Now I suppose I should reiterate a few things. 1) I do believe that homosexuality is listed as a sin in the Bible not just in the Old Testament but the New as well. 2) I also think homosexuality is no better or worse a sin than adultery, fornication or any other sexual sin that it listed by the Bible. 3) I also believe that this country was not founded as a Christian nation but as a nation in which religious and secular are to be carefully and deliberately divided for the sake of religious freedom. 4) As a libertarian I also don’t believe that the government should be involved in any way shape or form with marriage.
All that said, I am having problems with just about everyone in this debate. The ones that want to point the hypocrisy of people going after Kim Davis for this and letting a lot of other government officials go. Honestly the hypocrisy angle could be played all day but I don’t thin that gets back to the main issue of this situation. The people who want to point out Kim’s hypocrisy are just as wrong-headed as those who want to point out the government’s hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy is not why I think Kim is wrong. Yes, I think she is wrong. My issue with her is that she is using her power to deny people marriage and this just shows how silly government involvement in marriage is in the first place. The point is that we do not need Kim or the Supreme Court to define marriage and who can be married. The fact that we have gone along with this is proof as to how sheep like the American people can be about such things. Marriage is not something that Kim or Courts should control. Marriage is a right and licensing is the government taking your right and then selling it back to you. I personally think that the position of County Clerk should cease to exist. Its Kim’s arrogance in that she feels that she has the right to deny or allow something that really is not hers to give or take away. Marriage is a given right and no court or clerk really has the right to stop it.
I know some people think licensing of marriage is necessary for certain factors such as custody issue and divorce issues but in truth all that would be needed is a ceremony with a contract that needs to be worked out between the parties involved and filed with a lawyer. Such terms as divorce, custody and other issues of separation could be handled this way. Heck, lawyers could have boiler plate contracts just for marriage and that would end it.
Others stress then that people could get married in any relationship they wish and I would say, yeah…and… The question is who should control this right – the state or the people to whom it belongs in the first place – my answer, the people. Sorry in order to maintain religious freedom regarding marriage we have to have this because the current system allows for the government to come in and define who can and cannot get married. Because they are the ones who define marriage then they can also dictate terms as to what marriages are allowed and which are not and who can perform them. If they were completely out of marriage then they could not do this and our freedom as Christians to define Christian marriage would not be in jeopardy like it is now. Sure would we have all other kinds out there, but as long as we play the ‘who is going to control the definition of marriage’ game with the government we will lose and the better defense would be that government should have no role in marriage in the first place.