Progressive Revival

Progressive Revival


Rick Warren & Proposition 8

posted by Randall Balmer

I have a great deal of respect for Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California.  I would even go so far as to count him as a friend, and I suspect that he might say the same about me.  Warren has done a great deal to recast the social agenda of evangelicals to bring it more into line with the teachings of Jesus as well as the noble precedent of nineteenth-century evangelical activism, which invariably took the part of those on the margins of society.  Warren is no fan of the Religious Right, and he recognizes that it is inappropriate for people of faith in a pluralistic society to impose their will on others simply by majoritarian fiat.

So that is why I found his announcement on October 23 that he supports California’s Proposition 8 so disturbing.  Proposition 8, a ballot initiative, seeks to overturn the California supreme court’s ruling that gay marriage is constitutionally permissible.

Warren has every right to his views on the definition of marriage, which he insists (not without foundation) is mandated in the Bible.  Millions of Americans – a majority, I’m sure – agree with him.  “If you believe what the Bible says about marriage,” he declared on his website, “you need to support Proposition 8.”

Warren goes on to note that, by his reckoning, gays and lesbians make up only 2 percent of the population in the United States.  “We should not let 2 percent of the population change the definition of marriage.”

Warren, a Baptist, knows better.  The cornerstones of the Baptist tradition are adult baptism (as opposed to infant baptism) and the principle of liberty of conscience and the separation of church and state.  Baptists inherited these ideas from Roger Williams, the founder of the Baptist tradition in America.  And, at least until the conservative takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1979, Baptists have always been watchmen on that wall of separation and fierce guardians of liberty of conscience.  Thankfully, Williams’s ideas were incorporated into the United States Constitution, both in the First Amendment, which forbade a religious establishment, and in the recurring principle of respect for the rights of minorities.

These have been the guiding touchstones of American life for more than two centuries.  We Americans have sought, at times better than others, to live up to the principles articulated in our charter documents, especially in safeguarding the rights and the interests of minorities – though not perfectly, by any means.  The scourge of slavery and segregation and discrimination remains an indelible blot, and our treatment of women has been cavalier.  But we Americans eventually rise to our better selves and come around to recognize the claims of legal equality for those who, for reasons of gender or race or religion or sexual orientation, cannot number themselves part of the majority. 

And if we needed further warrant for this, the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of “equal protection under law” codified that into the Constitution itself.

Many Americans, myself included, understand the California supreme court’s decision (and similar rulings in other jurisdictions) as an expression of that principle, an expansion of civil rights to those who have been denied equality for a very long time.  It’s not at all at odds with fundamental Baptist principles of liberty and protection from a majoritarian ethic that imposes its standards on the minority.

I challenge Rick Warren, my friend and fellow evangelical, to reconsider his support for Proposition 8.  Warren and all people of faith have every right to hold to their religious views about homosexuality.  But to insist that those standards must be observed by everyone in a pluralistic society is – well, it’s not Baptist.

Rick Warren knows better.

 



Advertisement
Comments read comments(77)
post a comment
Drew Tatusko

posted October 26, 2008 at 8:33 pm


The disturbing bit is this:
“We should not let 2 percent of the population change the definition of marriage.”
What this means is that we should re-think any minority protection under the law and that is disturbing. I too believe the Bible, but I with many thoughtful Christians also believe that there is nothing intrinsically evil with same gender relationships. In fact, the Bible may be more supportive of it than many are willing to see. The issue should be singular: do people of the same gender who choose to enter in a relationship with someone of the same gender have the same exact rights as people of different genders? If the answer is no, then what is the legal reasoning to make this a defensible position?
The answer is that there is none that would be constitutional. Supreme courts are more and more waking up to this fact and are more and more declaring that same gender relationship are clearly suffering discrimination.
It does not matter who believes what biblical foundation and it does not matter what percentage we are talking about. If any percentage of our society is being discriminated against due to legal provision, that law must change. Proposition 8 sends progress backwards and puts discrimination at the fore.



report abuse
 

Mark Erbland

posted October 26, 2008 at 8:50 pm


I whole-heartedly support Rick Warren’s stance on proposition 8. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are CREATED equal, that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Sexual orientation is not a civil right, homosexuals are not a race of people, nor should they be a protected class. It is a practice by choice and that choice is contrary to both the natural make up of man and the spiritual and moral standards set by our creator. Remember what God thought about Sodom and Gomorrah? His position on the subject didn’t change with the coming of Christ either. The bible speaks very clearly that homosexuality is sin and man’s loose and incorrect interpretation or manipulation of scripture won’t change God’s expressed will in regard to marriage found in the Word. The age of grace hasn’t made what was once wrong now OK. For many years, sodomy was against the law in this country. Yet those who disdain the commands of God and his plan for man have managed to exert their influence and reverse those legal opinions in the name of privacy, equality and tolerance. Call it what you want, it’s still WRONG. Some people in this country seem to think that the expression of beliefs and values that are based in religious principles is somehow contrary to our constitution and should not be permitted in politics or the public debate. Well, those same people are promulgating their so-called “godless” opinions in public. They have no problem forcing their “godless” philosophy of life and beliefs on everyone else. They do, however have a god – it is themselves. So called proponents of the “Separation of Church and State” doctrine have manipulated the intent of the framers of the constitution to provide freedom of religion to mean freedom from religion. God’s commands are not unfair, nor are they discriminatory. They apply to everyone. God knows what’s best for men, women, children and families everywhere. We would do well to listen to Him and as a government that is of the people, by the people and for the people, we would be wise to base our guidelines for living in this country upon His counsel. Christians have a legal, moral and spiritual obligation to stand up and make their voices heard in this nation. Those who advocate no religous influence in this country would like for the religions of humanism, pluralism and aethism to dominate the public debate. I, however totally disagree and boldly state that we as a nation must repent of our sins (sexual included) and wholeheartedly seek after God to guide the course of this nation. I don’t think that you can legislate morality, but I do believe that our laws must have a moral and just base. It is only by a change of heart can a man be saved and that change comes by the bold preaching of the GOOD NEWS. God doesn’t hate those who have practiced homosexuality. He LOVES THEM and gave the life of His only Son for them so that they can be saved, forgiven and free from sin. The good news is that just like other sin we get caught up in – the lifestyle of homosexuality can be overcome. We need to let JESUS BE LORD of not only our personal lives, but also our nation. WE NEED THE ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD JEHOVAH IN THIS COUNTRY MORE NOW THAN EVER BEFORE!!! The argument has been made that homosexual couples should enjoy the same priviledges as a heterosexual couple – hogwash. They are attempting to legislate and force tolerance and acceptance of their sinful LIFESTYLE on society and on our children. Some of my best friends have been involved in the lifestyle, but that doesn’t mean I condone it. I love them, but I reject their lifestyle choice. Drug users have tried pushing for the same thing for years. Benefits don’t have to be extended to people on the basis of gender and sexual practice – that’s discriminatory!! If people want to live together and make a commitment to one another to be family and insurance companies want to foot the bill for that – fine. But don’t take and attempt to re-define God’s holy institution of marriage just to provide benefits to people that want to commit themselves to live together and call themselves family. Why not afford non-homosexual friends that live together as room mates the same benefits or hetero sexual couples that are unmarried the same benefits?



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted October 26, 2008 at 9:27 pm


Mr. Erbland:
Your long screed illustrated Mr. Balmer’s point perfectly: if the best you’ve got in order to argue in favor of stripping civil rights away from LGBT citizens is an argument based on religion, you’re going to have to do a lot better. Whether you like it or not, the laws of this country and of the State of California prohibit the establishment of religion – meaning, among other things, that on a cultural or social level, in order to justify a change in the law (and particularly one that strips people of their right to equal treatment under the law) you’re going to have to justify it through an appeal to common values, not sectarian religious values.
Quite frankly, the fact that you believe that the Bible doesn’t sanction homosexuality – a belief, I’ll add, that is contested within the contemporary church as a whole – means exactly bupkis when it comes to deliberative discourse in a pluralist society. If you can’t find a nonreligious reason to strip marriage rights from LGBT citizens, you’re just going to have to accept them, because you have absolutely no right to impose the values specific to your religious viewpoint on anyone else. That’s how pluralist societies work.
The same laws that should, in theory, protect LGBT citizens from the imposition of your religious values also protect you from a Roman Catholic or fundamentalist Christian or Islamic or any other kind of theocracy. The same amendment that protects their right to be free from your moral viewpoint protects your right to speak freely, to gather with others peaceably, and to publish your opinions in a public forum without fear of legal consequences.
Please reconsider your position, or state it in terms with which all Americans can agree rather than in exclusively Christian terms.



report abuse
 

Fred

posted October 27, 2008 at 9:40 am


Loving for All
By Mildred Loving
Prepared for Delivery on June 12, 2007,
The 40th Anniversary of the Loving vs. Virginia Announcement
When my late husband, Richard, and I got married in Washington, DC in 1958, it wasn’t to make a political statement or start a fight. We were in love, and we wanted to be married.
We didn’t get married in Washington because we wanted to marry there. We did it there because the government wouldn’t allow us to marry back home in Virginia where we grew up, where we met, where we fell in love, and where we wanted to be together and build our family. You see, I am a woman of color and Richard was white, and at that time people believed it was okay to keep us from marrying because of their ideas of who should marry whom.
When Richard and I came back to our home in Virginia, happily married, we had no intention of battling over the law. We made a commitment to each other in our love and lives, and now had the legal commitment, called marriage, to match. Isn’t that what marriage is?
Not long after our wedding, we were awakened in the middle of the night in our own bedroom by deputy sheriffs and actually arrested for the “crime” of marrying the wrong kind of person. Our marriage certificate was hanging on the wall above the bed. The state prosecuted Richard and me, and after we were found guilty, the judge declared: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” He sentenced us to a year in prison, but offered to suspend the sentence if we left our home in Virginia for 25 years exile.
We left, and got a lawyer. Richard and I had to fight, but still were not fighting for a cause. We were fighting for our love.
Though it turned out we had to fight, happily Richard and I didn’t have to fight alone. Thanks to groups like the ACLU and the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, and so many good people around the country willing to speak up, we took our case for the freedom to marry all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And on June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that, “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men,” a “basic civil right.”
My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God’s plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation’s fears and prejudices have given way, and today’s young people realize that if someone loves someone they have a right to marry.
Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the “wrong kind of person” for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.



report abuse
 

Francis

posted October 27, 2008 at 10:05 pm


The Bible is in conflict with the teachings of Christ on a number of issues. And so it is with Prop 8. Jesus would not stand in the way of a couple’s happiness, in fact, Jesus would probably preside over the marriage blessing the couple, regardless of the couples gender or genders or race or races. Remember not too long ago we heard that the Biblical teaching is against mixed-race marriage.
Francis



report abuse
 

Mark Erickson

posted October 28, 2008 at 1:35 pm


“Warren is no fan of the Religious Right.” Really? What evidence do you have, Mr. Balmer?
The article linked says this:
So why is most of the press under the impression that Rick Warren, a Southern Baptist, is so different from, say, Focus on the Family president James Dobson? “It’s a matter of tone,” says an amused Mr. Warren, who seems unable to name any particular theological issues on which he and Mr. Dobson disagree.
There is absolutely nothing surprising about Rick Warren endorsing Proposition 8.
Also, it is foolish to ask Mr. Warren to change his stance on the basis of being a Baptist. Surely his beliefs about homosexuality are much more deeply held than any allegiance to a historical tidbit from his denomination. A much better argument would instead end with “well, it’s not constitutional.”



report abuse
 

recovering ex-Pentecostal

posted October 28, 2008 at 1:49 pm


MarkErbland,
It isn’t at all apparent that you actual DO believe that ALL citizens are edowed with the inaliienable rights to “liberty and the pursuit of happiness”.
Liberty means freedom. Gay Americans do NOT have the freedom/liberty to marry the person of their mutul choosing – i.e.the one they love. This, for gay citizens, would indeed be the fulfillment of the pursuit of happiness.
“Sexual orientation is not a civil right”
Correct. It simply IS. And, it is not the same for all citizens, much to your all-too-obvious chagrin.
“homosexuals are not a race of people”
Nor are heterosexuals, but THEY can marry the person of their choosing.
“nor should they be a protected class”
Ah, but they ARE.
“It is a practice by choice”
Wrong. Sexual orientation (i.e. homo- r hetero- or bi-sexuality) is an innate, probably immutable characterstic. Even gay people who are celibate (i.e. who make the choice NOT to practice any kind of sexual activity) are still homosexual.
“and that choice is contrary to both the natural make up of man”
Wrong again. Homosexuality is only contary to the “natural make up” of heterosexual people. Not all of us are str8. Being gay is entirely natural to the make up of homosexual persons. DUH!, as the children used to say.
“The bible speaks very clearly that …”
It really doesn’t matter WHAT “the Bible says” if you believe in freedom of religion. (The Bible also says we should put the victims of incest to death, but I doubt – and hope – that you don’t follow that ‘teaching’.) Not all citizens consider the Bible to be A holy book, let alone their holy book. Or is America a theocracy now? (And if it is, who decided it hato be YOUR ‘religion’? Why should your religious tenets trump mine?)
Sodomy is 1. defined as anal or oral sex – something that many if not most heterosexuals practice; and 2. is perfectly legal; and 3. not whst Sodom & Gomorrah were destroyed for. (Hint: the real reason is revealed in Ezekiel – that they were haughty, rich in abudance and were inhospitable to strangers.)
“Why not afford non-homosexual friends that live together as room mates the same benefits or hetero sexual couples that are unmarried the same benefits?”
Partly because we don’t merely “live together as roommates” – I happen to be legally married. As for giving us the “same benefits”, that is what marriage does. And you just don’t happen to like it. Tuff!
I could continue to deconstruct your very UN-Christian post, but we are talking about all citizens being treated equally before the law – somehing the U.S. Constitution guarantees.
Even if Prop 8 passes, it, too, will eventually be struck down as UN-Constitutional – because it IS.
Ergo, you lose.



report abuse
 

Gary

posted October 28, 2008 at 5:42 pm


Rights come from God, according to the Bible and according to the founders of this country (We are endowed by our Creator with certain inailenable rights…). No where in the Bible do we find God granting the right to marriage to homosexauls. Just the opposite. God defines marriage as the union of a husband, who must be a man, and a wife, who must be a woman. Same-sex marriage is a perversion of marriage.
Additionally, God says all sex outside of marriage is sin. All sex outside marriage. And since homosexuals cannot marry, all homo sex is sinful. Always. Everywhere. Any time.
Balmer’s argument that nothing be denied to minorities is silly, and he should know that. Murderers, thieves, and rapists are minorities, but I’ll bet Balmer has no problem with the majority making their actvities illegal. What is wrong with Balmer that he thinks there is a right to same-sex marriage? Something sure is.



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted October 28, 2008 at 11:17 pm


Gary,
The fact that you equate LGBT citizens with murderers, thieves, and rapists is telling and extremely offensive to your LGBT brothers and sisters. Repent of your attitude and apologize.
What are you afraid of, Gary? Will acknowledging the equal right of LGBT citizens to marry their partners impact you in any way? Does it in any way violate a legally-acknowledged right of yours?
That is the question here – not your rather absurd historical argument. (By the way, the founders of this country were much more children of the secular Enlightenment than by any religious notion of rights, hence their decision to enshrine negative liberty rather than positive liberty in the Constitution.) The fact that your sectarian viewpoint believes that homosexuality is a sin does not entitle you to impose your views on everyone else.
In a nation whose highest law specifically stipulates that there will be no establishment of religion, you’re going to need to present non-religious-based reasons for your viewpoints. Please argue in a way that is respectful to all Americans – both by refraining from offensive slanders against your LGBT fellow-citizens, and by presenting reasons in terms on which all Americans of good will, no matter their religious beliefs, can agree.



report abuse
 

Timothy

posted October 29, 2008 at 6:11 am


All i would like to say is that if we allow this to grow from 2% and it does grow how will these people reproduce and how will a family be defined from there if they do. The scary thing here is what if they are succesful and make OUR families look like ” “. LOVE is what THEY/WE are all looking for and not realy finding even from straight baptists,and so on to begin with. Being a 43 year old man I have yet to find a woman who I can truly love in the full 360 degrees of life. The truth being i could have married at least 3 times but all we had going for us was the love of the flesh which is only skin deep truthfuly. Love is what is missing from Mr.Warrens answer and it has been overlooked for years and it all starts with patience in our HOMES and CHURCH homes?



report abuse
 

Stan

posted October 29, 2008 at 7:52 am


I’m glad Warren had the courage to take a stand. I am glad this is country where you take a stand or not take a stand.
What if we had the chance to vote on abortion? What if we had a chance to vote on the admission of the Tora or Biblical scriptures as part of our school teachings, you know some class rooms are using the Koran.
It is a slippery slope, but unfortunately so many people want us to slide into Sodom and Gamora.
I love my friends who are homosexual, but I still believe the scriptures do not condone such (check Jude 7 for example).
I think the founders and framers of this great country would be OK with us saying “I love you man, but its wrong”.
Stan



report abuse
 

Toni

posted October 29, 2008 at 9:32 am


I happen to agree with Rick Warren, supporting California’s Proposition 8. Like everyone, I feel he has a right to his opinion, and concerning gays, they have a right to their lifestyle but as with everything in life, we all have the freedom to make choices–be it with our lifestyle or everyday concerns.



report abuse
 

bellatrys

posted October 29, 2008 at 9:53 am


Biblical marriage: one man and up to 700 women…
It wasn’t that long ago that theocracies in Europe were banning marriage between Catholics and Protestants under state penalties. Do we really want to go back to that “godly” era?



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted October 29, 2008 at 10:54 am


I think the founders and framers of this great country would be OK with us saying “I love you man, but its wrong”.
Sure they would… but I don’t think they’d be okay with us saying “I love you man, but I think it’s wrong, and my belief that it’s wrong is going to be the law of the land.” It’s a long way from your opinion that it’s wrong to codifying and imposing your opinions on the rest of society.
What if we had the chance to vote on abortion? What if we had a chance to vote on the admission of the Tora or Biblical scriptures as part of our school teachings, you know some class rooms are using the Koran.
What if we had the chance to vote on whether we should have free speech, or freedom of the press? In a democratic republic, rights aren’t negotiable or subject to majority rule. The right of women to choose what to do with their bodies, or the right of everyone to an education in which he/she does not have religion imposed on him/her, shouldn’t come up for a vote.
I feel he has a right to his opinion, and concerning gays, they have a right to their lifestyle but as with everything in life, we all have the freedom to make choices–be it with our lifestyle or everyday concerns.
Not getting into your incredibly problematic claim that people choose to be gay or lesbian, you’ve hit on the problem right there. LGBT citizens don’t have the freedom to make a choice – or rather, in California, the Christian Right is working to take away the right of LGBT citizens to choose who they want to marry. The Yes on 8 campaign is all about telling LGBT citizens that they don’t have the right to their lifestyle, at least as far as having equal legal recognition to people who choose the more common lifestyle. If you’re being intellectually consistent in believing that people should be free to make choices and that LGBT citizens have a right to their lifestyle, you will vote no on Prop 8 and urge everyone you know to do the same.



report abuse
 

Gloria Mitchell

posted October 29, 2008 at 12:48 pm


Rick Warren should support California’s Proposition 8 to overturn the California supreme court’s ruling that gay marriage is constitutionally permissible. It may be so according to the world but not according to GOD.
Marriage in the Bible is between a man and a woman. God created Eve for Adam not Steve. Why should Rick Warren, (a Christian and a Pastor) support something thats an abomination to God.
We all know that Satan is busy trying to change everything to suit him.



report abuse
 

Meredith Shea

posted October 29, 2008 at 1:08 pm


Why is it that the Lesbians and Gays want the hetrosexuals not only to be tolerant, but also, insist that hetrosexuals agree with them? Lesbian and Gay people are some of the most non-tolerant people I know as far as their beliefs. We are in America and the Christian viewpoint should also be respected. Why should we change laws that were voted on by the majority just because a group is not tolerant? If I were to go to the gay community and ask if a hetrosexual parade and a one man-one woman marriage day be celebrated by them, do you think they would be as compliant? What is WRONG with these people?
Satan is really piling on the scales!



report abuse
 

Dina

posted October 29, 2008 at 1:12 pm


Let’s take it to a vote!
When Jesus stood before the Sanhedrin, the high priest decided but the majority agreed and consented to the killing of Jesus. When Pontious Pilate paraded Jesus in front of the crowd and gave them the chance to save Jesus from being KILLED, they chose (in essence- voted) for Jesus to die. Now we all know Jesus had to die for our sins, but I think we can all agree it was not the Right thing to do.
There are arguments for the mistranslation of scripture concerning homosexuality, but that put aside, We are not living in a theocracy, we are living in a democracy, with the seperation of church and state.
We have welcomed all people into this country. Let’s take care of our own and be an example to the rest of the world, as we like to pride ourself on being. Let’s be fair in the sight of the law. At the least, “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (equality under the law) and give unto God what is God’s( do not judge lest you be judged and UNCONDITIONAL LOVE). Vote no on 8!



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted October 29, 2008 at 3:22 pm


Rick Warren should support California’s Proposition 8 to overturn the California supreme court’s ruling that gay marriage is constitutionally permissible. It may be so according to the world but not according to GOD.
That you believe this does not make it objectively so. Many believe otherwise; why should your moral beliefs dictate laws that determine how others live their lives?
Marriage in the Bible is between a man and a woman.
Marriage in the Bible is between a man and hundreds of women, or a man and several women and concubines, or a man and a woman, neither of whom have ever been divorced except for unfaithfulness or abandonment by an unbelieving spouse. All these models are found in the Bible.
Moreover, what you think the Bible says about marriage does not matter in civil law.



report abuse
 

FLEUR

posted October 30, 2008 at 6:30 am


New American Standard Bible
“There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.” Proverbs 14:12
I agree totally with Rick Warren on this one. He does, indeed, “know better” and his stand on Prop 8 is one indication of that.



report abuse
 

Carolyn

posted October 30, 2008 at 11:54 am


Rick is right… Voting and Jim Crow and all of these other laws that are discriminatory to minorities should not be the stance that opponents of Prop 8 use to justify their position. There is no way that anyone should take something that God ordained and then try and redefine it. The very institution of marriage was not something dreamed up by man to run the country, like the voting or Jim Crow laws that discriminate. We are talking about Marriage, an institution that God created in the bible, man did not just dream it up. Why should man try and change that? Man should not. Marriage is and has always been dictated and informed by the Bible. We should not change that fact and we should recognize that marriage between a woman and a man creates life- a phenomenon we can never quite comprehend, but on that clearly sets God’s agenda for life, love and marriage.



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted October 30, 2008 at 12:03 pm


Marriage is and has always been dictated and informed by the Bible.
Please point to me exactly where in the United States Constitution and the California state Constitution it is indicated that the basis for civil law should be the Bible.
Nobody’s religious beliefs should determine law. If the best you’ve got is “the Bible says it’s wrong” (which, I’ll add, is certainly not an uncontested notion), and you can’t make a case to all Americans of all (or no) religions, you don’t have a leg to stand on. To impose your beliefs on all Americans is, quite frankly, nothing short of oppressive.



report abuse
 

Dora Villarreal

posted October 30, 2008 at 12:17 pm


According to Webster’s New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7), this is the definition of the word pluralism: “Cultural pluralism seeks to overcome racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination” In the old testament, we get to read how God wanted to dwell among men, but was such the evil in their hearts and wrongdoing that they were going astray from the real God worshipping other gods. God gave Moses the law, so they would live according to the word. When Jesus came, He came to redeem the world for our sins that were stated under the law. We now have salvation through Him, through Grace from God. But, still God gave us free-will. In a multicultural society we bring our beliefs, ideologies and desires. We are not forced to obey God, but rather we are given the choice to do it. If we want to be close to God and love God, of course we want to obey Him. In the word of God, it is stated how God views the marriage, but if people keep on going after the desires of the flesh (heart) judgement comes upon the lives of those who don’t repent. It is Not my point of view, but rather the word of God. What’s in our hearts is important to God. Are we going to be condemned of justified? It all depends if we know Jesus our Savior, and on how we live our one and only life. You’d be the judge: Romans 1: 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. 28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. God Bless America, God Bless California! My home state.



report abuse
 

Cindy

posted October 30, 2008 at 1:20 pm


I think the saddest note here are the comments that civil law is not baased on what the Bible says or what the religious world says.
Our forefathers did base this country on a belief in God and the Bible and the more our morals decay the more I see our young people growing up in a world that is unsafe and morally sick. I would happily go back to the days of Dick Van Dyke, where he and Mary Tyler Moore slept in separate beds. Where your principal at school was allowed to discipline you and you repected those older than you. At least then you didn’t have Code Red lockdown practices in your schools instead of Tornado or Fire drills. And if you think saying gay marriage is ok and a personal decision has nothing to do with all this than you are kidding yourself. Today everything seems to be ok and acceptable and our children will suffer for it.



report abuse
 

Clayshia Willis

posted October 30, 2008 at 2:32 pm


I agree with Rick Warren in every way. Why do you think this country has turned so far away from God who protected us until we allowed His Word to have no say in our conduct? No values, respect, unity, compassion, etc. I vote for God to be brought back, if it’s not too late.



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted October 30, 2008 at 4:11 pm


Why do you think this country has turned so far away from God who protected us until we allowed His Word to have no say in our conduct?
You’re going to need to support that claim with evidence; it is not a priori.
I vote for God to be brought back, if it’s not too late.
Then you should start by advocating a Constitutional amendment that invalidates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Our Constitution makes it all too clear that the establishment of any religion in this country is legally impermissible. The fact that you think the Bible says equal marriage rights for LGBT citizens are wrong does not entitle you to impose your beliefs on everyone else.



report abuse
 

Mark Erbland

posted October 30, 2008 at 10:15 pm


Mr Gilmore.
Since apparently, you feel that the people’s religious values and beliefs are not a legimate basis to draw the rule of law from – and furthermore you believe that people should basically have the right to do whatever they want to and that there is no standard for absolute truth, what standard do YOU say that people should use to determine what is acceptable, right or good?
Furthermore, recovering ex-Pentacostal,
I’d like to see you establish just one reference in the Bible that shows that God supports and approves of the practice of homosexuality or a marriage relationship between two men. Just because the Bible contains something doesn’t mean He approves of it.
Furthermore, Jesus wouldn’t support a homosexual marriage any more than he would have supported or encouraged the adultress to go out and have another extra-marrital affair. His words were to her – No one is left here to condemn you, nor do I condemn you – go AND SIN NO MORE!! Jesus’ lesson was that of acceptance, forgiveness and repentance – not justification of the sin.
The truth is that the HS lifestyle and abortion are both SIN AND ARE WRONG. We have sacrificed 50 MILLION of our American children to the god of convenience in the name of women’s rights. If you don’t think so, just google and watch the film “The Silent Scream”. Roe v Wade – Sacrificing America’s future for 25 years!!! What about their rights? Our system of government allows people to take a referendum and overturn an unjustified ruling on the part of the California State supreme court. Christians have just as much right to stand up for what they believe in as anyone else. That is not the establishment of religion in government. Our system of government was never set up under the premise that people’s religious views would not influence decisions made by those participating in the process of our representative republic. It contains the establishment clause to protect believers from being dictated to by the government about whether, how and who the people in our country would worship. It guarantees freedom of religion. However, even the Christian church is subject to practicing within the laws of the land. One can’t say that it’s their religious belief that they should go chop up and vacuum their neighbor into tiny little pieces and then squash their skull with a bone masher. That would be horribly perverse and wrong and why we have laws against that – but that’s what happens to over 4,000 Americans every day in this country in abortion clinics. Don’t you think there’s something WRONG with that picture?



report abuse
 

Sibyl C.

posted October 30, 2008 at 10:44 pm


I agree with Dora and Clayshia. The world can say and do as they please God won’t stop them. But as we can see all around us there is coming a stopping point. A lot of God haters dispute his word but when trouble comes the first words are,”Lord have mercy or God help us”. And they don’t seem to have a problem with spending money that says in God we trust. Long story short. The Bible says,”Heaven and earth shall pass away but my word will forever stand”. We are to love our neighbors as ourselves but we don’t have to accept their sins. No everyone will not accept Christ in this year or even the next but He said, “Every knee shall bow and every tounge will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.



report abuse
 

Mark Erbland

posted October 31, 2008 at 12:05 am


Thanks Dora for the great reference!!
Dina – Thanks for your comments – do not judge lest you be judged and UNCONDITIONAL LOVE
Calling homosexuality sin or wrong is not judging someone. It is judging the act, not the person. ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD!!! Romans 3:23- hence everyone needs forgiveness. Acknowledging that someone is a sinner is merely stating the obvious. WE ALL NEED JESUS FOR ATONEMENT. That is how it is possible for God to be loving and just at the same time. He judged sin and made it possible for a person to be justified through faith in Christ. That means acknowledging and confessing Jesus as God (Lord) and believing in one’s heart that God (the Father) raised him from the dead. (validating all the claims he made during his time here on earth and the prophecies about the Messiah all throughout the old testament) Becoming a Christian implies making a choice to be a follower of Jesus and to follow His teachings. The new testament admonishes the beliver to flee from sexual immorality and crucify the desires of the flesh. Through Christ, we get a picture of unconditional (agape) love. God doesn’t not love someone because they sinned. Jesus willingly allowed the punishment for sin to be placed upon Him. He willingly became the whipping boy. He was the sacrificial lamb. He didn’t have to die – he chose to die. He could have called down a host of angels at any time, but without his death, we would have been forever lost and separated from God. “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” 2 orinthians 5:21 Because of Christ’s perfect sacrifice, we can have God’s righteousness (right standing with him) imputed to us. It is not, however a license to continue in our sinful lifestyle choices. A lifestyle CHOICE is something someone has control over. People choose whether to engage in the act or not. People can have feelings or attractions (phileo & eros) to one another that are not healthy or righteous in the sight of God. The power of the HOlY SPIRIT gives us the ability to say NO to the things that are contrary to God’s ways and the power of His word helps to transform us so that we can be a blessing and live a life that will glorify Him. The Bible says that the marriage bed is undefiled. God instituted marriage and since our country’s founding, the legal status or definition of marriage has been in agreement with that God-ordained institution. The California Supreme Court does not have the authority or power to re-define marriage or write the laws in this land. That power belongs to the legislative branch of government. The court’s jurisdiction is limited to making decisions based on precedence and consistent with the intent of the written law within the framework of the constitution. It is not their job to re-interpret existing laws.
P.S. God loves you too Mr. Gilmore – and despite our opposing views, so do I! (John 3:16)
God Bless America



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted October 31, 2008 at 10:28 am


Since apparently, you feel that the people’s religious values and beliefs are not a legimate basis to draw the rule of law from – and furthermore you believe that people should basically have the right to do whatever they want to and that there is no standard for absolute truth, what standard do YOU say that people should use to determine what is acceptable, right or good?
This is a longstanding discussion in political theory, but my basic notion for political organization is this: (a) all people have the right and legal sanction to do anything under the law, so long as it does not violate the rights of others, (b) all people have the right to participate freely in their government, without coercion or oppression, and (c) if people are going to be able to exercise rights (a) and (b), they need the means to do so – meaning that we need to ensure some kind of minimal standard of living for all, at the very least access to work that pays wages that will enable them to support themselves and their families.
You make the mistake of presuming that a government somehow needs to have some notion of absolute truth, that we somehow need to engage some sort of objective standard in government. That is a mistake. There are far too many conflicting and mostly-incompatible notions of absolute truth in our society; to enshrine one in our government would be oppressive to all who believe otherwise. We can come to a consensus on basic human rights, as well as negative and positive liberties, and leave absolute truth up to people’s various belief systems. In fact, we must do so in order to make our society non-oppressive to all belief systems. The long and short of it is this: to justify a law within the American system, you must provide reasons that are based on this consensus – not on the religious views of one part of society.
To suggest that American law be based on your interpretation of the Bible is oppressive to those who do not have the Bible as their religion’s moral guide, to say nothing of those who do have the Bible as their moral guide but don’t hold to your interpretation. Specifically, your suggestion that there should be laws banning equal marriage rights for everyone because the Bible says that some relationships are impermissible is oppressive to LGBT citizens. It quite simply is.
By promoting Proposition 8, you are engaging in religious oppression. You are suggesting that the force of law should be used to impose your moral viewpoints, with absolutely no justification outside your own narrow moral bounds, on someone else’s life. The only difference between Islamic regimes establishing Sharia law and what you want to do is degree – not kind. Both actions involve the imposition of one religion’s moral beliefs on the whole of society, and both involve the oppression of those who act outside those beliefs.
I invite you to consider things from a different perspective. Consider how you would feel if you really loved someone who loved you back, but were told at every step that your relationship was not real, was a sin, was evil. If you’re married now, consider how you would feel if your wife was in the hospital with a terminal illness and you weren’t allowed to visit her; consider how you would feel if your employer couldn’t cover her health insurance; consider how you would feel if you couldn’t walk outside with her and hold hands.
I think your arguments, quite frankly, are lacking in this empathy; it seems that you think that the Golden Rule prescribed by Jesus (and every other moral system in human history) does not apply to LGBT citizens, who under the current system of institutionalized bigotry suffer every one of the things I outline above. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; would you really like someone to tell you that you couldn’t marry the person you love? Would you really like someone to tell you that the very fact that you love the person you love is an abomination before God, is breaking down American society, is destroying the fabric of civilization? I think not.
I invite you to consider things from the other perspective, consider that we live in a society in which Christianity is not the law of the land but is in fact one belief system among many, and change your viewpoint on Prop 8. If LGBT citizens have equal marriage rights, it will not affect you even one iota; if they don’t because Christians didn’t want them to have them, it will affect their lives severely. Please do the right thing.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted October 31, 2008 at 9:04 pm


to justify a law within the American system, you must provide reasons that are based on this consensus – not on the religious views of one part of society.
Peoples views on things are influenced by their belief systems. One of the wonderful characteristics about our government is that it allows for the presentation and debate of ideas within our legislature. Those bills are then voted on and with the approval of enough members, the bills then have the opportunity to be signed into law. By the recent ruling of the California Supreme court to legalize gay marriage, they have attempted to re-write the law in California. This is the same type of action that brought about abortion in this nation for any and every reason. Roe v Wade has resulted in the most gruesome and hideous type of murder of 50 million defenseless prople in America. And it still goes on. (see link) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek
I invite you to consider things from a different perspective. Consider how you would feel if you really loved someone who loved you back, but were told at every step that your relationship was not real, was a sin, was evil. If you’re married now, consider how you would feel if your wife was in the hospital with a terminal illness and you weren’t allowed to visit her; consider how you would feel if your employer couldn’t cover her health insurance; consider how you would feel if you couldn’t walk outside with her and hold hands.
I am not advocating that people do not love and care for one another. Same sex partners have the kind of priviledges you are referring to already granted to them by domestic partnerships and civil unions in California. (see link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership_in_California).
Marriage is a holy institution ordained by God where a man and woman are joined by their committment to one another in the sight of their creator who blesses the relationship. The decision of the Supreme Court is attemting to force the legitimization and acceptance of same sex marriage on the rest of society. In Massachusetts, it also resulted in the indoctrination of our children in the public schools to view homosexual relationships as an acceptable and viable alternative to traditional marriage. Gay couples already have the right to practice their lifestyle choice. Prop 8 will do nothing to change that.
I think your arguments, quite frankly, are lacking in this empathy; it seems that you think that the Golden Rule prescribed by Jesus (and every other moral system in human history) does not apply to LGBT citizens, who under the current system of institutionalized bigotry suffer every one of the things I outline above. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; would you really like someone to tell you that you couldn’t marry the person you love?
I think the idea here is NOT to encourage others to engage in sexual relationships that are outside the bounds of traditional marriage. I love myself enough, to the best of my ability, to follow a moral and healthy lifestyle that is not only to my benefit, but to others also and that gives glory to God. I would be most remiss in applying the Golden Rule (love others as myself) if I encouraged them to do any different.



report abuse
 

Pbebs Tee

posted November 1, 2008 at 8:55 pm


All arguments aside, even in their efforts to claim no absolutes, their very positions are already absolutist because they claim rightiousness. Nobody is assigning blame to homosexuals and lesbians because they were probably born that way, nor discrimination because we do not believe in their sexual orientation. We do not accuse them of discriminating against the majority of us for their criticising our heterosexual practice, so why should they cry fowl if we want to stick to our own absolutes – Biblical correctness, tradition, history, natural and normal observance of biological laws. Regardless of faith, beliefs, and religion, all we have to remember (the California judges have a short memory)is that ancient arrangement supported by biology and the natural law establishing marriage’s primary purpose as procreation in order to continue the human species. Such is not possible in a “marriage” between two men or two women.



report abuse
 

jimmy

posted November 2, 2008 at 1:23 am


By the recent ruling of the California Supreme court to legalize gay marriage, they have attempted to re-write the law in California.
No, they didn’t. They invalidated the law prohibiting same-sex marriages because a higher California law prohibited legal discrimination. They used a higher law to interpret and invalidate a lower one. That’s how laws work.
Marriage is a holy institution ordained by God where a man and woman are joined by their committment to one another in the sight of their creator who blesses the relationship.
That is your opinion, not a fact. Marriage may well be all those things you talk about, but it is also a reality in civil law, and civil law should not discriminate against people based on the narrow interpretation of one social group’s religious beliefs.
The decision of the Supreme Court is attemting to force the legitimization and acceptance of same sex marriage on the rest of society.
By that logic, divorce being legal forces the legitimization and acceptance of divorce on the rest of society. Adultery being legal forces the legitimization and acceptance of adultery on the rest of society.
In Massachusetts, it also resulted in the indoctrination of our children in the public schools to view homosexual relationships as an acceptable and viable alternative to traditional marriage.
Oh no! We might teach children that society doesn’t discriminate against LGBT citizens, and that if they happen to be LGBT they’re not destroying the very fabric of our society and headed for the fires of Hell! God forbid we live in a society that respects everyone’s sexuality.
Gay couples already have the right to practice their lifestyle choice.
No thanks to you and the conservative movement, which stood with Scalia in dissenting from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lawrence v. Texas.
Prop 8 will do nothing to change that.
It will, in fact, do a great deal to change that. It will remove from LGBT citizens the right to marry the person of their choice.
I think the idea here is NOT to encourage others to engage in sexual relationships that are outside the bounds of traditional marriage.
Since when is it any of the government’s business encouraging or discouraging one religion’s views on sexuality through the coercive force of law and the systematic denial of basic human rights? Why should your narrow view on sexuality be the normative one in government policy, rather than someone else’s?
I love myself enough, to the best of my ability, to follow a moral and healthy lifestyle that is not only to my benefit, but to others also and that gives glory to God. I would be most remiss in applying the Golden Rule (love others as myself) if I encouraged them to do any different.
Wow. You are seriously suggesting that imposing your religion on others is permissible under the Golden Rule because you wish your religion for yourself. That viewpoint is utterly repugnant, and can only lead to great abuses – as if your advocating that people of whose sexuality you disapprove shouldn’t have basic human rights isn’t enough of an abuse.
Quite frankly, your views disgust me on every level. That you advocate the stripping of people’s human rights for having a sexual orientation you disapprove of is absolutely repugnant. If Prop 8 fails, you will not be impacted at all; if it succeeds, many of your fellow American citizens will be denied a basic human right because someone else decided to impose their religious beliefs. That alone should send people flocking to the polls to oppose it.
But because people claiming Christ (and I do so very much wish they’d stop claiming Him) have decided that they cannot tolerate it when people they don’t like have basic human rights, they’re pumping millions of dollars into legally sanctioning their bigotry. It disgusts me, and makes me ashamed to call myself a follower of Christ. Hopefully the church will come around in another 10-20 years. Until then, let’s not drag the rest of society back while we fight the regressives in our own family.



report abuse
 

James Gilmore

posted November 2, 2008 at 1:36 am


Nobody is assigning blame to homosexuals and lesbians because they were probably born that way, nor discrimination because we do not believe in their sexual orientation.
Which part of denying LGBT citizens basic human rights because of their sexual orientation isn’t discrimination against them? How are you not discriminating against LGBT citizens by telling them that the sole fact of their sexual orientation disqualifies them from the basic right to marry the person they love?
We do not accuse them of discriminating against the majority of us for their criticising our heterosexual practice
Please point me to the major LGBT groups that call heterosexuality wrong. Please point me to the instances of discrimination by the LGBT community against straight people. The fact that the LGBT rights movement wants to have their human rights recognized by government is in no way discriminatory, and it requires a rather robust persecution complex to claim otherwise.
so why should they cry fowl if we want to stick to our own absolutes – Biblical correctness, tradition, history, natural and normal observance of biological laws.
They’re not. You’re perfectly free to stick to your own absolutes – unless there’s some ballot measure I’m not aware of that prohibits straight marriage. Marry someone of the opposite sex to your heart’s content.
What you should not have the ability to do is impose your absolutes on someone else – which is exactly what you’re advocating here. You are suggesting that the fact that you have absolutes means that everyone else should have to live by them. That is nothing short of oppression. The only difference between antigay laws and Sharia law is degree; in advocating Prop 8, you are doing exactly the same thing as a fundamentalist Islamic regime, imposing your religious beliefs on others.
Regardless of faith, beliefs, and religion, all we have to remember (the California judges have a short memory)is that ancient arrangement supported by biology and the natural law establishing marriage’s primary purpose as procreation in order to continue the human species.
I look forward to seeing your support for the ballot measure that bans infertile people from marriage, bans the elderly from marriage, and automatically dissolves any marriage in which the couple does not have children within the first few years. If your argument is that LGBT citizens shouldn’t have basic civil rights because they can’t procreate, logic dictates that the infertile, the elderly, and those who remain childless by choice should also be denied that basic human right.



report abuse
 

Jody

posted November 2, 2008 at 10:48 am


Exactly where does it say in the Bible that same sex marriage is acceptable? How can anyone think Jesus would have condoned this ? NO i do not want others religions imposed on me, nor do i want others sexual preference imposed on me either. Jesus died for our sins, he came to show us the error of our ways, not to embrace them. “the bible is in conflict with the teachings of Christ” ? What on earth? The bible is the word of God, Jesus was sent here to teach us the word of God? how twisted are we? I do not have small children, thank God, I would not want to have to explain this mess to them. Do you ever stop to think why the United States is not mentioned in the Bible? we are going so far the other way that it won’t be long before we are gone,. read the Word of God and realize that Marriage is between a man and a woman, not between two men and two women. The contemporary church has also gone far from the word of God. It is time to wake up and see what moral decay we have allowed and how it will be our downfall. We all need to pray that God will shine his Mercy and Grace on us as a nation. We were given free will that is why people make their own choices, right or wrong. But defying God is not without consequences. WE need to remember the price Jesus paid for our sins, I for one am so thankful!!!



report abuse
 

Juan Jaasiel Rodriguez Ornelas

posted November 3, 2008 at 11:13 pm


there is very deep issue here at hand in terms of marriage. This problem will in no way be solved in this election. The door for conflict has been blown wide open, and the issue will go on to weig more important things in our country.
We must truly look at the responsibilities of the state, and its need to promote the well being of it’s systems ability to provide freedoms and liberties for its constituents and to avoid creating inconsistencies for them that leads to moral dilemnas.
If we are to be true liberterians, and propose a state of anarchy, we must therefore not ask the state to consider our contracts, agreements, rhetoric etc. in its decision making process. For example, absolutely free trade and economy. However, because we request help (Welfare, police, defence, social security), recognition (race, profession, sexual orientation, business, sexual orientation, single or married), and action (money, punishments, reimbursements, domicile, visitation rights) from the system, and beg often for its interference for its constituents, we therefore grant it a power. And this is it: discernment.
It must have the power to categorize. Who is poor, guilty, friend, enemy, retirement aged, hispanic, white, black, architect, school teacher, lawyer, president, soldier, pilot, gay, straight, neither, both, single, married, owed to, owes, guilty, not guilty, afflicted, afflicting, is in georgia, is in texas, is in california, related, unrelated, etc. This is key to our system of law. We give it this power because of the complexity it has due to our requests of it. No one is exempt in this request by virtue of living here. Therefore, we cannot claim infinite equality from the law.
This is fine. It’s ok. Anyone against it or that says it is not true is simply not looking hard enough.
Proposition 8 proponents, and anyone who comes against it, are fighting over a power of discernment of the law, and that is the relational status that the law categorizes two people as “marriage”. The category has already existed for a long time, and the law has helped, recognized, and acted on this category. And therefore it has interfered. Once again this is ok. Because we expect this of the government. And if we do not consider this fair, than that person does not belong here, and probably not in any other government.
They are absolute anarchists.
Now, this is the danger that our modern day is putting before our government: regulating on popular basis what the different categories are, and furthermore, what their individual responsibilities, benefits, demerits, restrictions and other qualities are.
So, the marriage contract, homosexual relationships, heterosexual relationships, polygamist relationships, incest relationships, and others are all recognized by the law and assigned a status, legal or illegal. This too is ok. They are each individual categories. However, the marriage contract is a far more formal category. The real differences between the different relationships are all implied by the different titles we give them, however the differences occur in reality. They are obvious. And no one can deny them. Any straight person who would say that their relationship is the same as that as any other relationship, gay or plural and so on, and believes it, is in serious trouble.
Now, this is the problem of not supporting a measure such as prop 8. You force the law to take two VERY different relationships, with very REAL differences, make it dishonor those differences, and force them into a category that will provide the EXACT same qualities to both relationships. We do not need the law to do this, because it is already done. It’s called a union.
Furthermore, we are forcing the law to take a category, called a contract, and force it into one of our most fundamental categories: a Right. We are confusing it with a real right: the right to hold a contract. Therefore, we remove a serious right: the right to exclusivity in any contract. And we will take it to the supreme court to do this.
All in the name of equality. This is perhaps the biggest challenges this country will face. Are we going to force the government to hand over its power of discernment to our will and whim. And then, force it to close its eyes to real differences because of the word of the day, Tolerance and Equality, in this case, and then make it act irrelevant of those differences.
The psychological impact that this will have on the future of this nation is unknown and could not be calculated. Because we will begin the eroding of value and difference for the law, we may affect the very nature of this culture in the future. And in no good way, because we may begin to affect the categories of the general culture and social structure because of its interdependence of with government in a negative manner, for example the many court cases already being held as well as their rulings show this. This is not a direct attack human rights and decency, and neither are people calculating to do this great harm to our nation. It is simply our inability to see past the real issues, and handle them as required.
That there are ways to protect different groups from discrimination and that we can, with the law, is true. And we should definitely have them in play. But granting the formal homosexual union the same as the formal heterosexual union is not the way. This will unnecessarily inhibit the rights of heterosexual union.
We should avoid this precedent at all costs. Because it is a precedent for lying at the fundamental levels of the government, not just at decision making and bureaucratic levels.
Forget the problems for the two groups for and against gay marriage, we are entering a discussion of this nation’s government’s future, it’s quality, and possible eventual demise.
to say the least, picture ralph wiggum getting thrown through a glass window and saying: “I’m a brick”



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted November 7, 2008 at 12:42 pm


To Jody – I hope you do realize that the Bible also says that women should be submissive to men! I’m pretty sure you’re not okay with what the Bible says about that, right?
The Bible also condones slavery, but I’m sure you would be disgusted, if that practice was still being done today!
You are picking and choosing what you want to follow from the Bible! Please stop and reflect on some of the things you are saying, and think about how you would want to be treated, if you were on the other side of the situation.



report abuse
 

R.L.

posted November 8, 2008 at 12:26 am


Dear Your Name:
I am black and encourage you to do some research on slavery mentioned in the bible vs. colonial to 19th century slavery in America.
Believe it or not, this black person is not against homosexuality or any other forms of sexual immorality just because of white conservatives or because some black preacher told me it’s wrong.
No…there’s this thing called the word of God that stands forever. Amen.



report abuse
 

dannyuk2

posted November 9, 2008 at 2:02 am


The word of God was also used to say that black people were inferior. I bet you very conveniently forget that dont you RL.
If you’re going for the bible as your backup to discriminate against LGBT people, you really ought to read the bible a bit more. By their fruits shall you know them. Prop 8 is bad fruit – all it does is cause harm and setbacks, bad fruit. rejecting it would have caused no harm. All you have done is enshrine discrimination into state law, which is reprehensible.



report abuse
 

Lisa

posted November 11, 2008 at 10:36 am


Know what Jesus said about gays? Nothing! Not a single word. But he had a whole lot to say about hypocrisy, about loving ones neighbor, about not judging others. Yet why is it that so many Christians believe gay marriage is the most important issue of the day? (Something like $30 million dollars was spent on the vote yes campaign.) Is this what Jesus would do? Could all of this have something to do with prejudice and not religion at all? There are many religious leaders and scholars who truly believe homosexuality is not a sin. Have you ever bothered to listen to what they have to say? Here is a book: What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality; a DVD: For The Bible Tells Me So; and a website:
http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian



report abuse
 

Molly

posted November 14, 2008 at 5:33 pm


Regardless of what the Bible or God says about the definition of marriage or what is sinful and what is not – fortunately for everyone, it is not up to the Bible to decide the laws. This is a constitutional and human rights issue. What ever happened to the separation of church and state?
It’s hard for me to understand how those who are adamant believers in freedom of religion think their beliefs should play a role in Proposition 8. What God says should have no influence on the outcome of Proposition 8. A religious defense for Proposition 8 reeks of hypocrisy and prejudice. How can one disagree with homosexuality on a religious basis, utilizing freedom of expression, but contend people of a different sexual orientation than themselves shouldn’t be rewarded the same freedoms in the way they live their lives.
As a nation that was founded upon these inherent freedoms, and one that has consistently embraced those of diverse and different backgrounds, Proposition 8 is a disgusting attempt to impose arbitrary limitations on the freedom of American people.



report abuse
 

Denise

posted November 15, 2008 at 7:39 pm


dannyuk2 said ‘The word of God was also used to say that black people were inferior. I bet you very conveniently forget that dont you RL’
Where in the bible does it say that black people are inferior. That can’t be in the Holy bible!!



report abuse
 

cehhw

posted November 18, 2008 at 6:50 pm


I would really really like to know where in the bible it says black people are inferior…Don’t just type it, come back and give us the scripture plese.



report abuse
 

Bridgid MacDonnell

posted December 4, 2008 at 11:40 pm


Rick Warren was right. Plain and simple. The word of God teaches that Homosexuality is wrong.



report abuse
 

Pat Brady-Lookalike

posted December 23, 2008 at 11:31 am


“Hold on Nelly Belle” Pastor Warren has a right to speak up for a religious definition of marriage if his faith holds that “civil marriage” (secular marriage) is indeed marriage. A faith system that does NOT so hold has no “dog in the fight”, of Prop. 8 and gay marriage, although they might put one in anyway. For example, the Roman Catholic Church invalidates all marriages not performed in the R.C. rite, at least in withholding spiritual validation, although recognizing civil marriage as socially accepted and legally binding. So the question is: Would a Baptist (or substitute faith system here) minister recognize a civil-union ceremony as marriage? If so, the minister is obligated to speak up about his or her religion’s definition of marriage and support the side closest to that position. If, to a Baptist, a justice-of-the-peace ceremony, a Vegas wedding if you will, is NOT a true marriage, then Pastor Warren can (and should?) hold his peace along with the couple who are sailing off into a shared life without a religious sanction and send-off. The separation of Church and State was narrowly defined, constitutionally, more from the State’s side, than that of the Churches. There were already wars among the Pilgrims and Assoc. as to the “correct” creed, which is how Rhode Island got started…Roger Williams and friends got the boot out of Massachusetts for being apostate according to the predominating Puritans. The State, according to the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” People here are saying Pastor Warren should be denied the free exercise of his religion? What the heck is that based on? That they don’t agree with him? That’s not the same as charging him with violating American principles of law and custom.



report abuse
 

B.J. West

posted December 23, 2008 at 5:41 pm


Bridgid MacDonnell said “Rick Warren was right. Plain and simple. The word of God teaches that Homosexuality is wrong.”
Nobody contests that. The biblical postion is clear. And if you are a Christian, by all means, live your life in accordance with biblical law.
However, that does NOT give Christians the right to force non-Christians to live the way you might want them to. That’s called Theocracy, and it’s wrong.



report abuse
 

PK Kessler

posted April 9, 2009 at 4:28 pm


The Preamble to the Constitution of the USA
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…”
The words “form, establish, insure, provide, promte, and secure” have to be based on a “we” and a “common” foundation together. That is what our fore-fathers struggled to do…and based that commonality with “Providence” and prayers in front and behind them.
To insure and secure the blessings of Liberty, there comes a time when the forces of tyranny must be thrown off–those of the Satanic regime! And as a citizen of the USA secondarily, but mostly as a citizen of THAT eternal kingdom eternally and primarily, we must stand on what UNITES! ANd only UNDER GOD can we be united.
These discussion about the rights of people to do ‘whatever they will’ and calling it ‘freedom’ is insane! America must see that the balance of liberty and justice be stabilized! And that can only happen when we give up certain so called ‘freedoms’ for the sacrifice of the greater good…and those crossroads must be met where God says they need to be.
Personally, I believe our country must establish laws for the greater good–in this case, if you want to exercise your freedoms to marry the same sex, ok, but do it in another country. The greater (moral) good must be maintained if society is to survive as well as this great country.



report abuse
 

Gerry

posted April 12, 2009 at 10:57 pm


This writer mentions discrimination based on “race”… there’s only one human race. Skin color doesn’t separate us into “races”.



report abuse
 

Henrique

posted June 8, 2010 at 4:14 pm


Have you guys seen this video about Proposition 8 with Justin Long and Mike White? Really amazing! http://www.ypsilon2.com/blog/small-talk/voce-odeia-os-homossexuais-entao-deixe-eles-se-casarem/



report abuse
 

Mr. Payday Easy Loans Inc.

posted September 8, 2010 at 4:15 am


Thanks for such a fantastic publish and also the review, I’m completely impressed! Keep stuff like this coming. fbubjujnuzalhygaejwjezdsemfjyurewmr
Mr. Payday Easy Loans Inc.



report abuse
 

hedging insurance

posted September 15, 2010 at 7:31 am


Great blog post, I’ve been looking for that.
http://abbeyinsurance.info agrip insurance??



report abuse
 

online loans

posted September 21, 2010 at 7:02 am


Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.



report abuse
 

payday loans canada

posted September 21, 2010 at 6:48 pm


Wow! Thank you! I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?



report abuse
 

no faxing loans

posted September 22, 2010 at 5:53 pm


Thanks for such a good submit and the critique, I’m totally impressed! Maintain stuff like this coming. pqgicjhlqlb



report abuse
 

loans no fax

posted September 25, 2010 at 6:14 pm


I will post a link to this blog on my website. I’m sure my readers will find this info really great.



report abuse
 

loans in canada

posted September 26, 2010 at 3:56 am


Usually I do not write on blogs, but I would like to say that this article really convinced me to do so! Congratulations, very nice post.



report abuse
 

loan canada bad credit

posted September 26, 2010 at 4:35 pm


Good post. Thank for sharing.



report abuse
 

loan in canada

posted September 27, 2010 at 5:22 pm


The submit is really the best on this laudable topic. I concur with your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your future updates. Just saying thanks will not just be enough, for the exceptional lucidity in your writing. I will at once grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates. De delightful work and much success in your business dealings!



report abuse
 

payday loan ontario

posted September 28, 2010 at 7:10 am


Easily, the submit is really the greatest on this laudable topic. I concur with your conclusions and will thirstily look forward to your future updates. Saying thanks will not just be sufficient, for the amazing lucidity in your writing. I will instantly grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates. Solid work and much success in your business enterprise!



report abuse
 

loans for bad credit

posted September 28, 2010 at 6:08 pm


Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Take care.



report abuse
 

loans bc canada

posted September 29, 2010 at 6:22 pm


Fantastic publish. Thank for sharing.



report abuse
 

crackserial

posted September 29, 2010 at 7:51 pm


Respect to the author of original work. I am want to say thanks for funny post, and thanks to google and yahoo for perfect blog search.



report abuse
 

canadian loans bad credit

posted September 30, 2010 at 8:34 pm


Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.



report abuse
 

weight loss

posted October 2, 2010 at 5:32 am


Greetings everyone, This webpage is fantastic and so is how the matter was expanded. I like some of the comments too although I would prefer we all maintain it on topic in order add value to the subject.



report abuse
 

loans in canada with bad credit

posted October 3, 2010 at 8:38 pm


Thanks for such a amazing post as well as the evaluation, I am completely impressed! Keep stuff like this coming.



report abuse
 

faxless payday loan

posted October 4, 2010 at 3:38 am


Thanks for making such a killer blog. I arrive on here all the time and am floored with the fresh information here.



report abuse
 

loans with bad credit

posted October 5, 2010 at 8:29 pm


Hi buddy, fairly informative submit. Please keep them coming.



report abuse
 

online payday loans

posted December 17, 2010 at 11:24 pm


This website is the top web portal. mddsqknn



report abuse
 

school grants

posted December 18, 2010 at 6:26 pm


This website is the most helpful world-wide-web site. uojokcow



report abuse
 

sample resume

posted December 22, 2010 at 4:51 am


This website is the highest quality web portal. scuuyskx



report abuse
 

football online

posted December 24, 2010 at 6:17 am


I am looking for free college football online tv. How can I find it?



report abuse
 

calendar template

posted January 7, 2011 at 4:56 pm


Thanks for the info about Rick Warren & Proposition 8
- Progressive Revival



report abuse
 

hair removal

posted January 10, 2011 at 4:14 am


Very very nice post about Rick Warren & Proposition 8
- Progressive Revival!



report abuse
 

school grants

posted January 12, 2011 at 6:07 am


Excellent read about Rick Warren & Proposition 8
- Progressive Revival!



report abuse
 

payday loan advance

posted January 13, 2011 at 5:26 am


Quality blogpost all-around Rick Warren & Proposition 8
- Progressive Revival!



report abuse
 

payday loans calgary

posted February 17, 2011 at 8:08 am


I like your bloge very much. Great job author of blog.beliefnet.com



report abuse
 

college basketball fans

posted November 17, 2011 at 11:42 am


You make it entertaining and you still take care of to keep it wise. I can not wait to read far more from you. This is really a great site.



report abuse
 

Kevin

posted January 1, 2012 at 5:09 pm


Shouldn’t Rick Warren change the name of his church from Saddleback to Brokeback?



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Progressive Revival. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Faith, Media and Culture Prayer, Plain and Simple Happy Blogging!!!  

posted 2:50:10pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

Why Jews Around the World are Praying for the Victory of the Egyptian Uprising
Originally appeared on Tikkun Daily BlogEver since the victory over the dictator of Tunisia and the subsequent uprising in Egypt, my email has been flooded with messages from Jews around the world hoping and praying for the victory of the Egyptian people over their cruel Mubarak regime.&nb

posted 1:48:39pm Feb. 01, 2011 | read full post »

When Generosity, Love, and Kindness are Public Policy, the Violence We Saw in Arizona will Dramatically Diminish
The attempted assassination of Congresswoman Giffords and the murder of so many others in Arizona has elicited a number of policy suggestions, from gun control to private protection for elected officials, to banning incitement to violence on websites either directly or more subtly (e.g., Sarah Palin

posted 2:44:04pm Jan. 19, 2011 | read full post »

The Spiritual Messages of Chanukah and Christmas -- and Their Downsides
Christmas and Chanukah share a spiritual message: that it is possible to bring light and hope in a world of darkness, oppression and despair. But whereas Christmas focuses on the birth of a single individual whose life and mission was itself supposed to bring liberation, Chanukah is about a national

posted 12:59:53pm Dec. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Obama (and Biden) Have No Clue About What's Bothering Their Political Base
Shortly before the California Democratic primary in 2008, the San Fransisco Chronicle invited me to write a short article explaining why I, chair of the interfaithNetwork of Spiritual Progressives, was supporting Barack Obama. Like most other progressive activists, I understood that a pres

posted 1:44:11pm Sep. 30, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.