown out the window. We are not allowed to make the case for Biblical marriage because the Supreme Court says they have an obligation “not to mandate our own moral code”. However, the state IS mandating a moral code by endorsing what society identifies as immoral. If the state is truly concerned about the “liberty of all” then the state cannot endorse one creed over another.

There are two religious creeds on the table right now. The dictionary defines a creed as “a set of fundamental beliefs”. There is the creed which recognizes God’s condemnation of a homosexual lifestyle (Biblical Creed) and there is the creed which purports that the homosexual lifestyle should be accepted, tolerated, respected and endorsed (Homosexual Creed). Supreme Court Justice J. Greaney has favored one of these creeds over the other when he wrote that the status of homosexuality deserves “full acceptance, tolerance, and respect”. Sorry sir, we beg to differ. This is a debate over creeds, not rights.

The homosexual lifestyle will never be accepted, tolerated, or respected by Bible-believing citizens. NEVER. It is contradictory to trust the Bible as God’s word and sanction homosexuality. That lifestyle cannot be endorsed, it is sin. It always has been sin and always will be sin. The state’s endorsement of the Homosexual Creed darkens the relevance of the Biblical Creed.

Just as I wouldn’t leave my kids with an alcoholic babysitter or a known sex offender, I also wouldn’t subject my children to public education which sets forth a homosexual lifestyle as a viable option. I would pull them out of public school before letting them be influenced by a homosexual teacher. It is my right to raise my family with Biblical Creeds. Article 1 of our Declaration of Rights says “Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, CREED, or national origin”. The Supreme Court has violated our rights by endorsing the Homosexual Creed and rejecting the Biblical Creed.

Although our Biblical Creed identifies homosexual activity as immoral, our beliefs also call upon us to “love the person, not the lifestyle”. We God-fearing citizens recognize the mote in our own eyes. We too are susceptible to and guilty of sin. There is none righteous in God’s eyes. We all fall short of the mark and deserve the punishment which Christ bore for us. The homosexual people are no worse. Sin is sin in God’s eyes. They need to be treated kindly, loved, and shown God’s plan of salvation just like everyone else to whom the Great Commission is directed.

But doesn’t the continued support of traditional marriage violate the Homosexual Creed? No: for two reasons; First, no homosexual camp has ever argued that a heterosexual lifestyle violates their creed. In fact, they openly accept and respect traditional marriage because we’re essential for procreation. Supreme Court Justice C. J. Marshall has written that the gays “seek not to undermine the institution of civil marriage. They do not want marriage abolished.”

Secondly, by leaving the legal definition (Black’s Law Dictionary) of marriage alone, the state is not endorsing a Biblical Creed. Rather, the state is merely acknowledging the true definition of marriage since colonial times and for thousand years of human history beforehand.

Discrimination most certainly is occurring. However, it’s not the homosexuals being discriminated against, it’s all God-fearing citizens. We are the victims here. If gays are allowed to marry then a serious offense against our liberty will occur. One set of creeds will be endorsed by the state over another. A state judgment on morality, however unintentionally, will and must occur. The Commonwealth will consider the Biblical Creeds of all Bible-believing faiths inferior to the Homosexual Creeds of other faiths. This IS a religious debate to the very core.

 

Hello Dr. Bob Griffin. Thank you for your suggestion. I have introduced myself on the welcome page. Yesterday afternoon, I read the Massachusetts Supreme Court's decision and found that I had no choice but to put my reaction on paper (electronic paper, that is). Yes, they are my own words.

And FreeAtLast, good input. We should never get so entangled in the affairs of this life that we loose focus on the fundamentals. I also hear you that the church has failed because we fall short of total obedience to God's Word. Do you, however, assert that the believer should refrain from participating in the discussions of current events? Should the individual believer have an influence on the delemmas of society (like homosexual marriage)? Or, should we let the world do with our government what they will and stand by idly waiting for them to take away our freedoms, like that to preach the Gospel?