Gay Marriage — Why Not?

Associate Editor’s Note:  This  short piece by Rev. Matthew Wurm of Trinity Lutheran Church, Bemidji MN appeared in the Bemidji Pioneer as a letter to the editor.  Pastor Wurm is a fine pastor serving the saints in the far north country and also a personal friend.  This short piece demonstrates another way to argue against something as abominable as gay marriage – by pointing it to its logical conclusion.  This Tuesday a number of states have measures on their ballots regarding gay marriage, please vote your conscience (informed by the Word of God).


Gay Marriage—Why not? by Rev. Matthew Wurm

If two committed homosexuals truly love each other, why should any American in good conscience limit their freedom to marry?   If a man and four women love each other and pledge themselves to one another, why should we exclude their desire for a polygamous marriage? If four men and three women truly love one another and are committed to their group, why should we forbid their polyamory (the marriage of multiple partners and sexes)? If a man truly loves his sister, isn’t it discriminatory to prohibit their unique form of sexuality by limiting their freedom and perceived right to marry?  And if a woman says she truly loves a fifteen year old boy and that teenager loves her in return, how long can we limit their right to express their love and desires?

If the deciding factor for permitting people to marry is only love and mutual commitment, where will this stop? Think what the logical end of not limiting marriage will mean to the entire institution of marriage for all people.

 

 


Comments

Gay Marriage — Why Not? — 77 Comments

  1. @Rev. McCall #49

    Fallen down the slippery slope? I’m willing to take a running jump.

    The principle I propose is whether or not the proposed relationship has any significant negative practical consequences to the larger society.

    Marrying a first cousin is legal in some states but not others:
    http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/state-laws-regarding-marriages-between-first-cousi.aspx

    The genetic risks to offspring of closely related parents is a real practical concern.

    As non-human animals do not have the same legal standing as humans, the pet example is nonsensical I think.

    Polygamy could be an interesting debate.

  2. GregD :I have a dog in this hunt

    See! There’s the slippery slope…

    GregD :DOMA has been challenged in the courts and the Obama administration is unwilling to defend it, as it considers DOMA unconstitutional.

    Every schoolchild knows it is the judicial and not the executive branch that is authorized to decide what is and is not constitutional, but that is another subject.

  3. @GregD #50
    Upon the principle of “you can’t legislate morality” because ultimately morality does not come from the government, it comes from the citizens who grant the government authority, I think I am beginning to see things a bit differently. I haven’t thought about this very much yet, so I can’t say for certain though. I think we, as pastors and people alike must always be aware of the pendulum swing, and not push it back further than it was pushed upon us. For instance, is the church pushing back on government too far because government pushed the church out of its business a little too much? http://www.intersectionofchurchandstate.com is a fascinating resource. Maybe we, as pastors should preach “more better” to our people to take their Christian morality into the public square and government and the institution of the church remain aloof of government… Jesse Jackson and John Hagge… and myself included.
    In regard to bestiality… that is a nonsensical argument and I won’t even address it. True, marrying cousins is dangerous genetically. I think there is less danger to polygamy than gay marriage. Both are deviant behavior however. The great danger of gay marriage, especially if the couple adopts or bears a child through some “unnatural means” for them (because they are by “nature” homosexuals) is the inherent sexism declared by their lifestyle to their children. Think what two lesbian mothers declare by their actions every day to their child, or two gay fathers. There is this great line from Jane Austin’s “Sense and sensibility” “Everyday implied but never declared.” When Willibee runs off with another rich woman.

  4. @GregD #1
    And according to the recent study by The University of Texas homosexual relationships are vastly more harmful to childrens mental wellbeing than heterosexual ones. Are not those children members of society? Do not other children interact with them and their “parents”? You are suggesting a fallacy when you imply that there are activities that people can engage in that don’t affect other people. There is no such thing. People tried suggesting this once with pornography as well. “It doesn’t hurt anyone.” Except for the actors being paid to do it, the time spent away from family and friends, the 6th Commandment, and on and on. Every action you or I take impacts those around us. To think otherwise is very naive and frankly wrong. So as sinful human beings we must look to God for direction in what is right and good for society and for our neighbor. This is revealed in God’s natural law. If we look to anywhere else, ourselves or the consensus of sinful peoples opinions or sharia law or anything else we are gonna screw it up.

  5. It will be interesting to see how the U of TX study weathers the test of time. But at least on the face of things it appears to address a practical issue and should be considered.

    My interest in this discussion was to learn something of how your community was willing to engage those outside your community. We are neighbors after all. Is our relationship going to focus on our commonalities or be dominated by our differences? Can we have a cohesive society with religious diversity? Looking back over this discussion I’m not sure what to think. Maybe we should try again another time.

  6. After being a Lutheran for 44 years, I find it hard to believe some Lutherans think the way they do when it comes to same sex marriage. Not once in the Bible does Jesus say anything about homosexuals. I wonder what all of you gay haters would do if on judgement day you found out Jesus was a homosexual man while on earth and the disciple he loved was his partner. I’m guessing there would be a bunch of you back peddling hoping Jesus would let you through the pearly gates. I just do not understand why you spread hate. Jesus said to love your neighbor, not hate your neighbor.

  7. @Karen B #7

    Karen, you are like the mountain climber on a snowy slope who just came up from the edge of a deadly cliff and sees a skier rushing down toward her, racing toward the edge which cannot be seen clearly from above. Not wanting to seem divisive or disagreeable by sounding a warning, you smile and wave, wishing him well as he rushes to his death. Actually, you are even more blindly hateful, because you are letting the homosexuals you claim to love race to their eternal death while you judge to be unloving all those who would save him.

  8. Karen B :
    Not once in the Bible does Jesus say anything about homosexuals. I wonder what all of you gay haters would do if on judgement day you found out Jesus was a homosexual man while on earth and the disciple he loved was his partner. . . I just do not understand why you spread hate. Jesus said to love your neighbor, not hate your neighbor.

    That’s the most ignorant and hateful thing I’ve read all day.

    Jesus is obviously so hateful to homosexuals when talking about marriage that it was between a man and a woman. How insensitive. Certainly the Author of Life knew of such persons. And what about the rest of the New Testament? That is Jesus also. And what about the Old Testament? Isn’t that Jesus also? He says so.

    It is hateful to say people are spreading hate when they are instructing ignorant people on God’s Word.

    People who say that hate God because they hate His Word. Repent.

  9. @Pastor Ted Crandall #11
    Ezekiel 33:7 “So you, son of man, I have made a watchman for the house of Israel. Whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me. 8 If I say to the wicked, O wicked one, you shall surely die, and you do not speak to warn the wicked to turn from his way, that wicked person shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. 9 But if you warn the wicked to turn from his way, and he does not turn from his way, that person shall die in his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul.

    It’s a fearsome responsibility to have been called to be a Pastor, Karen B.

    [Perhaps that’s why the fainthearted would rather be bureaucrats?]

  10. @Karen B #7
    After being a Lutheran for 44 years, I find it hard to believe some Lutherans think the way they do when it comes to same sex marriage.

    I take it you are an elca lutheran, which denies so much of the Lutheran faith that it’s not being Lutheran at all any more.

    I belonged there, when old ALC was still Lutheran in its beliefs and practices. Most of my relatives are still there. They say, “My congregation’s ‘conservative'” and put their heads in the sand about their synod.

    [But many LCMS do the same, on different subjects, I’m sad to say.]

    Or they tell me, “You see things too black and white.” And I reply, “You learned them out of the same catechism I did, back when you still believed all the Bible was God’s Word.” And they understood Paul’s words about men lying with men and women with women and that it was wrong, then. What changed their minds? The Word didn’t change!

  11. Two things to say about the ELCA leadership:
    1) they are apostate!!
    2) they have caused many problems for confessional Lutherans!

    And this is most certainly true!

  12. Last night, the SeeBS TV show, “Person of Interest,” had the two vigilante characters, Reese and Finch, working on a case involving Dr. Maddy Enright, a female surgeon threatened by an unknown person to secretly cause the death of a wealthy tycoon during his upcoming surgical operation.

    The plot was that if Maddy did not obey and kill the patient, her “wife” would be killed by snipers. While trying to find the snipers and the criminal mastermind before the operation is completed, the “wife-and-wife marriage” is treated as matter-of-factly by the scriptwriters as Reese’s habit of whispering whenever he needs to sound tough. As expected, the scriptwriters have the lovely couple surviving and living happily ever after, or at least into the last commercial and credits. No indication whether the couple was XXXA.

  13. @helen #13 So why would this make me an ELCA Lutheran? Maybe I’ve just been lucky and gone to MO Synod churches that were not radical like some posting here who seem to hate homosexuals.

  14. @Pastor Ted Crandall #11 Ted, you do know that everything in the Old Testament did not happen as written don’t you? Many are stories to get a point across, such as being faithful to your partner and not having orgies, it was not against homosexuals. Adam and Eve is a story explaining free will. A whale did not swallow Jonah.

  15. @Karen B #21
    Lady, if you aren’t in elca, you are proving that you believe more of their falsehoods than the Bible’s truths!

    Who do you study under, who is smarter than God?
    (E.g., Christ said he would be in the tomb three days,
    even as Jonah was in the belly of the whale.)

    Did you ever consider that, if Adam and Eve is “just a story”,
    you don’t need Christ’s death and resurrection to save you from original sin?
    Why do you think He died? Or don’t you believe that either?

  16. Karen B : A whale did not swallow Jonah.

    You’re right. it was a big fish…..

    And your comments publicly state an apostate position. Although we cannot read hearts (only God can) we do see public actions. We need to condemn your statements. And if you truly believe them in your inner person, then we condemn you, and hope God’s Law will bring you to repentence and be able to hear His Gospel.

  17. @Karen B #21

    Karen, I used to believe that, when I was a junior in college — and still sophomoric. Then I had a moment of truth when I read the words of Jesus in the New Testament and realized he believed that Jonah in the Old Testament was a truly historic person and that his three days in the belly of a fish was a true story. It was for me a crisis of faith: Was Jesus wrong? Was it also untrue that Jesus spent three days in the belly of the earth? (Matthew 12:40) Did he really rise from the dead? Did he pay for my sins? Was any of the Bible true? Could I trust a single Word of God…

    By the grace of God alone, the Holy Spirit convinced me that what I was reading in the Word of God was true. When I open the Bible now, I try to remember to pray, “Lord, open my heart to hear what you’re saying to me.” I hope and pray you spend lots of time reading the Bible, giving the Holy Spirit the opportunity to free you, too.

    “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:31-33)

  18. I was expecting this to be a nice Jesus loving, love thy neighbor site and I was wrong. I’m off to find a nice Lutheran site. Have a nice day.

  19. The SCOTUS announced Friday afternoon that it will take up same-sex marriage, hearing both a case stemming from California’s Proposition 8 voter-approved ban on homosexual marriage and a case from New York challenging the constitutionality of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

    See the Court Order List: 568 U.S., Friday, December 7, 2012.

    Since Roberts folded like a soggy kleenex on Traitorobamacare, it would not be surprising for him and other papists on the SCOTUS to bend over and declare DOMA and Prop 8 unconstitutional. Maybe they’ll also agree to allow people to fill out marriage licenses with animals, vegetables, or corpses. With the medications some are taking, who can say what the SCOTUS will decide.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.