The LGBT ("P" soon to be added for polygamy) agenda is in full steam nowadays and if you didn't know that I might suggest pull your head out of the ground. Before we go further lets get something out of the way. I am a conservative Christian who believes in the inerrancy of the Bible, and that Jesus really did rise from the grave and really is sitting at the right hand of God the Father ruling history. I say this just so the more liberal readers can go ahead and get their "bigot" cards out ahead of time before I actually offend someone. That being said, it should come to now surprise to you that I believe homosexuality to be a grievous sin against God that needs to be repented of and forsaken. Now that I've had a chance to make it ever so clear where I stand I would like to move on to address a particular topic in the whole "marriage equality" discussion.

One of the things that has really perplexed me about the whole argument is those that believe so called same sex "marriage" is a "private issue between two people" (or maybe three or four or five or...you get the idea). This is essentially a libertarian argument that hinges on the idea of personal freedoms. The logic (fallacious as it is) states that marriage is between two people (for now...) and if you are not one of those two people then you have absolutely no say in what they do. Furthermore, you will often hear someone argue that the so called same sex "marriage" debate is over what two people are doing in private and therefore should not be publicly meddled in.

This reasoning is illogical because it takes no account whatsoever as to what marriage/wedding of two people actually is!

Think about the last wedding you went to or saw portrayed in a movie. Notice something about how UNPRIVATE that event was. In fact, a marriage between two people is not just UNPRIVATE it is innately PUBLIC. A couple who is getting married does so publicly, before God & before the congregation. That is exactly why the minister states: "If anyone has any reason why these two should not be wed speak now or forever hold you peace." This is done because marriage is PUBLIC and communal.

Several months ago Douglas Wilson summed up the argument quite nicely on his blog. Wilson states:

The same sex marriage crusade has nothing whatever to do with what people can do sexually in private, and it has everything to do with what you will be allowed to say about it in public. We are not talking about whether private homosexual behavior will be penalized, but whether public opposition to homosexual behavior will be penalized.

— Douglas Wilson

The whole impetus of the LGBT (& "P" soon) agenda is about what someone can say about it publicly. If it was solely about what two guys do under the sheets at night then I don't think they would be making such a fuss about it. The reason the LGBT (& "P" soon) agenda, and Libertarians who want to be socially acceptable, argue that it is a private matter is because they want to fool the populous into thinking it won't affect them.

This argumentation is a bill of goods. The so called same sex "marriage" argument is not an argument for marriage equality but marriage destruction. Marriage is a social contract of sorts that happens in communities. The destruction of true communities built around the Church has seen the slow erosion of the institution of marriage. Ultimately the destruction of marriage coincides with the destruction of the community. As communal understanding gives way to individualistic impulses we see a correlation in the decay of the individual and the community. That necessarily gives way to a completely false understanding of marriage. This false understanding bases everything at the desires of two individuals. When this becomes our mode of evaluation then we are not two far off from the edge of the cliff. In fact we might say that we are currently in free fall.

But one thing is for sure. Something that cannot go on indefinitely won't. We will reach a point where the air beneath us runs out and we will hit the ground.  I really do agree with Wilson here. This issue is all about the public and not the private. This is why I disagree with the libertarian argument that this doesn't affect me "personally". Everything is connected. Modernistic individualism is a lie. Let's not believe what is not true for the sake of saving face.

Food for thought.

Michael