“Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled: for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.”
Hebrews 13:4
Yesterday US President
Barack Obama finally stumbled out of the same-sex marriage closet he has been
hiding in the last four years. This is hardly a surprise to those of us who
studied candidate Obama’s position on the issue four years ago. To be blunt,
Obama has been blowing pink smoke since his inauguration.
In the last two years
Obama has indicated on more than one occasion that his views on the matter were
“evolving”. Well, yesterday, in a grand moment of punctuated equilibrium, Obama
transmutated and came of age! Of course he has tacitly endorsed the gay agenda,
to include gay marriage, all along, as his actions well attest. By repealing
the military’s policy of Don’t Ask, Don’t
Tell , and openly refusing to enforce the federal Defense of Marriage Act
(DOMA), indicate he has been waving the rainbow flag all along. Apparently, President
Obama believes he is imperiously above enforcing the laws of the land while
simultaneously immune from the law of God.
Obama claims he came to
this “new” found enlightenment gradually, subsequent to discussions with
family, friends, advisors, and gay Americans. In other words, his emergence
from the closet is predicated upon an amalgam of both human opinion and
experience, as if these serve as the gold standard for truth and morality.
It goes without saying
that Obama invoked the Bible, crediting the “Golden Rule” (It is too bad he
doesn’t invoke the Golden Rule where partial birth abortion is concerned!) for
his transvalued take on marriage. But given Obama’s anemic and tortured use of
Scripture on the subject (see excerpt from my book below), it is hard believe
he really cares what the Bible says about anything, let alone same-sex
marriage.
On the contrary, I am of
the opinion the catalyst for Obama’s sudden about face, on this most
acrimonious issue, has more to do with a combination of experience and political expedience, which
is as subjective as it is relativistic. He is in serious trouble politically
with his reelection bid imperiled. Some democratic-party faithful have been
withholding campaign donations from Obama to force his exit from same-sex
sequestration. Just coincidence?
Only November 6th,
2012 will reveal whether Obama, and his advisers, just committed political
suicide, or not. That 31 states have overwhelmingly voted in favor of marriage
amendments to their respective state constitutions, doesn’t bode well for an
Obama second term. But I won’t hold my breath just yet, for as the saying goes,
a day is a long time in politics.
In light of Obama’s
renaissance moment, it must be asked if Obama’s view on marriage will continue
to “evolve” into other “equitable” relational combinations, like polyamory
(group marriage) and pedogamy (intergenerational marriage)? After all, if
experience and expedience are the guideposts for morality and truth, why stop
short at gay marriage?
*(Note: The portion
below is from my book Same-Sex Marriage:
Is It Really The Same? It was written nearly four years ago detailing, then
candidate, Obama’s position of the same-sex issue. Also, see my post below on
Jesus’ view of homosexuality to refute the absurd nonsense that Jesus promoted
homosexuality via the Golden Rule):
9. What is Barack Obama’s (US President Elect) position on gay rights and
same-sex marriage?
Given that during the US
presidential campaign Barack Obama claimed he did not fully support same-sex
marriage, what are we to make of his position on the issue? In short, his
position on gay rights and SSM is as radical and far reaching as his views on
abortion, which amount to infanticide[i]. The
best way to answer the question is to use the words of Obama himself from a
statement he issued to the gay community:
“Equality is a moral imperative. That’s why throughout my career, I
have fought to eliminate discrimination against LGBT Americans. In Illinois, I
co-sponsored a fully inclusive bill that prohibited discrimination on the basis
of both sexual orientation and gender identity, extending protection to the
workplace, housing, and places of public accommodation. In the U.S. Senate, I
have co-sponsored bills that would equalize tax treatment for same-sex couples
and provide benefits to domestic partners of federal employees. And as
president, I will place the weight of my administration behind the enactment of
the Matthew Shepard Act to outlaw hate crimes and
a fully inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act to outlaw workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”[ii](Emphasis added)
a fully inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act to outlaw workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”[ii](Emphasis added)
The
first sentence says it all, “Equality is a moral imperative.” It is basically
all downhill from there. Though he may have tried to distance himself from gay
marriage during the campaign, it is evident that was only because it was
politically expedient for Obama to do so. He has no moral convictions or
ethical squabbles with homosexuality or its related issues. Essentially, he will try and promote comprehensive gay
rights legislation that will irrevocably empower this tiny minority to enslave
the many who deem homosexuality morally abhorrent.
Once
this wide ranging list of gay friendly legislation is signed into law,
Bible-believing Christians will be in the cross hairs of the ACLU (American
Civil Liberties Union) and gay rights crusaders, who will tar and brand all who
disagree as “right-wing bigots” and “homophobes”. We will see the professed
“tolerance”, gay rights sympathizers preach quickly, morph into tyranny as
these cultural transvaluationists begin applying hate crime laws and hate
speech legislation to Christians and conservative congregations.
President
elect Obama has also called for the complete repeal of the federal version of
the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Obama is on record saying, “…I believe we
should get rid of that statute altogether. Federal law should not discriminate
in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does.
I have also called for us to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell …”[iii]
The
federal DOMA was enacted by a Republican led congress in 1996 to regulate
matters related to tax status, immigration, and social security as it relates
to SSM. As the basis of the regulation, the DOMA defines marriage as between a
man and a woman. In addition, this DOMA gives all 50 states the autonomy to
reject the same-sex marriages from other states that performed them.[iv]
By
completely repealing the DOMA, Obama will jeopardize every state DOMA in the
country—most states have their own individual DOMAs. This will probably require
one state with a DOMA to recognize another state’s same-sex marriage. For
example, a state like Texas would be forced to then recognize the same-sex
marriages of those who were married in the state of Massachusetts, should such
couples relocate to Texas.
To
further substantiate his extreme position on gay rights, it should not be
surprising Obama uses Scripture to advance his gay rights panacea. In his book The Audacity of Hope, Obama maintains
that he is not “willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure
line in Romans [about homosexual practice] to be more defining of Christianity
than the Sermon on the Mount.”[v]
Only
a thorough-going postmodern trained attorney (Harvard Law School) could make
such an outrageous assertion regarding of the following passage:
Romans 1:24 “Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity,
that their bodies might be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth
of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator,
who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them over to degrading
passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is
unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of
the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men
committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of
their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer,
God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not
proper”.
There is absolutely
nothing obtuse or opaque about Romans’ graphic portrayal of homosexuality. One
must intentionally determine not to understand what Paul is saying, in order to
be so dismissive of what is as plain as the nose on your face.
Obama’s ignorance
regarding both the Romans account and the Sermon of the Mount is glaring given
the subsequent considerations from the sermon:
·
Where in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) is
homosexuality ever promoted or approved even tacitly? Further, where in the
Sermon on the Mount is Romans 1:24-28 ever contravened or questioned?
·
In Matthew 5:17-18 Jesus said He did not come to abolish
the Law, but to fulfill it. Jesus upheld even the lesser laws like those
related to tithing, so it is unreasonable to think that Jesus abrogated the
sexual ethics contained in OT Law.
·
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus used six antitheses to
expand the dictates and demands of the Law by applying it to matters of the
heart (mind, will, and emotions). The sum of these antitheses was to target the
thoughts and motives of any would be follower of Christ. Two of the six
antithesis relate directly to marriage and sexuality:
Matthew 5:27-28: "You have heard
that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery'; but I say to you, that everyone who looks on a
woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.”
Matthew 5:31-32: "And it was said, 'Whoever sends his wife away, let
him give her a certificate of divorce'; but I say to you that everyone who
divorces his wife, except for the cause of unchastity, makes her commit
adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”
These two passages cover the essential terrain of the
seventh and tenth commandments (adultery and covetousness)[vi]. If
anything, Jesus is actually increasing the demands of sexual laws to include
one’s thought life. Not only is it a sin to adulterate, fornicate, commit
incest, to rape, and to perform homosexual acts; it is a sin to even ponder
such things in one’s thoughts.
·
In these two antitheses, Jesus emphasizes the distinct
priority of male-female union only afforded in heterosexual marriage. He never
intimates any other arrangement is acceptable. Jesus also underscores that the
nature of the heterosexual union is to be both a lifelong commitment and
monogamous.
·
It is true that the sermon addresses other themes like
loving your enemies (5:43-48) and hypocritically judging others for small
matters when much larger issues loom large in our own life (7:1-6). As Robert
Gagnon concludes, “However, these themes provide no more support for homosexual
unions than they do for loving, committed polyamorous or polygamous unions or
for adult-consensual incestuous unions, both of which Jesus obviously opposed.”[vii]
·
Given that Obama uses the Sermon on the Mount as support
for his “moral imperative” for gay rights legislation, it is interesting he
says nothing of the end of that sermon where Jesus sternly warned,
Matthew 7:15, 22-23: "Beware of the false prophets,
who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves … Not
everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who
is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not
prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name
perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice
lawlessness.'”(Emphasis Added)
God’s will regarding sexual ethics is straightforward and
obvious throughout Scripture. Jesus considers violation of the Genesis 2:22-24
mandate for marriage (Matthew 19:4-6; Mark 10:2-11) lawlessness, which includes homosexuality and SSM. Just
because Barack Obama passes legislation favoring homosexuality, does not make
it any less lawless in God’s eyes.In the end, Obama’s “moral imperative”
amounts to moral impudence from Christ’s perspective.
Indeed, President Elect Obama needs much prayer regarding
both his views on gay rights, and his eclipsed understanding of what Jesus
really thinks about this issue.
[i] Barack
Obama, as Illinois
state senator, voted against the Born Free Act, which would allow babies born
alive during abortion the chance to have access to medical care.
[ii] See http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/alexokrent/gGggJS, Accessed 11 November 2008.
[iii] Ibid, p.2.
[iv] The US
Constitution has a “Full Faith and Credit Clause” which mandates that states
must recognize the “acts, records, and judicial proceedings” of other states.
In the case of the federal DOMA, this clause is suspended and not in force.
[v] Online: http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=27532
, Accessed 11 November 2008.
[vi] The Ten
Commandments serve as paradigmatic law, which means these laws are more
extensively explained and expounded in the rest of the law, where specific
applications are given. For example, Leviticus 18 is an application of the both
the seventh and tenth commands.
[vii] Robert
Gagnon, “Barack Obama’s Disturbing Misreading of the Sermon on the Mount as
Support for Homosexual Sex,” Online at: www.robgagnon.net
, Accessed 11 November 2008, p.3. Also see Robert Gagnon, “Obama’s Coming War
on Historic Christianity over Homosexual Practice and Abortion,” Online at: www.robgagnon.net , Accessed 11 November
2008.
