By now you've heard the news. Men can marry men and women can marry women in California. Their liberal court went against the vote of the people and said so.
I've conducted more than a few marriage ceremonies over the last 36 years. My first couple was married in June 1972. I could legally perform the marriage ceremony; but since I was still 20 at the time, I could not marry on my own without my parent's signature. It's true. I had to wait a couple of years before I got Jackie.
Well, back to California.
If a couple of gays marry, which one is the wife? If a couple of lesbians marry, which one is the husband?
On the tax form, which one is the head of the household, while the other is a spouse?
We'll have to throw away our jokes about hen-pecked husbands. Now we have hen-pecked hens. I wonder who is doing the pecking.
I wonder which of the guys is the protector and which is the respecter? If both are husbands, here are two married guys without wives.
The sad thing is there'll be some confused, little guys who are fatherless or motherless; instead they'll have two confused moms who have no husband or two confused dads who have no wife.
How do you explain parents who by choice of lifestyle cannot parent? How do explain to innocent children how biological mommy committed adultery with some male outside the family, so that biological mommy and the other mommy could have a child? How do you explain that this was not because the sexual functions of both mommies didn't work but because they don't work together to produce a child and cannot ever produce one, so they had to bring in a third party?
The whole thought that marriage needs redefinition into a perverted confusion is itself offensive to common sense. Homosexual behavior is not married, godly love; it's selfish sex. Those confused, liberal judges didn't redefine marriage; they approved legal lust. Homosexual unions may be legalized by justices, but God regards such as the unfortunate result of a person who fails to acknowledge Him and so given over to perverted lusts (Romans 1:24ff.).
Now some will regard this as mean-spirited and think I'm unChristian for saying what God said. But let's think about who is mean-spirited. Is it kind to rob children of mothers or fathers in order to satisfy selfish sex? Is it kind to rear a child in confusion? Is it kind to so press your agenda (to demand acceptance for what is immoral) that you influence other people's children with your immoral example? Is it kind for one justice to tell the whole state their morality is not as important as some supposed right to pervert marriage and nature? Is it kind to tear the fabric of society apart by confusion and perversion?
Christian kindness does not sit silent in the presence of sin. To do so would be to let the sinner go to hell unwarned. That is the really unkind thing to do. Kindness is to speak out lovingly against the error, even in the face of opposition. Kindness is the calling to repentance, not in the tolerating of gross sin.
The really unChristian person is the one who so hates the light that he must strike out at anyone who calls sin evil. Herodias called for John's head out of hatred. All he did was tell the truth. Who was unChristian?
Well, who's the wife in that gay marriage, and who's the husband in that lesbian union? And you call that a marriage?