STR place has a great post and video testimony here.
Tag Archives: Homosexuality
Same-Sex Marriage, Public Opinion, and the “Seinfeld Effect”
“Americans appear to accept same-sex marriage more than they really do, perhaps because they believe it to be more widely accepted than it really is.”
These are the opening words of an article in which the authors expound on the “Seinfeld Effect”
“In the 1993 Seinfeld episode “The Outing,” a female reporter mistakes Jerry Seinfeld and his friend George Costanza for homosexual partners. When her misunderstanding dawns on them, they vehemently deny that they are gay, yet constantly punctuate their denials with the rote expression “not that there’s anything wrong with that!” As heterosexual men, Jerry and George are both keen to be taken for what they are, but there’s more to it than that: they can’t entirely inhibit revulsion at the idea that others think they are homosexual, and perhaps revulsion at the very idea of being homosexual.
Their repeated exclamation “not that there’s anything wrong with that!”—invariably uttered with far less passion than their denials—is a socially conditioned response. Somewhere they have learned that it is unacceptable to cast aspersions on homosexuality, and that the politically correct response is to say (as Jerry does at one point, albeit rather too excitedly), “People’s personal sexual preferences are nobody’s business but their own!” Jerry and George struggle to suppress what they really think with what they have been taught to think is “enlightened opinion.” Call it the Seinfeld Effect.
Seventeen years later, the advocates of same-sex marriage are making “people’s personal sexual preferences” everybody’s business, and are counting on the Seinfeld Effect to suppress what most Americans really think about same-sex marriage. They are waging their struggle, after all, not just in courts of law but also in the court of public opinion, and the advocates’ success with certain judges will not be secure unless most Americans are with them. So how are they doing?
A CNN/Gallup poll released on August 11 found that 52% of respondents supported and only 46% opposed same-sex marriage—a result widely trumpeted as the first time a majority expressed this view. But in an important finding, a North Carolina firm called Public Policy Polling discovered that its method of automated polling or “robo-calls,” in which respondents interact on their phone with a computer-controlled interview system rather than a human interviewer, yields significantly higher numbers of Americans who oppose same-sex marriage.” (More….)
Prop. 8 ruling ignores precedent, evidence and common sense
Hugh Hewitt highlighted this article from the Washington Post on prop 8 and it is worth a read:
Even some who support same-sex marriage worry that, in striking down California’s voter-approved proposition defining marriage as between one man and one woman, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker went too far. They are right — and not the only ones who should be concerned. Walker’s ruling is indefensible as a matter of law wholly apart from its result.
By refusing to acknowledge binding Supreme Court precedent, substantial evidence produced at trial that was contrary to the holding and plain common sense, the ruling exhibits none of the requirements of a traditional decision. This opinion is arbitrary and capricious, and its alarming legal methodology and overtly policy-driven tenor are too extreme to stand.
Regardless of whether one agrees with the result, structurally sound opinions always confront binding legal precedent. Walker’s is a clear exception because the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken on whether a state’s refusal to authorize same-sex marriage violates the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th Amendment. In 1972, Baker v. Nelson, a case over whether Minnesota violated the Constitution by issuing marriage licenses only to opposite-sex couples, was unanimously thrown out on the merits, for lack of a substantial federal question. The Supreme Court’s action establishes a binding precedent in favor of Proposition 8. But Judge Walker’s ruling doesn’t mention Baker, much less attempt to distinguish it or accept its findings…. (More)
Christian responses to Judge overturning Calif. gay marriage ban (Prop 8) as unconstitutional
For the AP story, click here. For Washington Post, click here.
Dr. Bill Maier (PsyD) offers an important reminder: “When we’re discussing the same-sex marriage, it’s critical that we clearly articulate what this debate is really about and what it’s not about:
- It’s not about whether gays and lesbians are nice people or good citizens. Some are, some aren’t, just like heterosexuals.
- It’s not about whether gays and lesbians can form loving relationships–of course they can. (We might argue that they are not experiencing love as God intended for it to be experienced, bu they certainly share feelings of affection.)
- It’s not about whether gays and lesbians can be loving parents. There are nurturing, caring gay couples raising children all across this country. (Whether they are providing their children with what they truly need is another matter…)
- It’s not about whether gays and lesbians should be treated with respect and dignity. Every member of the human race should be treated with respect and dignity.
Here’s What I believe this debate is about:
- It’s about whether we have the right to redefine marriage so it is elastic enough to include any grouping of adults.
- It’s about whether we acknowledge the wonderful human diversity expressed in two sexes, male and female.
- It’s about whether men and women complement and complete each other in their differences.
- It’s about whether mothers and fathers play unique and irreplaceable roles in the lives of their children, precisely because of their sex.
- It’s about whether there are compelling societal reasons to define marriage as one thing and not as another.”
For more, see:
The Complete Christian Guide to Understanding Homosexuality: A Biblical and Compassionate Response to Same-Sex Attraction
Here are a couple of responses: (from Ruth Institute):
Dr Jennifer Roback Morse, Foundress and President of the Ruth Institute, lamented the overturn of Proposition 8 by openly gay Judge Vaughn Walker, who is widely reported to be gay. “Judge Walker’s reasoning today in overturning Prop 8 illustrates that he does not understand the essential public purpose of marriage, which is to attach mothers and fathers to their children and to one another. He replaces this public purpose with private purposes of adults’ feelings and desires.”
Dr. Morse continued: “by the time Judge Walker and his ilk are finished, there will be nothing left of marriage but a government registry of friendships. The essential problem of attaching children to the mothers and fathers will be pushed aside, and will have to be solved some other way.”The Ruth Institute has been active in the efforts to educate the public about the essential public purpose of marriage, the social benefits of natural marriage, and the harms to society from redefining marriage. Dr Morse, former economics professor at Yale and George Mason Universities, produced a four hour lecture series, called “Same Sex Marriage Affects Everyone.” To quote just a few of the many arguments she made in that series: Redefining marriage as the union of any two persons will undermine the biological basis for parenthood, which amounts to a redefinition of parenthood. Same sex Marriage will marginalize men from the family. Redefining marriage will increase the power of the state over civil society, including religious bodies.
“Surely the voters have the right to be consulted before making such a major change in public policy,” Dr. Morse said today. “Judge Walker has no right to disparage the voters of California the way he does in this opinion. “His opinion amounts to this sloppy syllogism. ‘First, I don’t understand that there are any arguments in favor of natural marriage. Therefore, there are no arguments in favor of natural marriage. Conclusion: unlawful animus against gays and lesbians is the only possible reason 7 million voters supported natural marriage.’ Dr. Morse stated: “The fact that he doesn’t understand the arguments, doesn’t mean there aren’t any. And it is truly unprecedented for a judge to decide that some ideas cannot even be contested in public debate. The Ruth Institute will continue to educate the public about the significant role of natural marriage in society, and the harms from redefining marriage.”
We need to keep three aspects of this discussion in the right context. Make sure you are answering the right questions with the appropriate answers. 1) What does the Bible teach about homosexuality? 2) How can Christians with compassion and love engage those who struggle with same-sex attraction? 3) Why marriage between one man and one woman for a lifetime should be protected and endorsed for the good of the society as a whole (Christians are for marriage; not against gays).
There will certainly be more to come in the days ahead and there is much at stake in this debate. What is needed now, is clear thinking and winsome engagement. May the church respond well.
Christianity, Homosexuality, and the Bible – what we believe and how to say it
With the recent announcement that Christian music artist Jennifer Knapp is gay and the ongoing public discussion about marriage (see prop 8), Christianity, the Bible, and Homosexuality are in the news. But I think there is some confusion about which question people need to answer in which order.
Christians, generally speaking, have not done well articulating their position on homosexuality or loving those who struggle with same-sex attraction. I would like to suggest that we need to separate questions into 3 distinct categories. This will help us better put forth a view that is both truthful and compassionate–and is genuinely helpful (notice I did not necessarily say popular). There will be links to helpful books and articles to explore them further.
Question 1: How should Christians (and local churches) think about, interact with, and respond to those who struggle with same-sex attraction?
I think every Christian needs to read the following article by Alan Shlemon HOMOSEXUALITY: KNOW THE TRUTH AND SPEAK IT WITH COMPASSION, Click here. It is well worth your time!
Here is a helpful book:
Question 2: What does the actually teach about Homosexual behavior? (and is this culturally outdated?)
Leviticus 18 and Romans 1 from Stand to Reason.
Two helpful books:
Question 3: How should Christians think about the same-sex marriage debate? (on what basis should we make our case in the public square?)
The Ruth Institute (for arguments for traditional marriage for the public good)