Bush calls for gay marriage ban. “If we are to prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever our nation must enact a constitutional amendment to protect marriage in America,” said Mr Bush. [BBC News]
I have a number of contradictory thoughts and feelings on this issue, so let me try to lay them out in a way that makes some sense:
- As a follower of Jesus who takes a reasonably conservative interpretation of scripture, I do believe that Genesis states that it is a man and a woman who will become “one flesh” in marriage, and that adultery (sex outside of Genesis-defined marriage) is a violation of a commandment which was reinforced by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount.
- As an intellectual, I also understand that the case against homosexuality as laid out in the Bible is weak (certainly in comparison to other behaviors that Jesus speaks out against quite dramatically, such as greed).
- As one who seeks to have the heart of Jesus, I understand that even if homosexuality is outside of God’s will, gays and lesbians are still loved by God and therefore my response should be the same.
- As a progressive, I am horrified by the idea that we could write something into our Constitution which seems, on its face, to be discriminatory.
- As a person who wants to see a new President in power next January, the crass politics of this move turns my stomach and would make it difficult for me to support Mr. Bush’s proposal even if I thought it was the correct course of action (which I do not).
- As an observer, I recognize the absolute hypocrisy of the Church in seeking to legislate morality with regard to gay marriage but not with regard to no-fault divorce (for the record, I believe God has granted us all freedom of choice in the moral sphere, and therefore the government should be careful about legislating morality.)
So where do I stand on this? I do not like the idea of calling civil unions for gays and lesbians marriage, since I feel that it does de-sanctify the religious covenant I entered into with my wife. However, I do not like the idea of granting a set of rights (through marriage) to one type of partnership (man and wife) and not another (domestic partners of the same sex). It does seem discriminatory.
I think the best solution I’ve heard to date is for the State to divorce (no pun intended) the civil from the religious aspects of marriage. Replace civil marriage with civil unions (for gays and straights) which confer the same rights as civil marriage today, and have a judge or city clerk administer the process of making this legally binding. Afterward, people who wish to have a religious marriage may do so, separate from the contract they signed in front of a judge in order to file joint taxes, make medical decisions for their partner, and so forth.
