The notion that sex was designed for procreation only sure is leaving huge holes in the logic of extremists, and their idiocy is showing as a result. The following video from last week puts the exclamation point on extremist with regard to this bible-thumping charge against homosexuals in America…
And sadly, this is not an isolated event…
These are the indoctrinated religious extremists that self-righteously believe they have a golden pass into the heaven – even though they preach ignorance, intolerance, hate, and completely skew the teachings of Chris. They use this as a tool of authority over others and their congregants lap it up. It is an amazing example of fearing what you do not understand.
They are terrified people. Honestly, these folks think that gays will die off if segregated because homosexuals cannot reproduce. I have a news flash for them – who do they think gives birth to homosexuals?
This is the ReBiblican voting bloc and they turn out in droves on election day. Now that President Obama has publicly endorsed marriage rights for homosexuals – the issue just threw more fuel on their already smoldering hatred toward our first African-American president. And many of these pre-enlightenment Christians would stay home before voting for a Mormon, but this type of rhetoric will bring them out to make sure Obama is not re-elected.
They are slaves of mythology. And one of the memes that they tout as proof that they are correct is the biblical definition of marriage. This was covered extremely well in an article by Hrafnkell at PoliticusUSA recently titled “What the Bible Says Versus What Republicans Wish it Said”, but our own Susan Cardoza weighed in this week with her thoughts.
The More the Marry-er
by Susan Cardoza
A lot of people were pleased when the President came out a couple weeks ago in favor of same sex marriage. Well, not everyone was pleased, namely Republicans, some religious leaders and most Evangelicals. See, they think that if we allow two people of the same sex to marry each other somehow that interferes in their own wedded bliss. I know, I know, it makes absolutely no sense but there you have it, their marriages are now in mortal danger. And it is all because the Bible supposedly tells them so, but let’s take a look at the scriptures they quote and see if they are really in danger.
In taking religious conservatives at their word, you can define marriage as the Bible does. However, if you do, then you have to take a critical look at some of the men in the Old Testament, like Abraham. Abraham was one man who slept with his servant when his wife Sarah proved to be infertile. And Jacob also fathered children with four different women. Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon and the kings of Judah and Israel were polygamists, but people think of them as heroes of the bible.
The New Testament model of marriage is not much better, in fact Jesus himself was single and preached an indifference to earthly attachments especially family. Paul, who was single as well, regarded marriage as people who were unable to contain their passion. Paul said, “It is better to marry than to burn with passion”. Not exactly a rousing endorsement for the institution of marriage, no matter if it is between a man and a women or the same sex.
The Bible and Jesus say many important things about love and family, yet neither explicitly defines marriage as between one man and one woman. And secondly, as the examples above illustrate, most people do not want their marriage to look anything like what the Bible describes. “Marriage” in America refers to two separate things, a religious vow and a civil one, though it is most often enacted as one and the same.
As a civil institution, marriage offers practical benefits to both partners: contractual rights having to do with taxes; insurance; the care and custody of children; visitation rights; and inheritance. As a religious institution, marriage offers something else: a commitment of both partners before God to love, honor and cherish each other…in accordance with God’s word. In a religious marriage, two people promise to take care of each other the same way they are taught to believe God cares about them.
In the Old Testament, the concept of family is fundamental, but examples of what religious conservatives would call “the traditional family” are not often portrayed in the Bible. Conservatives point to Adam and Eve as evidence for their one man, one woman argument. But, like modern life, things evolve and if you consider the goings on of Abraham, Jacob, David et al, things changed due to circumstances that arose. The Old Testament, for the most part, was written by people for whom polygamy was a way of life, if the circumstances called for it.
Again, there is that darned evolution thing rearing its head. The successive argument for one woman—one man is procreation but in delving further into that issue, there are problems there as well. How many couples procreate in a manner other than what the argument considers? There is adoption, IVF and surrogates which are all methods used to create families for both religious and civil unions. Are those couples outside the bounds of the Conservative idea of marriage? If they are, then people within the conservative’s own circle of traditional marriage are too outside the traditional idea of “procreation” in the natural way. And what about the couples who have no plans whatsoever to procreate for various reasons? Are they too, outside the bounds of the meaning of a conservative’s idea of traditional marriage? If so, that circle of marriage is getting smaller and smaller.
Jesus was an unmarried man and in all his teachings he portrayed a caring community of believers, whose bond in God superseded all blood ties. Jesus told his followers to leave their families and follow him, explaining in Matthew that there will be no marriage in Heaven. Jesus, while condemning divorce, never mentioned homosexuality or same sex marriage. In fact, men (apostles) who followed Jesus all lived communally together, yet there is no real information, that I am aware of, that discusses their private lives.
And speaking of divorce, how do Conservatives square that process in direct disobeyance of Jesus commands? The answer to that question is they cannot. Rather they revert to what they always do when confronted with a hole in their logic – they ignore it.
They ignore it when the apostle Paul echoes Jesus’ lack of interest in matters of the flesh. For him, celibacy was the Christian ideal, but family stability was the best alternative. Marry if you must, he told his audiences, but do not get divorced. “To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): a wife must not separate from her husband.” Admittedly I am no Bible scholar but to date I have not been presented with evidence that the term “gay marriage” appears anywhere in the Bible.
So if gay marriage is not in the Bible what exactly is their disdain for the act? Well, it is clear that Paul was tough on homosexuality but it was the lust, the promiscuity and debauchery that was more likely the critique.
When LGBT seek to marry, it is with the same intention straight couples seek to marry. They want to devote their lives to one another and at that point would the sex be no longer as Paul described it? Paul was referring to a group of people who are outside the bounds of accepted behavior, people who ultimately meet their end and are judged by God. No gay marriage I have seen comes close to that kind of behavior, in fact quite the opposite, most people I know in a gay marriage are loving committed couples.
The Bible endorses slavery, a practice that Americans now universally consider shameful and barbaric. It recommends the death penalty for adulterers, so a whole lot of Conservatives have dodged a bullet on that one. I think, in the end, a more mature view of scriptural authority requires us, as we have in the past, to move beyond literalism. The Bible was written for a world so unlike our own, it’s impossible to apply its rules, at face value, to our lives or our rules for living today.