Same Sex Marriage Blogalogue: Prolegomena 4 - Emotions

I have not taken the time to read all of the comments made here (sorry, I'm playing catch up a little with this blogologue) but I do have some initial reactions to Olberman's diatribe.

First, since Olberman does not seem to share the religious sentiments of many involved I will not hold him to being consistent with the things he says about God and/or the Bible. However, if he seeks to dismiss their arguments out of hand, I would like to ask him for a little charity. If someone is going to use the "black=gay" argument to say that we were wrong then, we are wrong now, I believe they should not try and pit this as an argument against the Christian view. The Bible certainly does not place race and sexual orientation on the same footing the way civil rights proponents are accustomed to do.

Second, the argument that gays have been forced into sham heterosexual marriages because same-sex marriage was outlawed is a total non-sequitur. It is a problem that we view marriage as a right, and apparently in Olberman's case as a necessity. For the Christian, the Bible never claims marriage to be a necessity. Marriage is at best a privilege, like a drivers license, and in the case of America it is up to the people to decide who that privilege is extended to. No one is arguing that blind people should be granted the right to drive in order to satisfy their need for speed, and though the grounding of the objection is different, the idea is the same: we have decided against it because we do not believe it is in the best interest of the country.

Larry,
Please, if we are going to continue this interaction, do not misrepresent my comments. My argument was not that gays should not be extended any privileges from the state. What I said was that the people of the state get to decide who they feel it is in the best interest of the state to extend specific privileges to. This is why blind people can't get drivers licenses, because it is not in the best interest of the other drivers, pedestrians, homeowners, etc. Similarly, the people in the states which have asked the question have decided that it is not in the best interest of the family, the society, the children, etc. to extend the privilege of marriage to homosexual unions. That is their prerogative, and as you know I argued elsewhere, is why our focus as Christians must be on what the Bible says and if we are going to abide by that.

Tony,

I'm really perplexed as to your comment regarding of posting scriptures to the issues at hand. I would really like to know what you really think about the author of the Bible and how we are to interpret scripture. How can you and I come to different conclusions in interpreting scripture. The Holy Spirit is the one that brings you to those truths as born again believers and born of the Spirit. The Bible is a difficult book because it came from the infinite to the finite-from the unlimited, all powerful God, to limited man. As we approach the Bible praying that the Spirit will be our teacher and will guide us to a better understanding of His Holy Word as He is the author of it. So their should be no ambiguity when it comes to the Word of God, as He is the author and finisher of our faith.

Is God, a God of confusion? Shouldn't you be extremely concerned about someone's eternal salvation, just as our precious Lord is. Also being a concerned brother, shouldn't you be concerned about protecting the church from wolfs (false teachers).

I'm really confused. Please explain to me as to how you come to your conclusions as to delete someone from your site, if they disagree with your assessment of God and interpreting scripture. The only reason that I would quote scripture in a post, is because, that is the ONLY way that we can distinguish truth from error. Show me any other way as to how we can combat the spiritual world and the schemes of the enemy.

God Bless,
Mike