Posted by Charity on February 9th, 2007

The other day, Andrew Sullivan had a post about Giuliani’s bid for President.

Giuliani is running as a secular, modern conservative to run what has become a religious, theological party. His fate is going to be a fascinating insight into what American conservatism can now mean. And the Christianists are not going to put up with secular, inclusive, reality-based conservatism.

I think that the label the Republican Party has earned in recent years,that it is trying to impose a theocracy, comes down to one issue: gay marriage.

Personally, I wish this issue would just go away, but it won’t. So, instead, I decided that I should try and make some sense out of it.

I’ve been listening to a series entitled, “House or Home?” on the Christian radio series “Living on the Edge” that I download from iTunes every day. (This series is a must hear for any Christian family that wants biblical principles to guide them toward having a closer family.)

The first part in the series talks about marriage as a holy covenant. It was mostly about viewing marriage as a covenant for life, not something you will try, and see if it works out.

It goes on to talk about the things that we do that take away from the sacredness of this perfect union that God designed for a man and a woman. Those things include divorce, living together before marriage, sex before marriage, sex outside marriage, and homosexual acts.

It is clear if you are a Bible believing Christian, that God created man and woman to have different attributes. The union of a man and woman is meant to yield a partnership where each benefits the other with the unique gifts that God created them with, and results in a fuller life for each of them.

I believe this. I believe that God created man and woman to be in a lifetime partnership.

I also believe, as it applies to government, that people have the right to live their lives as they choose.

Not everyone is a Christian. Not every Christian believes the Bible. Not every Christian who believes the Bible, believes that practicing homosexuality is wrong.

I’m not even sure that it is wrong, per se, but I do believe that the divine design that God created was for a man and a woman to become united as one flesh.

But this isn’t about what I think is right or wrong. That is the point of this post. Our laws are not about what one group thinks is the morally right or wrong way to live your life.

Surely divorce, sex before marriage, and sex outside of the marriage are just as violating to the holy marriage covenant. Yet none of those things are illegal. Why should same-sex marriage be any different?

I have yet to hear a good answer to that question.

Divorce among Christians is actually slightly higher than among non-Christians. If you ask me, what is destroying the American family is not same-sex relationships, it’s divorce.

What about the children?

I think that God designed the family to have a mother and a father because they each bring a unique relationship to the child’s life. I believe that this is the ideal situation for a child to be raised in.

Again, this is not about what I think is ideal. My own family isn’t ideal. My older two children are not my husband’s biological children.

More importantly, there are countless same-sex couples that are wonderful parents. And, let’s not forget that there are countless heterosexual couples that are awful parents.

Do we really want the government to dictate how we should raise our children? Don’t forget, there are people who claim that raising your child with religion is abusive.

It’s funny, I’ve been thinking about this post for a couple of days, but haven’t gotten around to doing it. Now it looks like same-sex marriage is going to be a big issue in the Vermont legislature.

This is the issue that could destroy the Republican Party – and I don’t mean because swing voters are not opposed to gay marriage. It is the thing that could destroy the Republican Party from within. There is already a split forming between those who want the party to stand for liberty and those who want the part to stand for Christian values.

Once the GOP starts championing the governing of our personal lives, it ceases to be the party of freedom and smaller government. We have seen that happen over the last six years, as more spending and less freedom has replaced less spending and more freedom.

As a Republican, I do not want to see the party fractured beyond repair.

As a Christian, I do not want to see our freedom eroded. Living in a society that is largely hostile to our beliefs, we need our freedom.

8 Responses to “Christianity, Same-Sex Marriage, and the Republican Party”

  1. As you know, I vehemently disagree with the God stuff. but that’s not why I’m posting…

    You surprised the hell out of me here, Charity. Maybe you do get that ‘freedom’ isn’t just about the right to make as much money as you can.

    Ultimately, it is about freedom, not having a ‘party of Christian values’, which, in many ways stand in opposition to true freedom. Religion and politics do make a nasty mix, don’t they?

    Good post…and that evangelical in the Dawkins video that they talk about at WorldNut Daily is none other than Ted Haggard.. you should see the video, it’s pretty creepy.

  2. I agree.

    This is a good and thoughful post. And it is certainly refreshing to hear a Christian who remembers that Jesus said “My Kingdom is not of this World.”

    I hope that many voices like yours can be heard in your party.

  3. Thanks for stopping by Alex and for the kind comments.

  4. “Maybe you do get that ‘freedom’ isn’t just about the right to make as much money as you can.”

    I do get it, JD. Now when are you going to get that ‘freedom’ isn’t just about the right to have sex with whomever you want? ;-)
    (That was a joke)

    Thanks for the comments.

  5. I have to say, Charity, if more fundies were like you in this regard, the country would be a better place, and we wouldn’t be the laughingstock of the world… although…

    “Living in a society that is largely hostile to our beliefs… “ Puh-leeeze. Christians are a huge majority in this country, playing the victim on this is a joke, right? Now, if you were talking about atheists in that sentence, you’d most certainly correct.

  6. “as a liberal.. I would love to see the Republican party fractured beyond repair…

    ‘as an atheist and freethinker, I’d like to see them stay the hell out of government’

    Just had to paraphrase you there…kiddin’

  7. “Christians are a huge majority in this country, playing the victim on this is a joke, right?”

    I’m not playing the victim. That statement is not about some War on Christmas BS. When there is a politically active force that would like to consider my lifestyle child abuse, I am going to call that hostile. I’m also going to remain on guard.

    I am all for the law staying out of people’s personal lives, but I also expect the law to stay out of religion.

    How far would you be willing to go to protect my First Amendment right to practice my religion?

  8. To the extent that you were not harming another person of imposing your belief system against your will, all the way. Seriously. AS much as I don’t like religion, i could peacefully coexist with all stripes of religious people if they kept it a personal matter. And that means understanding that if nobody is telling them what they can/can’t watch or read or sleep with, they can’t do it either.