For all my Republican friends ...

Just in case you thought I was "going all left-ish" on you, here's a rant for you. :-)

You might have heard of the debate raging in California over the controversial legislation known as "Proposition 8", which was passed on Election Day. Essentially, the proposition modifies the California state constitution to legally define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, thus excluding homosexual marriages. The legislation passed as a result of a California State Supreme Court decision that overturned a previously voted ban on gay marriage. Proposition 8 was designed to modify the constitution so that such a reversal could not succeed again.

I applaud the legislation because it finally honors the wishes of the people. They have already spoken once in favor of a traditional view of marriage, but the judicial branch took that away. This time, at least, the people have spoken again, and I am glad that at least for right now, the people's wishes are honored above those in the higher levels of the courts.

But now there are several protests in the streets, and have been since last Tuesday. I guess my first question is ... what exactly are you protesting? You had a chance to vote down the proposition, but the people at large clearly supported it. It would seem as though they are protesting democracy itself. But more than that, I am saddened by this article I read today on the issue. In it, an Episcopalian pastor, Rev. Ed Bacon, denounces the Christian community that supported "this act of bigotry." He was referring specifically to Saddleback Church (where Rick Warren currently serves as pastor), who was outspoken in their support of the proposition. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (I feel ridiculous typing that) has also said that the war is not over, and it will go back to the courts. He comments, "It's the same as in the 1948 case when blacks and whites were not allowed to marry. This falls into the same category."

This irks me a bit. First of all, Arnold, no it's not. This has no parallel whatsoever to the 1948 case, because this has NOTHING to do with race. It is a matter of a sexual preference, which cannot and should not be compared to ethnicity. Even if you contend that one can be born as a homosexual (which is hardly a foregone conclusion), homosexuality is by nature an active choice. You don't choose what color your skin is; you chose whom you have sex with, or more appropriately, whom you marry. It's also been suggested that alcoholism can be hereditary, yet if an alcoholic gets wasted and try to drive home, he will be and should be locked up, regardless of his genes. Now drunkenness and homosexuality are different in nature. I understand that, but both involve active choices, not a passive designation. The issue of sexual orientation cannot be judged along the same lines as one's race no more than one's preference for blondes or brunettes can be.

But that's really besides the point. My main issue with gay marriage is that it violates what is by nature a religious institution. Marriage has its origin in Scripture (or at the very least in religious communities), and has always been defined as a union by one man and one woman. A union that falls outside of those parameters may be called many things, but "marriage" is not one of them. If you want to call it a "civil union" and give them equal benefits as a married couple, I'm ok with that. I don't think a homosexual couple should be discriminated against by our government when it comes to tax benefits and legal standing. But that's a civil issue ... not a religious one.

As for you, Rev. Bacon, what is truly "disappointing" is that an ordained minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ would fail to recognize a community standing up for a moral mandate commanded by Scripture. If you don't agree that Scripture teaches a traditional view of marriage, then that's fine. We can agree to disagree, though I'd love to hear your exegetical reasons. But to accuse someone of bigotry for taking a moral stand that they clearly believe is taught in Scripture is despicable. These aren't like the people who tried to justify the inferiority of African-Americans using obscure passages ripped out of context. These are people following very clear teachings in both the Old and New Testaments. So, with all due respect, Reverend, shame on you.

Man, I need to stop following politics ... this can't be good for my blood pressure.