Tuesday, October 19, 2004
If You Can't Take the Heat....
The Cincinnati Enquirer has editorialized that voters in both Ohio and Kentucky should reject proposed marriage amendments to their respective state constitutions. The main reason given? Those are in relationships but aren't married might have legal problems with clauses in the proposed amendments. The clauses want to prohibit homosexual marriage, but also want to take the possibility of "civil unions" off the table. While the editorials might be right about legal challenges and the like, the fact is that the anger and frustration of the editorial board should be directed towards the Massachusetts Supreme Court. That august body foisted this debate on the rest of the country. If the mau-maued editorial board can't stand the thought of shacking up couples legal status being challenged, they really ought to consider the legitimacy of "common law" marriages and other transient relationships.
I remember Glenn Beck saying on the radio at the time of the Massachusetts Supreme Court's ruling that true inroads against gay marriage aren't going to be made until heterosexual "living arrangements" like cohabitation (read: shacking up) are dealt with. I agreed with his assesment then and I echo it now. God designed marriage to be a lifelong commitment between one man and one woman. The church has for far too long let the issue of cohabitation and other living arrangements go. Right now, because of divorce laws and the culture at large, the state of marriage is really one of a contract between autonomous individuals. If the Enquirer doesn't want to address this vital issue, we are poorer for it.
Finally, the statements that Kentucky voters have larger issues to contend with like a budget deficit is simply insulting. As I have demonstrated, this debate has been foisted on us from Massachusetts and the marriage amendment is part of the blowback. How people live together is, in my opinion, a FAAAR more important issue than some state budget deficit. If the state of affairs in Frankfort is lacking strong political leadership, then so be it. What the Enquirer should do is call for an examination of our marriage and divorce laws with an eye towards making them more in the image of what God intended; a lifelong covenant between one man and one woman. The Enquirer is not interested in addressing the truly important issues like how people view commitments, love, child rearing, sex and many other issues and instead wants to address state government budgets which will change in a year or two any way.
If you want to read this insulting and sophmoric editorial go here. For the equally insulting and sophmoric editorial dealing with Ohio marriage amendment go here. As always, I appreciate any feedback or comments that readers may have.
I remember Glenn Beck saying on the radio at the time of the Massachusetts Supreme Court's ruling that true inroads against gay marriage aren't going to be made until heterosexual "living arrangements" like cohabitation (read: shacking up) are dealt with. I agreed with his assesment then and I echo it now. God designed marriage to be a lifelong commitment between one man and one woman. The church has for far too long let the issue of cohabitation and other living arrangements go. Right now, because of divorce laws and the culture at large, the state of marriage is really one of a contract between autonomous individuals. If the Enquirer doesn't want to address this vital issue, we are poorer for it.
Finally, the statements that Kentucky voters have larger issues to contend with like a budget deficit is simply insulting. As I have demonstrated, this debate has been foisted on us from Massachusetts and the marriage amendment is part of the blowback. How people live together is, in my opinion, a FAAAR more important issue than some state budget deficit. If the state of affairs in Frankfort is lacking strong political leadership, then so be it. What the Enquirer should do is call for an examination of our marriage and divorce laws with an eye towards making them more in the image of what God intended; a lifelong covenant between one man and one woman. The Enquirer is not interested in addressing the truly important issues like how people view commitments, love, child rearing, sex and many other issues and instead wants to address state government budgets which will change in a year or two any way.
If you want to read this insulting and sophmoric editorial go here. For the equally insulting and sophmoric editorial dealing with Ohio marriage amendment go here. As always, I appreciate any feedback or comments that readers may have.
Comments:
Post a Comment
