If only gay marriage was all they wanted

Too many people base their attitude toward gay marriage on gut reactions rather than carefully thought opinion. 

Common gut reactions  

  • “Hey, it won’t hurt me, so what’s the big deal?”
  • “Who cares if two men want to be married, it wont effect my life or marriage.”
  • “Besides, who am I to tell other people how to live?”
  • “If it makes them happy, good for them, I say, “Go for it!”
  • “Why should I have marriage available to me and deny it to others.”
  • “I can’t expect other people to live by my beliefs.”                                                                  

These are naïve and self-serving ways of distinguishing right from wrong.

More troubling is how potentially harmful gut reactions are for people living in representative forms of democracy. When debating laws and policies that affect our common life, we need to be willing to think more deeply about implications behind laws and long-term outcomes.

On the matter of gay marriage, make no mistake, there is an agenda at work that seeks far more than giving two men the right of marriage. And the agenda is finding success by feeding on the fears and ignorance of uninformed people.

Fortified on notions that this is really about equality, justice, and love, and dreadfully fearful of being falsely accused of bigotry, hatred, discrimination and irrational phobias, people are being manipulated to bow before gay marriage (even if they privately find the idea morally wrong or personally repulsive). But they are carelessly unaware of the fact that marriage is only a foot in the door to a much larger agenda.

Now I don’t doubt that a few people are hesitant to say much because they have gay friends and don’t want to hurt their feelings. This is more of an altruistic response. But true friendship (based in respect and tolerance) should allow for differences of perspective without being irrationally accused of hate and bigotry. If a friend labels you with these vicious misrepresentations for simply disagreeing, he is not a true friend. He only accepts a friendship if you see things his way.

You can be absolutely certain that marriage is not the only thing gay activist want. Marriage is just the trigger issue being used to obtain status as a protected minority under civil rights legislation. Why do you think repeated efforts are made to suggest that being gay is equal with one’s racial identity? This false comparison has been a main part of the overall strategy to cause the public to bow before the homosexual lifestyle and fully endorsement it in every part of public life. Sadly, it has been effective with uninformed and fearful people.

If sexual orientation is granted civil rights status equal to racial identity, the full weight of federal law will sooner or later silence and punish anyone who teaches that God’s will for marriage is limited to one man and one woman and that homosexual behavior is a violation of the Creator’s law. If you hold these views you will be required to keep them to yourself and you will not be permitted to act on them in any way that is considered discriminatory. Christian Churches and Christian business people will be forced to embrace homosexuality or risk lawsuits and punishments.

If this sounds crazy or irrationally apocalyptic to you, please do a little more homework by studying cases in New Jersey, Massachusetts and by looking north to Canada for a view of the future. Don’t stand among the gullible and naïve. Be informed. Be rational. Think.

Now, it certainly might be more politically and legally amendable and create less social unrest if the gay community said, “All we want is marriage and the benefits that come with it, but we are not asking for civil rights status as a minority group along the lines of racial identity.  We are not asking for businesses and Churches to be forced to affirm gay marriage. We are not asking for curriculum changes at the public schools to include gay marriage and families.”

Be assured that these things will not be said because the goal of gay activists is to have the public bow before the sexual preferences of (at the very most) 3-4 percent of the population. If successful, people will not be permitted to teach the historical view of our nation and the view Jesus taught that marriage is solely meant to be a gift from God between a man and a woman (Matthew 19:4-6). If you choose to hold this view, you’ll be forced into public silence and unable to act on it in any way that could be accused as discrimination.

So next time you ask, “What’s the big deal?” or say, “It won’t affect others if two men get married,” please realize that you are falling for a much larger agenda that will not be good for the nation.

See: Seven Point Strategy for Gay Marriage

_________________________________________________________________________

 Steve Cornell

This entry was posted in Church and State, Citizenship, CNN, Culture, Democracy, Democrats, Discrimination, Emerging Leaders, Equal Rights, Ethics, First Amendment, Freedom, Gay, Gay Marriage?, Government, Homosexual lifestyle, Homosexuality, Law, Marriage, Obama, Partisanship, Republican, Supreme Court and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to If only gay marriage was all they wanted

  1. You might as well brace yourself. Unless divorce is made illegal, same-sex marriage WILL be legalized in the near future.

  2. bbrown1 says:

    There is and can never be any such thing as “same sex marriage”. By definition, marriage requires a man and a woman. Using their terms is allowing the gay activists a major victory. Evil always starts by changing the language and the meaning of words.
    The unintended consequences will be harmful beyond anything we can imagine. Just as the sexual cultural revolution of the 60’s ushered in with no-fault divorce, contraception, and abortion. The harm done to human lives and souls from that is incalculable. The agenda is government and civic acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle. The consequences will be a further extension of the harm currently being done to innocent children.

    Thank you for this essay and the moral clarity of your pieces.

    • Zeus says:

      By CHURCHES’ and many religions’ definition, marriage is between two people of the opposite sex. If you want to blame anyone for co-opting the definition of marriage, blame governments, because “civil unions” became synonymous with “marriage” many, many decades before the issue of same-sex marriage even came up. So you should take up your beef with the public sector, and not citizens. But as is typical of a narrow-minded conservative, you would rather point blame at a marginalized group that just wants the same entitlements and benefits as everyone else.

  3. Dave (former MU student) says:

    Brilliant, Steve!!!

  4. Zacharyba says:

    Great points but didn’t appreciate the religious element. Many of us opposed to homosexual recognition are opposed for reasons of decency, conduct, and childrens’ best interest. Not cuz Jesus sez.

  5. Pingback: When the facts expose the agenda | WisdomForLife

  6. Zeus says:

    “If sexual orientation is granted civil rights status equal to racial identity, the full weight of federal law will sooner or later silence and punish anyone who teaches that God’s will for marriage is limited to one man and one woman and that homosexual behavior is a violation of the Creator’s law. If you hold these views you will be required to keep them to yourself and you will not be permitted to act on them in any way that is considered discriminatory. Christian Churches and Christian business people will be forced to embrace homosexuality or risk lawsuits and punishments.”
    First of all, I encourage you to acquaint yourself with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. Pretty much any business that serves the public cannot discriminate just because they don’t like someone’s values, color, attire, etc. So same-sex marriage isn’t the catalyst for the scenario you describe above. Laws prohibiting such discrimination have been on the books for well over a century.
    Second, the separation of church and state works both ways. Any church would have a field day in court if local, state, or federal governments ever attempted to force them to perform marriages between two people of the same sex. Can you cite a situation in any of the 17 states and DC that allow same-sex marriage in which a church or religious organization has been forced to perform such a union?
    As is typical of the hysterical, fear-mongering right, the hypothetical situations cited that will supposedly arise due to same-sex marriage just aren’t happening. It only goes to show the desperation of the anti-equality crowd to ensure that society’s “less-thans” continue to be marginalized. Sorry, but to cite what is becoming a tired cliché, “you are on the wrong side of history.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s