I am disappointed in North Carolina. I had hoped Amendment One wouldn't pass. But, I also strongly believe in States Rights and the people of a state being able to decide what kind of state they want. That said, I'm surprised they don't see how their vote is yet another black eye for Christianity.
They succeeded in proving the Religious Right are hypocrites. They thump their Bibles and talk about how much they love God yet they continually fail to exhibit the qualities of the God they expound on so vehemently. They aren't saying "believe in God". They are saying "believe in God the way we say you have to believe in God".
They have very selective memories about what is in the Bible. I mean let's take a look at some of the acceptable forms of marriage found in the Bible.
1. The one man/one woman: this is where the Religious Right apparently stops reading the Bible. Of course, I find it odd that while they hold tight to the whole "marriage means one man/one woman" thought but they have no problems justifying women elders even though the Bible defines an elder as "a man with one wife".
2. The man/brother's widow: let's keep in mind if the widow had not born a son she had no choice in this. She had to marry her brother-in-law.
3. The man/wives/concubines: Abraham had two concubines in addition to his wife, Jacob had one, and Solomon, that oh so wise man, had around 300!
4. The man/wife/wife's property: Her slaves became his property which he could have sex with all he wanted. I'm sure we all remember the story where Sarah gave her slave Hagar to her husband Abram so he could father a child.
5. The man/wife/wife/wife/...etc: You get the picture. Polygamy was definitely alive and well in the Bible, at least for Jacob, David, Gideon and Solomon to name a few.
6. The male soldier/prisoner of war: Moses decreed all Midianites were to be slaughtered except the virgin girls. They were taken as spoils of war.
And my personal favourite (not really)...
7. The rapist/victim: By law, if a virgin was raped she had to marry her rapist. Ahhh, now there's a marriage made in Heaven.
An interesting fact; no where in the Bible does God condemn any of these marriage types.
The Religious Right want to preserve the "sanctity of marriage" (not sure what that means) but I am curious which 'sanctity' they mean. Does it mean the ones found in the Bible as listed above? Could it mean marriage in the Middle Ages where women were traded like cattle? Maybe it means the ones from the 1700's that were often arranged. How about the 1800's when men could marry 11 year olds. There's also the marriages of the 1950's when it was illegal for whites to marry blacks or hispanics. Let's not forget the 1960's when you could be excommunicated for marrying outside your faith. It's only been about 130 years that men started losing their right to beat and imprison their wives. It's only been in the last 40 years or so that the concept of equality in a marriage has been established. Marital rape didn't become a crime in all states until 1993.
My point is the arguments for saving "traditional" marriage are a farce, a smoke screen. Reality is what marriage is has been evolving and changing since the first two people said "I do". There is not, and never has been such a thing as "traditional" marriage.
No comments:
Post a Comment