Same sex marriage is now the law of the land. Homosexuals are dancing in the streets and evangelicals are looking towards the clouds—surely this ruling will usher in the second coming. Neither jubilation nor doom seems to be the correct response.
The goal of the homosexual community has long been geared towards gaining acceptance—five Supreme Court justices gave them that acknowledgement with the stroke of a pen. However, five liberal justices do not necessary represent the heartbeat of America. A generation of people will have to die before homosexuality gains widespread acceptance as a normal lifestyle which those of the persuasion so badly want. Personally, I have known and currently know homosexuals—other than their attraction to those of the same sex—I find them no different than anyone else. They have the same emotions, goals, and ambitions—in other words—they are human just like the rest of us.
Because I accept homosexuals as they are does not mean I necessarily approve of their lifestyle—acceptance and approval are two entirely different things. I grew up during a time period when homosexuality was an unspeakable sin. No one who had homosexual feelings could express those desires publically. Obviously that has changed and now we see gay pride parades, gender altering surgical procedures, and folks who want to self-identify their sexuality as opposed to what is on their birth certificate. Many of my generation have difficulty embracing this new exploitation of the homosexual lifestyle—older folks, for the most part, actually moderate their marital affection in public—feeling there is a time and place for everything. This used to be called modest and self-respect—words which no longer seem to have much meaning.
Actually same sex marriage is not exactly what it appears. Yes, two men or two women are exchanging wedding vows—but, one of the two males must adapt the feminine role within the relationship. And with two females—one of the women will take on the masculine role in the relationship. Even though the relationships are same sex—the physical and emotional parts of the interactions typically mimic male-female relationships. This is a necessity forced by nature and the anatomical differences between males and females.
One of the side effects of same sex marriage may be the erosion of religious freedoms in America. Already, people who have expressed disapproval or disgust regarding the SCOTUS decision have been labeled as religious bigots. I don’t happen to agree with the court’s decision, but it has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Having grown up on a farm, I came to understand nature early in life—if bulls didn’t have a sexual affinity for heifers—there would be no T bone steaks or cream to go in one’s coffee. Nature has its own plan and it has worked for thousands—if not millions of years. Only when man, in his limited wisdom, decides to redefine nature do the wheels begin to wobble. I guess that makes me a nature bigot.
Do I think men should not love other men sexually? It matters little what I may think—I accept the fact that some do—my position on lesbian relations mirror my thoughts regarding men. Personally I don’t care what adults do in the privacy of their homes, motels, or whatever—just keep it out of my face—whether it is homosexual or heterosexual.
Whether one can refuse to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding, or take pictures, or cater the event is just the starting point of the unintended consequences of the SCOTUS ruling. Now will military chaplains, ministers, priests, and rabbis be required to perform same sex weddings? Can sisters, brothers, or same sex first cousins legally marry—they can’t propagate a child—so why not! Homosexuals no doubt think they won big—the legal profession is actually the big winner and will make a fortune litigating all manner of issues that were unthinkable just a few short years ago.
Perhaps I will spend more time looking at the clouds too.
Have a good week. Bill Shuey is a freelance writer from North Carolina.
This decision has everything to do with religion. The homosexual agenda was not to have civil unions and equal rights. It was to erode the definition of Biblical marriage: one man, one woman and God.
This is a war between Judeo/Christian religions vs the state. Our founding fathers warned us that a Republic can only stand if the people are moral.
Same sex marriage is now “the law of the land”? NOT SO!
1. The supremacy clause of the federal Constitution (Art. VI, clause 2) says that only the Constitution, laws made pursuant to the Constitution, and Treaties made under the authority of the United States are the supreme law of the land. Supreme Court “opinions” are NOT part of that supreme law.
2. Supreme court opinions are not “law” -- they are OPINIONS on the cases [rightly or wrongly] before the Court. The ONLY ONLY ONLY federal law in this land is: The Constitution, Laws made by Congress which are permitted by the Constitution, and Treaties made by the President and the Senate which are permitted by the Constitution.
Supreme Court opinions are NOT LAW.
But the statists have managed to convince most Americans that the supreme court is THE highest law making body in the entire Country. If people would only read our federal Constitution and use their heads, they would have seen through this absurd claim 100 years ago.