Came across this blog:
http://littlecog.com/2008/11/12/an-opinion-on-gay-marriage-rights/ 
I don’t usually engage in “this” conversation, but the following line struck me as truth:
No state or government entity should issue “marriage” licenses at all. Instead, marriages for none, civil unions for all. It creates a system of equal protection under the law.
If religious organizations wish to protect their views on the sanctity of marriage, they may do so outside the realm of Government. If gay couples wish to marry and create a family, they may also do this outside the realm of Government. Governments are not moral entities…they are simply not equipped to tell us right from wrong. — little cog
“Governments are not moral entities …” The recently published book by Shane Claibourn, Jesus for President, reminds us that salvation isn’t found in any agent of the “empire,” a.k.a. government. Government doesn’t have a soul — it doesn’t have a moral obligation at all. The government, in theory, is an agent for chaos control … an attempt to keep us civilized.
To some, morality cannot be separated from civility. They expect the government to reflect biblical standards because somewhere they got the misinformation that this country was established as a “Christian” nation. They’ve accepted regurgitated informatin from their church leaders who have spent their lives trying to synthesis religion and government for their own uses. If they’d look back at history, they would see America was established as a place for people to be free — whether their freedom agreed with personal belief and conviction or not.
Earlier in his post, “little cog” quoted the 14th amendment of our constitution:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
That is the constitution, speaking on civil rights. We equate it with race … but it doesn’t specifically state that anywhere in the constitution.
Maybe it’s time we become educated on the arguments we make. When we quote things, or we assume things, and somehow superimpose our assumptions into the realm of reality. According to me, against my personal beliefs and convictions, there are things that are “right” or “wrong.” According to the Bible, and people who have comitted themselves to this belief system, there are definite rights and wrongs. But can we really transpose faith tenets on an institution that doesn’t have the same goals as that belief system?
Get angry, disagree. But spend some time thinking about what the constitution really, truly says before you start using it as a weapon to uphold your beliefs. The government was never created to favor one faith over another. The government, by design, has little to do with faith at all. The more I learn, the more they become mutually exclusive for me, despite what our religious institutions insist.
Just something to think about.
Little Cog Said:
on November 13, 2008 at 5:17 am
Wow.
You rock, I’m glad you liked the post. I most thoroughly enjoyed yours.
-theLittleCog
Andy O Said:
on November 13, 2008 at 12:39 pm
WOW. That really IS interesting…
Nice post. That got my brain working harder than most I’ve been reading lately.
societyvs Said:
on November 21, 2008 at 9:59 pm
I watched a show on PBS one night concerning state and religion – called ‘wall of seperation’…about this very issue.
In fact, many of the earlier pioneers of America were religious people and saw no problem with their faith and politics being mixed – however – they were also aware they could not be exclusivistic in a democracy. It is important to note America is a democracy and all aspects of your country need to speak their peace – from religious to gay to non-religious.
I think the country is their ‘for the people’ – and if something gets passed that irks Christians – that’s too bad – in a democracy that’s how things work. But I do believe they have a right to participate in the democracy – faith or not.
Do i think the constitution is religous…actually…and oddly enough it is in a way – like if one considers the laws of Torah religious. The laws exist to govern society and the people within it – for the safety and benefit of all involved – the constitution does this as a foundational document for America. It does contain the words ‘God’ in it and many precepts of Judeo-Christian ideology.
I, oddly enough, think the seperation of church and state is ‘good’ – this should not be a problem for Christians (since they do not run the constitution) – the constitution is for everyone. If it happens to work on behalf of Christian values so be it – if it goes counter to them – so be it also…that’s a democracy. I do lean to seperation on some levels – since I don’t want everyone being required to be ‘Christian by law’ – that’s an abuse of the freedom we are supposed to experience in Christ.
Butterflygirl Said:
on December 7, 2008 at 8:58 am
“No state or government entity should issue “marriage” licenses at all. Instead, marriages for none, civil unions for all. It creates a system of equal protection under the law.
If religious organizations wish to protect their views on the sanctity of marriage, they may do so outside the realm of Government. If gay couples wish to marry and create a family, they may also do this outside the realm of Government. Governments are not moral entities…they are simply not equipped to tell us right from wrong. — little cog”
I like it.
I can’t sleep…reading blogs…this was good.