Even though it is old news, the whole kerfuffle about Proposition 8 has not died down. I don’t know if a week has gone by without dust flying somehow.
Many, many have undertaken great explanations and justifications for voting yes on 8. I cannot say the same for the other side. Though I acknowledge a few have been genial about it, many, many have played dirty. Some have gotten violent.
A while ago Newsweek gave me a new reason to drink myself into a stupor with its article “Gay Marriage: Our Mutual Joy.”
Sigh…where to start.
I can’t even get past the first paragraph without writing a volume on what Lisa Miller misses.
For starters, she misses the fact that the Bible does not endorse something just because it reports it happening. I thought that would be obvious…guess not. Just because Abraham was a great patriarch does not make him a perfect man. The Bible records the lives of the great men of the Bible, warts and all. Noting that Abe slept with his servant girl is hardly a ringing endorsement of polygamy.
motivation for postmodern Christians
She makes much ado about Scripture supposedly mentioning same-sex relationships infrequently. This is much ado about nothing. Robert Gagnon (link found below on the biblical case against same-sex marriage) puts it better than I can:
“What of Miller’s argument based on frequency of explicit mention? Bestiality is mentioned even less in the Bible than homosexual practice and incest gets only comparable treatment, yet who would be so foolish as to argue that Jews and Christians in antiquity would have regarded sex with an animal or sex with one’s mother as inconsequential offenses? Infrequency of mention is often an indicator that the matter in question is foundational rather than insignificant. You don’t have to talk a lot about something that most everyone agrees with and that few persons, if any, violate.”
I could keep going, but I shant. Instead, I am going to post a conversation I had a while back with a fellow teacher. She posted a very fiery “no on 8″ bulletin on myspace. I challenged her on it. A lively conversation ensued. In my opinion, the conversation is very educational from a number of standpoints. In it I demonstrate the reasoning behind voting for the traditional view of marriage in this past election.
I hope you see by reading the conversation that, though there is certainly a biblical case against same-sex marriage, and though there is nothing wrong with voting based on biblical convictions, there is a strong non-biblical and non-religious case against the government sanctioning same-sex marriage.
The conversation is quite lengthy, so I will post it in installments, starting with the first enstallment tomorrow.
In the meantime, in addition to the links I’ve already provided above, check out the following posts from others that have made helpful contributions to the fracas (the links below are, admittedly, one-sided. If you want to read some stuff from those that disagree with me, simply follow some of the links in Newsweek’s response to the mail and comments they received titled “A Religious Reaction to Gay Marriage”.):
Newsweek on Gay Marriage: With more charity than I can muster, Carl Trueman makes some very insightful comments not only about the article but about the future of Evangelicalism.
Turning the Bible on its Head: Albert Mohler swings for the fence.
The Apostle Paul on Homosexuality: Robert Gagnon (linked above as well) discusses the verses on homosexuality in Paul’s letters.
The Case Against Newsweek: Stand to Reason’s Melinda Penner lays out Miller’s argument premise by premise, then she responds.
How should Christianity inform your politics? Greg Koukl answers that question.
An Obvious Truth: John Mark Reynolds is the king of common sense.
Also check out related posts from my own blog:
Balancing Scripture, Reason, and Experience
Tony Jones: Same-sex Blogalogue Update
Tony Jones Part III: Something I Missed
Like what you read? Be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed (RSS button is found at the top right in the sidebar)!
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
9 responses so far ↓
augustine // December 22, 2008 at 9:50 am
I’m always curious when someone presents a non-religious arguments aganst gay marriage, since they tend to be abysmal. The one you linked to here (townhall.com) continues that proud tradition, and will be receiving a full eviscerating soon on my blog.
Thanks for the link!
A Secular, Non-Religious Defence of Marriage Inequality « Nous // December 22, 2008 at 4:05 pm
[...] are almost always laughably poor, and I’ve recently come across another courtesy of The Pugnacious Irishman which does not buck the [...]
Rich Bordner // December 22, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Augustine,
Thanks for stopping by.
I read your post…eviscerating is not the word that came to mind. Bloviating, perhaps, but not eviscerating.
Lots of hot air.
Folks, after this, I most likely won’t be responding to comments on this series, since whatever I have to comment back will most likely be covered in the conversation posts itself. Augustine’s “eviscerating” of Greg Koukl is a case in point. Most of what I have to say in response to his piece will be covered in the series itself.
That being said, comment away!
Same-Sex Marriage Conversation, Part I « The Pugnacious Irishman // December 23, 2008 at 7:23 am
[...] Marriage Conversation, Part I Read the introduction to this [...]
Same-Sex Marriage Conversation, Part II « The Pugnacious Irishman // December 23, 2008 at 7:24 am
[...] Marriage Conversation, Part II Read the introduction and part I of this [...]
Same-sex Marriage Conversation Part III « The Pugnacious Irishman // December 24, 2008 at 12:17 pm
[...] Marriage Conversation Part III Read the introduction and parts I and II of this [...]
Same-Sex Marriage Conversation Part IV « The Pugnacious Irishman // December 24, 2008 at 12:19 pm
[...] Marriage Conversation Part IV Read the introduction and parts I , II, and III of this [...]
Same-Sex Marriage Conversation, Concluded « The Pugnacious Irishman // December 26, 2008 at 9:46 am
[...] Marriage Conversation, Concluded Read the introduction and parts I , II, III, and IV of this [...]
The Quisani League » Blog Archive » CoC: Jan 12th, 2009 // January 12, 2009 at 6:16 am
[...] Bordner presents The Naked Emperor, Pontificating on Fashion posted at The Pugnacious Irishman, saying, “This is the introduction to a five part series on [...]