[Vision2020] Re: Gay marriage...... an oxymoron......

[joekc at adelphia.net]

Dear "Nolan Lynch":

If Joan is correct, you should be ashamed of yourself. Calling yourself a Christian and joking that some critic of yours should be tortured and killed!?! This is just sick.

I should be ashamed at myself for responding to your post, too, but it is such a perfect chance to illustrate the importance of the separation of church and state -- religious morality and law -- that I can't resist.

A minor point first. In my dictionary, 'marriage' is defined as "a legally recognized relationship, established by a civil or religious ceremony, between two people who intend to live together as sexual and domestic partners." 'Gay marriage' is not an oxymoron.

More important though, you write: "marriage is a covenant in which two individuals are joined together, forming one flesh, a single entity. In normal circumstances this unity becomes especially evident when the husband and the wife literally combine to form one flesh: a child." You go on to use this as a basis for distinguishing gay marriage from straight marriage.

Note, however, that you need to include a separate clause in order to make your point: "in normal circumstances," that is, "excluding extenuating circumstances involving infertility, etc. where reproduction is impossible for medical reasons." And here we have it, beautifully pointed out by an opponent of gay marriage, exactly why mere religious beliefs should never be the basis for civil law.

If the real reason to forbid gay marriage is that in "a gay marriage, there can be no child, therefore there can be no marriage," then this same argument should provide the basis for restricting many straight marriages, as well. If these consequences are rejected, then the argument does not convey the real reason for being against gay marriage in the first place. Adding the special clauses in only highlights this point. Perhaps there is no reason at all to oppose gay marriage, just a firmly held opinion that it is wrong.

If one opposes gay marriage for personal reasons, that is fine by me. Religious beliefs, and personal beliefs of any kind, need not always be based on reason and argument. But the law is different. If the law is based on principles that are less than fully general, the eventual outcome is the restriction of our personal liberties, even if these consequences are unintended. 

For this and other reasons I hope that all of you work hard to prevent the passing of Idaho's anti-gay marriage law. Whether or not you personally approve of gay marriage is irrelevant.

--
Joe Campbell

=============
Here's my perspective: marriage is a covenant in which two individuals are
joined together, forming one flesh, a single entity. In normal circumstnces
this unity becomes especially evident when the husband and the wife 
literally combine to
form one flesh: a child. In a gay marriage, there can be no child, therefore
there can be no marriage. This is of course excluding extenuating
circumstances involving infertility, etc. where reproduction is impossible 
for medical reasons. A gay couple cannot form one flesh, they cannot 
reproduce; nor were they designed to.