The (Dis)Respect for Marriage Act
As soon as the Dobbs case was handed down from the Supreme Court, activists began their work on legislation to enshrine the expansive LGBTQ definition of marriage. Their fear was, based on Justice Thomas’s dissent, that SCOTUS might eventually overturn the decision that enshrined same sex marriage as law (Obergefell).
The “Respect for Marriage Act” was the result. It passed the Senate last Wednesday. On the surface, and if you just listen to talking heads, all it does is “respect” each State’s definition of marriage. It does far more than that.
Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal organization dedicated to religious liberty issues, writes:
The so-called Respect for Marriage Act is a misnamed bill that expands not only what marriage means, but also who can be sued for disagreeing with the new meaning of marriage.
While proponents of the bill claim that it simply codifies the 2015 Obergefell decision, in reality it is an intentional attack on the religious freedom of millions of Americans with sincerely held beliefs about marriage.
And in case you think this Act might do something new for LGBTQ marriage, ADF adds:
The truth is the Respect for Marriage Act does nothing to change the status of same-sex marriage or the benefits afforded to same-sex couples following Obergefell. It does much, however, to endanger religious freedom.
This Act is designed to do one thing – make religious and traditional organizations comply.
One of the transparent arguments that was popular when Obergefell was passed was that they were only asking for one thing – for two people of the same sex who love each other to marry – and for nothing else. It was an obvious falsehood at the time, and it didn’t take long for that to work itself out both in popular culture and federal law.
Chalk another one up for, “when the levy breaks”. [The CT take on this is shortsighted.]
Churches, Gender Identity, and Participation in Culture
The theologian Carl Trueman writes in the Wall Street Journal:
The website of Allendale United Methodist Church in St. Petersburg, Fla., says the congregation “is committed to anti-racism and radical solidarity with folx on the margins.” Last month the church featured a “special guest” for the children’s sermon at weekly worship. Isaac Simmons, who uses the stage name “Ms. Penny Cost,” donned a high-slit sequin dress, denounced capitalism and praised liberation theology. In a follow-up post after the event, Rev. Andy Oliver, the church’s pastor, wrote: “Ms. Penny Cost was an angel in heels appearing to shepherds in the fields on the night shift, telling them that Good News had arrived on their doorstep. What was once the margins is the center.”
For any set of reasons, the Western culture has decided that the core of an individual’s identity can be reduced to sexual preference and the intersection of oppression. We are all sex and victimhood now. And a growing swath of the “church” is whole-heartedly agreeing. The Woke version of sexuality and identity are at direct odds with Christian orthodoxy, however, so churches and Christians are facing a significant choice. Either we accept it, following Allendale UMC’s example, or we stick with Christian orthodoxy and reality. But sticking with orthodoxy means we make a noticeable split from the rest of culture.
Are we ready to pay the price that comes with that split? Trueman, who is a wise observer of these things, believes the cost is exclusion from our common culture. He makes this argument in a couple places as well as in the WSJ article:
The message of these events is clear: The terms of belonging to civil society have changed. In the early 20th century, debates about Christian orthodoxy took place within an America where the basic elements of Christian moral teaching were generally accepted. Today, such thinking stands at odds with the politics of identity that dominates elite institutions. That sets the scene for external culture war and internal civil war.
Sticking with Christian orthodoxy is no longer just a matter of an internal debate. Because, as Trueman notes, this issue is a big deal both inside and outside the church. This means an internal stance is automatically one that resounds in the wider public square.
I consider this one of the issues about which time will prove an unflinching judge. The complicit Lutheran church in 1930’s Germany is still judged as weak. The progressive church and denomination which today chose destructive ideologies over truth will be judged in the same way. (Will the silent denomination be judged the same way?) It is easy for them now. It will be bad for them later.
Stay Silent, or Speak and Suffer the Consequences
I am a proud native of Colorado, the most beautiful state (a little biased, I know). So it pains me to watch my state slip further and further into it’s own brand of tyranny. Once, talking with a lawyer about starting a 501c3 for an organization for which I chair the board, he told me he would rather work with the IRS than the state of Colorado. That’s not a compliment.
If you know about “Jack the Baker” who would not bake a cake for a same sex marriage, you may not know that the state of Colorado has organized such events since then, targeting businesses run by Christians. Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) provides the legal cover to make individuals support LGBTQ ideology or face the consequences. As reported in Public Discourse:
In fact, CADA causes far more harm than it claims to prevent, as in the case of conscientious objector Lorie Smith. CADA reads:
It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, . . . directly or indirectly: to refuse . . . the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation; . . . [or to] publish . . . communications . . . [saying] that an individual’s patronage or presence at a place of public accommodation is unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, or undesirable; because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.
And further, talking about the owner of a website design company targeted by CADA:
However, the state of Colorado, enforcing CADA, has given Smith only two options: be silent or violate her conscience. If she expresses her faith message about marriage on her business website, she will be found in violation of the law and fined.
A Book I’m Excited About
Over the last two years I have filled my bookshelves with works by mid-20th century dissidents and anti-communist political philosophers. I have read a lot about the psychology of “mass formation” and learned a lot about the ideological trail from Marx to the Woke worldview (it is a straight line).
I recently got a little worn with it all, so I picked up Herman Bavinck’s “The Wonderful Works of God”. Bavinck’s work is a systematic theology written just over 100 years ago and was recently republished under this name. I wanted a sound, beautiful theology to use as a kind of personal devotional. I have not been disappointed.
The book is magnificent, and I’m excited to slowly chew my way through the rest of it.