“PROPOSITION 8 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE IT DENIES PLAINTIFFS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT WITHOUT A LEGITIMATE (MUCH LESS COMPELLING)REASON”
This was the decision passed down by a federal judge in California on August 4th, 2010 which overturned the voters’ decision to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. When the law was initially passed there was a huge backlash from many social liberals, most prominently coming from Hollywood. Back in December of ’08 I wrote a response to the tone that was coming back at those who believe in a biblical view of marriage. (see Part 1, Part 2)
As I read the judges official statement I was surprised to find how easily I followed his logic (though I disagree with him on fundamental things that led to that logic). Setting aside the fact that he clearly has a bias that should have caused him to recuse himself from the decision, I felt like he has a good eye for how society has changed and he put together a very well written document. I would summarize the judges conclusion in this way:
Society has evolved in such a way that the only real difference between the genders is anatomical. Because marriage has never required the two parties to have the capacity of bearing children, and there is no difference in the roles of men and women in marriage, there is no reason to exclude homosexual couples from partaking in the institution.Some quotes:
“The evidence shows that the movement of marriage away from a gendered institution and toward an institution free from state-mandated gender roles reflects an evolution in the understanding of gender rather than a change in marriage.” (113)
“As states moved to recognize the equality of the sexes, they eliminated laws and practices… that had made gender a proxy for a spouse’s role within a marriage.” (112)
“Rather, the exclusion exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage. That time has passed.” (113)
“Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage; marriage under law is a union of equals.”
(113)
It is easy to see what the judge describes in American society. Complimentarianism- the view that men and women are equal in value but different in role- is now considered sexism. Egalitarianism- the view that men and women are equal in all things save some anatomical differences- is the norm. The latter view has infiltrated all areas of society including the home and the church.
In light of this let’s take a quick look at some important biblical truths:
Men and women are of equal worth in the sight of God.
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” (Gen. 1:27)
Men and women differ in their roles…
…in marriage
“…the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit everything to their husbands.” (Eph. 5:23-24)
…in the church
“Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior…and so train the young women to love their husbands and children…and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. Likewise, urge the younger men to be self-controlled…so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us.” (Titus 2:3-8)
The attempt by men and women to reverse or exaggerate their roles is a result of the Fall.
“To the woman he said…Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." (Gen. 3:16)
Next week I will discuss the role of divorce in this attempt to redefine marriage.
Grace and Peace,
Stephen
No comments:
Post a Comment