Translate

Wednesday, July 30, 2003

And another thing: Bush knows he'd better not mess with the Kingdom of God, which is infinitely more powerful than the United States. The church isn't going anywhere.
Tomorrow doesn't mean tomorrow, I guess. Sorry. Let's get real for a minute. President Bush has indicated his support for current law defending marriage as that between a man and a woman, and seems to be supporting a Constitutional Amendment to that effect. I happen to think it's quite necessary. Marriage belongs to the Christian church. It is a testament to the power and influence of Christianity that everyone else gets married, and calls it that. But I can think of no way that the rights of people can be enhanced by calling every kind of union a marriage. A lot of folks aren't even satisfied with granting legal standing to civil unions. The only result of changing the definition of a marriage (and that is what it is, make no mistake) is to undermine the right of free association of Christians. Basically, this is a free speech right of citizens to believe whatever they wish, and to hang out with those who believe similarly. Even if the end result of that belief, if put into practice, would deprive others of their rights, it is protected in the First Amendment. That's why you can't get arrested for being in some unpopular group (like the KKK). But alas, what if the government started saying to Christian ministers, "You must marry these two people (who are homosexuals, for example)." They must either compromise doctrine, or break the law, which compromises doctrine.