I have written a hundred updates in my head, and scrapped them over and over. I want to be heard as a yell into the cacophonous void. I only have so many times to speak my piece, I want it to matter. So first I'll talk political than spiritual.
In the least surprising turn of events imaginable, the Supreme Court deemed the ban of same-sex marriages on the state level unconstitutional. The majority opinion was sloppy, the dissenting opinions caustic and divided, and the justifications used were messy and easily open to further interpretation. I think the better route would have been Amendment 9, Amendment 14, Amendment 1, and a dash of Nullification Crisis related materials added for good measure. With that being said, I think it was the right decision to make. There is not a scenario I can think of where marginalizing a particular minority segment of the population with the approval of the religious establishment was moral or beneficial at any point within history for any nation I can think of. Here, the government takes the life (money is time is life-segments, see movie In Time for an awesome elaboration on this idea) and some liberties of all of it's citizens, of any orientation, ethnicity, culture, age. Consequently, it is obligated to attend to each citizen's well-being to the best of it's ability by virtue of social contract. This is the fundamental conception our political system was founded upon.
Marriage is not a universally Christian institution. Atheists get married,as well as Hindus, Muslims, and Native Americans. Not all of them get married in a church. And no portion of any current judicial rulings or enacted legislation is mandating churches perform marriages. Personally, I think that having the church and state comingled like that is a perversion. Like it or not, our current system incentivizes marriage: power of attorney, tax rates, inheritance matters, insurance availability and pricing, custody rights, to name a few. As it stands, with the current political and legal system we have, it has every secular reason to extend these privileges. And I cannot fault that. I think it is a reasonable and appropriate course of action. Again, equal protection, and equal application of the law across all states for all individuals is a legal tradition here, and a reality that cannot be denied. I find it chilling to think that I might live in a nation where a current popular group of undesirables could be marignalized with public approval, I think Bonhoeffer had some wise words on why that might be a problem. And since my group has historically been a couple bad days from religious genocide consistently, any buffer against receiving equally terrible treatment from any opposing groups should they achieve dominance is a good idea.
WIth all that being said, "this is why we can't have nice things" still applies. It is a shame that the default answer has been to run to the government to cooerce desired behavior from this or that group, it is a shame that my sexuality, my family composition, and my ideology have become public domain and the government can call dibs on defining and regulating it. I am uncomfortable with the government granting rights and protections. I am very uncomfortable with that idea. However, it would be absurd to have political rules that precluded all sides from equally accessing particular strategies. And it is a damn shame the church has spent resources and placed hope in the courts to coerce preferred behavior and comfortable social atmosphere instead of using those resources in a way that tends to both bodily and spiritual needs. Instead thus far the majority has enjoyed privilege without mercy or empathy, so now it takes the coercive strike of government to mandate change. And sadly the end result may be better. I hope that you, anonymous reader, will join me in feeling embarrassed. At this point the best option is to apply all protections equally. In this area, as in so many others, a kinder more moral approach would have left this topic unregulated and unreinforced by government-granted privileges. But, the time to fuss about that was much earlier, not when a group of people that aren't me are catching a break.
Spiritually, I am saddened by the myopia, anger, backwards priorities, and good old American heresy that keeps popping up across my feed. As a Christian, by definition I try to mimic Someone who did things much differently than we do. I see lots of reconquista rhetoric across my feed, and yet I follow Someone who told Pontius Pilate He was not founding an earthly kingdom but a spiritual one. I follow someone who stated repeatedly that he came to save not to judge, and yet I see constant invocations of doom and rage that judgment was not rendered appropriately. I follow someone who spent his ministry with the gentiles, bastards, and sinners, and yet a class of "unclean" individuals are being railed against. We have no human enemies here, each person is a mission field: we should be giving water, food, shelter, and hope, not trying to crush or defeat anyone. And instead I see time/money/energy dedicated to maintaining a social status quo that died 60 years ago. "the gays" "the liberals" and "the democrats" and "the judges" are the enemy, which runs contrary to the ideal endgame: Jesus being planted in their way, love and meaning awaiting. It is stunning in a way i can't politely or succintly describe to see these dour posts about our nation being smitted for allowing "the gays" to get married. That level of historical illiteracy is shameful. I highly doubt that is going to be what does it, given what else this nation has perpetrated in it's history. But again, prosperity gospel and reconquista rhetoric should have no place, it is heresy and a perversion.
Assuming, for the sake of the argument, that God does in fact not approve of homosexual behavior, there are a wealth of passages about any number of evils we tolerate, in infinitely greater quantities. Which suggests something maybe the conservative church should take notice of. My dad put it best, "we like people that sin like us." Which, sadly, I think is the best understanding of what I see in my feed. We aren't here to win a kingdom, There is nothing more shameful and twisted than rocking runes representing "in this sign conquer" and sending souls to Hell in the name of Heaven. If the church has the goal of taking back the culture, it has lost. Because that's a game we're not supposed to play. We aren't supposed to be in charge here. We aren't supposed to have life cater to us, we fail our mission when we are busy attempting to be the social default instead of engaging real people with real needs to share real hope and meaning. We shouldn't be angry that an absurd legal strategy that serves to marginalize a small group of people, and tarnishes our witness along the way, gets overturned. Shame on us, the church body portions that do, for backing those laws. We are to be known as His disciples by how we love our family, our neighbor, and our world. And this weekend I didn't see that.
You don't get into heaven by being straight. Or being married. Or single. Or gay. It doesn't matter whether we are jew, gentile, male, female. There is one hope, one blood that paid for all sin, one love. There is no performance scale where we have to do or be X to attain favor. There is no change we must accomplish to be saved. But there is meaning, identity, and hope to be found in this faith big enough to sustain a person. Which is more than marriage can offer (as a married person, I have discovered this.) Frankly, I don't agree with the interpretation and application of "those three" passages, that every pastor I've ever sat under has interpreted and applied the same way. I find them rather contentious, and have not settled on where I stand on them. But I do know me and my family heartily disagree with the conservative church's hysteria over this weekend, and want no part in shaming or raging against men and women who daily experience daily struggles I can't begin to comprehend.
So, if you wish to celebrate, celebrate. Laugh, laugh. Congratulations LGBT community, I support this win. I don't believe there is anything in my faith's source text that makes you unloveable or requires you to be marginalized. I don't see anywhere in my faith's source text that requires me to be a part of an insane culture war, or tarnish my Savior's reputation by seeking power, influence, or wealth. I found meaning and identity in something bigger than marriage, but perhaps that is the next discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment