Essential Reading For Those Opposed to the Five Lawyers' Redefinition of "Marriage"

Unless you've been on a desert island with no wi-fi you know that in July five lawyers representing a portion of our nation (not me, e.g.) changed the definition of "marriage" to include persons of the same sex. Incredible! Because - the real issue was not about "rights" but about a definition. Given the 5-lawyers' redefinition, then of course same-sex marriages should be allowed. But one has to redefine "marriage" to logically conclude that. We also learned that from now on we won't need to vote on anything, but just follow whatever various polls say. That's part of the fruit of utilitarianism, right? 

For all of us who are troubled by this Ryan Anderson's new book is essential reading - Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom. I picked it up today and have begun - it's going to be clarifying.

Anderson begins:

"With its decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court of the United States has brought the sexual revolution to its apex— a redefinition of our civilization’s primordial institution, cutting its link to procreation and declaring sex differences meaningless. The court has usurped the authority of the people, working through the democratic process, to define marriage. And it has shut down debate just as we were starting to hear new voices— gay people who agree that children need their mother and their father, and children of same-sex couples who wish they knew both their mom and dad." (Kindle Locations 81-85)

And then there is the false analogy from racial prejudice and interracial marriage. Marriage-redefiners promote the idea that "anyone who opposes Obergefell is an irrational bigot— the moral and legal equivalent of a racist." (Kindle Locations 177-178) This would include many blacks as racists since, e.g., the position of the African Methodist Episcopal Church affirms the biblical definition of marriage as between a male and a female.  (See here, and here.)

Anderson writes:

"As I explain in this book, great thinkers throughout human history— and from every political community until about the year 2000— thought it reasonable and right to view marriage as the union of husband and wife. Indeed, this view of marriage has been nearly a human universal. It has been shared by the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim traditions; by ancient Greek and Roman thinkers untouched by the influence of these religions; and by Enlightenment philosophers. It is affirmed by canon law as well as common and civil law. 

Bans on interracial marriage, by contrast, were part of an insidious system of racial subordination and exploitation that denied the equality and dignity of all human beings and forcibly segregated citizens based on race. When these interracial marriage bans first arose in the American colonies, they were inconsistent not only with the common law of England but with the customs of every previous culture throughout human history. 

As for the Bible, while it doesn’t present marriage as having anything to do with race, it insists that marriage has everything to do with sexual complementarity. From the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation, the Bible is replete with spousal imagery and the language of husband and wife. One activist Supreme Court ruling cannot overthrow the truth about marriage that is expressed in faith and reason and universal human experience." (Kindle Locations 178-189) 

Just as with the aftermath of the abortion travesty-decision (which gave permission to kill persons), this debate is far from over.