There’s something in every atheist, itching to believe, and something in every believer, itching to doubt.
~Mignon McLaughlin, The Second Neurotic’s Notebook, 1966
This will be a bit different than most of my “real” postings. Now that I’m no longer doing MilSpouse Friday Fill-Ins each week, I have more time to do actual blogging.
This might become a heated debate. If it does, I’m expecting that my fantastic readers will maintain civility, even if there are opposing views. I expect that no one will attack anyone else or say negative things about other views. Differing, CIVIL opinions are welcome.
Let me preface this by saying I’m a Christian. I was brought up in a Protestant (Methodist) church and 100% believe in God. I’ve had enough things happen to me that just can’t be explained by anything except God. However, I don’t believe in pushing it down other people’s throats. I think each person is free to choose the religion–or choose not to believe in a religion–that they wish.
I’ve just recently been going back to church regularly for the first time in a while as an adult. Though I’m Christian, I believe the Bible was created and translated by humans. Meaning, there are probably errors in it, but that the general theme of a loving God, Jesus, salvation, persevering during trials and tribulations, Heaven and Hell are true.
But I have things that I believe that make people say I can’t be a true Christian. And things that make me question myself.
I 100% believe in letting those who are gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transsexual marry whomever they want. Seriously, what is wrong with love when it is two consenting adults? Is love really that bad, in whatever form? Frankly, I think the world needs MORE love!
Yet, this past week at church, the pastor told us his thoughts on Washington’s then-upcoming law (which, as of today, is law). He encouraged the congregation (without actually saying it) to sign the petition that will temporarily repeal it and put it on the upcoming ballot so the voters can then vote it down. He stated that there are six sexual sins of the Bible and God hates each equally: incest, bestiality, homosexuality, adultery, sex before marriage and one other than I’m not remembering at this moment.
He then said he’s looking into the legal ways they can prevent “those kind of events” happening in the church. This is where I have the issue… if God hates all sexual sins equally, then shouldn’t the church also prevent anyone who has had premarital sex or had an affair from having a wedding at the church? Is the church going to welcome GLBT’s into the congregation? If not, then why should anyone who has had premarital sex or an affair be allowed into the church? I mean… if all sexual sins are equal in God’s eyes… then why should ANYONE judge which sin is worse and which one will be discriminated against? What about “let ye who is without sin cast the first stone?”
And while I’m on this topic, we were talking about making marriages strong at the same service. He was talking about The Five Love Languages and was giving the example that his is affirmation. He said he’s vain and loves his wife to tell him he’s the best husband, man, lover, etc. Wait a minute… isn’t vanity (pride) one of the Seven Deadly Sins? I’m a bit rusty on my Bible, but doesn’t it say somewhere in the Bible that God hates all sins equally? So, if homosexuality is a sin and so is vanity… who’s “more wrong?” And really… there’s no one in this entire world that is without sin. So where does that leave us? Why does a church choose one “sin” to rail against?
Now, I can see the argument that marriage is something that is biblical in nature and therefore meant for a man and a woman. But if using that logic, ONLY a member of the clergy should be able to marry you. If you are “married” by a judge, captain of a ship, etc… it should be a civil union. And if the church wants to preserve the sanctity of marriage as only for one man and one woman, I can maybe be okay with that. BUT ONLY IF CIVIL UNIONS RECEIVE THE SAME LEGAL RIGHTS THAT MARRIAGE DOES. Because, if marriage between one man and one woman is based on biblical teachings and it’s those who follow the teachings to the letter, then what in the WORLD is anyone other than a pastor/reverend/member of the clergy doing marrying people? (by the way, don’t tell our family, but Huzzy and I were married legally 15 days before our wedding in the courthouse… which, under this logic would be a civil union.. and I’m fine with that).
Also, if marriage is based on the Bible, then why does that give anyone legal rights? Aren’t we supposed to have separation of church and state? Isn’t that the foundation of our country?
Wouldn’t it stop a lot of the “marriage is for one man and one woman” and “the gays are ruining the meaning of marriage” <insert eye roll from me here> if MARRIAGE was a church ceremony, but a civil union was what everyone had to have in order to be given the legalities provided by the state/federal governments, including insurance and legal rights? Then the church could keep marriage to one man and one woman… without infringing on the rights of others.
I’m not arguing one way or another. I really am struggling with these questions. I will never change my stance that two consenting adults who are legally able to make their own decisions should be able to be with whomever they want and get the same legal protections as anyone else. But I’m trying to figure out why we focus on certain things in the Bible and emphasize certain things.
I would think that if the church is against homosexuality and wants to make it (or keep it) so that it is against the law… shouldn’t they also be pushing for adultery and pre-marital sex to also be the law?
Does anyone have any way to clear this up for me? You will not change my views on being a Christian. I am one. You will not also change my views on gay rights. But what I’m looking for… is explanations. I’m horribly confused. Other than the above, I really do love the church.