On the Recent Supreme Court and Defense of Marriage Act Ruling

I flipped on the television last Wednesday, June 26, 2013, and watched the news on the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which essentially kept same-sex couples from receiving tax, health and retirement benefits from the government. At that moment I thought, “Wow, whatever might come out of this, however this decision might shape each person in America, the world I lived in would never be the same.” Yet, inasmuch as the decision was monumental, as a Christ follower in covenant relationship to the God of the Universe, there is a bit of personal uneasiness over the whole situation.

It would be naive to think the Supreme Court decision about DOMA is simply about the money $$$. (Who would object to a gay couple formulating contractual agreements for inheritance, hospital visitations, or property?) Rather, the decision set a legal precedence about marriage, particularly who can be married, and who can reap the benefits of being in a marital relationship. It is a legal decision promoting the ok-ness of homosexuality.

Now there is a narrow path the Christian traverses, and it is so difficult to find with all the commotion about same-sex marriage going on. To one extreme, I find there are fundamentalists on the right, who spew out the most vial obscenities against the homosexual. To hear a false prophet like Benny Hinn declare that God will destroy the homosexual community by 1994 or 1995 is most unsettling. Such things must never come from the lips of God’s people.

To another extreme there are fundamentalists on the left who want to forcefully bring the church into conformity to their agenda. There are even a number of professing Christians who would even say, “Homosexuality is ok.” Others in the church are simply vague about the “H” word. This is a position that I simply reject.

Genesis 1-2 teaches that God created mankind in His own image, both male and female, and the man and woman were to be united together in a monogamous relationship with the expressed purpose of procreation (i.e. marriage). Same-sex unions were condemned in Scripture (Lev. 18:22, 20:13; Rom. 1:26-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 1 Tim. 1:10). It is far too constraining upon the biblical text to suggest these only apply to specific types of same-sex unions (e.g. ancient pagan cult prostitution, the purported acts of pederasty in the Greek teacher-student relationships which included same-sex unions, etc.). Paul, for example, is more likely condemning same-sex unions in whatever form it took place.

Some may object: “But are you not just Bible thumping? Do we not live in a pluralistic society wherein there are a number of people who simply follow a different path than the one chiseled out by your Judeo-Christian values?” But I say, “Such is far from the case.” Homosexuality also goes contrary to human biology. The human sexual reproductive system is far from simply a mechanism for a experiencing the pleasure of an orgasm. Rather, it is a complex biological system designed for reproducing humans. The way male and female sexual organs work together cannot really work in same-sex activities.

There is something about the heterosexual monogamous family unit that is beneficial to the infrastructure of a nation. A child is certainly better off raised by a mother and father. Sure, heterosexual monogamous families have their “hiccups;” however, overall the traditional family unit is the best of all circumstances. There are many heroic single parents that make things work against the odds, but traditional marriage is still good and divorce is another problem all together. Traditional marriages provide the best conditions for procreation, and a nation’s strength is partly due to a stable growing population. It is reasonable to think that civil government would give certain benefits for traditional marriages (e.g. tax benefits) on the basis of what they can provide to the stability of a nation’s infrastructure. Homosexual unions never really offer the same benefits to society.

As for genetic, the research has been inconclusive as to whether or not there is a genetic cause for homosexuality. Even if a genetic cause can be determined, it would still be far from conclusive that homosexuality would be permissible. (Suppose a genetic component can be found for kleptomania, such would never make stealing ok.)

Some of my dear Christian friends might inquire: “Isn’t the most important thing the love shared between the gay couple? Are Christians supposed to a radical love that goes beyond simple appeals to the letter of the law? Where’s the love?” I say, “What’s love got to do with it?” Love is never the ultimate trump card in the universe that nothing can beat. Even the Jesus Christ, Love Personified, can warn us of love gone awry. He said this: “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it” (Matt. 10:37-39). The Lord’s disciple John would even write, “Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him” (1 John 2:15). Even Solomon loved many women, but they turned his heart from the Lord (1 Kings 11:1-8). A husband may love another man’s wife but love itself never sanctifies the relationship. In the same way, two men or two women might declare their love for each other, but love is never the omnipotent power source that makes it all good.

So the Supreme Court decision was magnanimous. It will most certainly change the way the average person thinks about the institution of marriage in days to come. Whether it will be for the better, I fear that such will never be the case.

~ WGN