Growing Pains
The very first time marriage is “mentioned” in the Old Testament is when God looks at Adam and Eve and tells them, “Be fruitful, and multiply.” I say “mentioned” because it is an interpretive phrase that can mean lots of things. I mean, at the risk of being blasphemous, it could be just a command to have sex. However, if there are people who want to interpret it as a clear reference to marriage, then so be it. I am not a Biblical Scholar, who am I to argue.
The actual word “marriage” is used a countless number of times but most examples are like, “It is not our custom here to give the younger daughter in marriage before the older one.” (that’s Laban in Genesis 19:26). Or one of my personal favorites, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her.” (Deuteronomy 22:16), which I’m sure, still happens every single day.
Bear with me here, I’m getting to the point, I promise.
We see the word “wife” for the first time in Genesis 2:25 where it says, “Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.” Good for them. They shouldn’t feel any shame. Unless of course, well, never mind. And wife (or wives) is also found a countless number of times. As in "And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah (Genesis 4:19).
Ok, so where am I going with all this? Right here: I looked up “marriage”, “wife”, “wives” and all kinds of variations of those words in the Bible and every single time the wife was a woman and the husband was a man. But nowhere, nowhere, did I find that it couldn’t be two men or two women. NOWHERE.
Now, as I said, I am no Biblical Scholar. If I’ve missed it, then please point it out to me. I’ll gladly retract what I’ve said, and maybe most of what I’m going to say (I say most because I’m not actually sure of what might come next). And for heaven’s sake, please don’t point out some roundabout, esoteric, indirect reference. I can be a pretty black and white kind of guy, I don’t relish in the grey. If the Bible says that Gays can’t marry, show me where. It may say a man can’t marry a man, or a woman can’t marry a woman, but unless it specifically mentions Gays, it doesn’t count.
Which brings me to Mike Seaver, or as he’s known now, Kirk Cameron. He was everybody’s teen idol in the eighties, even mine (a little). He has used his celebrity for good, there is no doubt of that. He and his wife run something called the Firefly Foundation which gives terminally ill kids a chance to spend a week or so at Camp Firefly with their parents. Very noble. Very inspiring. But now, in an effort to shatter all of our dreams and fantasies, he has taken the role of, well, the village-fucking-idiot.
Prosecution Exhibit A, Friday March 2, 2012, “Piers Morgan Tonight”, CNN: “Marriage is almost as old as dirt, and it was defined in the Garden of Eden between Adam and Eve. One man, one woman for life till death do you part. So I would never attempt to redefine marriage. And I don’t think anyone else should either.”
REALLY???? C’mon Mike! I went over this already. Genesis does not “define” marriage. Yes, it refers to Eve as Adam’s wife but is that a definition? Hell, the Bible makes that reference three chapters after the be fruitful and multiply command! (Apparently, even God knew that the sex was going to dry up once the “ I do’s” were uttered). But seriously, I ask again, show me the definition. Show me the one man, one woman part. Show me the till death do you part line. What chapter? What verse. The earliest version of “till death do you part” came with the advent of the Catholic Church. I may be wrong, but was that not quite a while after Adam and Eve? Oh, and the “old as dirt” part? I’m gonna give him that one, even if dirt is probably BILLIONS of years old.
And, although I am a believer in the Bible (but not as good a Jew as I should be), I should probably point out that there are many things in there that, well, are pretty outlandish. Incest for one. You really want me to believe that Noah, and his sons, and their wives, were able to repopulate the earth without it? How about bigamy? How many in the Bible had multiple wives (see previously referenced Genesis chapter on Lamech). Animal sacrifice? Why isn’t PETA boycotting the Bible?
So let’s not pick and choose what we want to carry forward to serve our own agendas. Let’s be reasonable and look at the whole picture before we say, “It’s in the Bible so it has to be so.”
Prosecution Exhibit B, Same date, same show, same channel: In reference to homosexuality Mike says, “I think that it’s unnatural. I think it’s detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many foundations of civilization.”
Now we are all entitled to our own opinions, that’s what makes America great. No matter how fucking idiotic what we have to say is, we have the right to say it. I’m sure there are people who think my very own opinion, written in this very space, is fucking idiotic. But I can say what I want and they can feel however they want about it. So for the sake of time (and my own sanity) I’m going to leave the “unnatural” and “detrimental” comments alone. I’d much rather go after the “ultimately destructive to so many foundations of civilization”.
Of course, Mike doesn’t get specific. Which foundations are in danger? How are they in danger? In what way, specifically, will they be destroyed? I mean, our economy is in the shitter, there isn’t a day when there isn’t some natural disaster somewhere, innocent people are being slaughtered all over the world, and Rush is still on the air. I also have to worry about solar storms, terrorism, whether or not someone is going to bring a gun to my kid’s school and why Ron Paul is still in the race. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Is Mike saying that what I really have to worry about is homosexuality? That the civilization we have all come to know and love is going to be decimated by men who want to marry men and women who want to marry women? Do I really have to answer that??
Maybe, just maybe, Mike has done history a great favor. Because there is tiny, microscopic chance that he might be right, he may have solved some of the biggest mysteries of all time. The Mayan Civilization declined precipitously around 900 AD and, by 1500 AD was gone altogether. I’ve got news for Mike, homosexuality is “as old as dirt.” Might that have been the contributing factor to the Mayan demise?
I jest of course. No way homosexuality was responsible for the disappearance of Mayan Civilization. We all know it’s that stupid calendar thing.
I have a lot of friends who are gay. Some are in committed relationships, some not. I respect them for the people they are, for ideals they have and for the friends they are. None of which has anything to do with the fact that they are gay. As my friends, I believe they should be able to live the lives that they choose. To do what makes them happy; what makes them feel whole. It is what I want for me and my family, why wouldn’t I want that for them? I will not pass judgment on them for who they love, only be happy for them that they have someone to love. And I want them to be able to have the same rights and privileges that every other married couple have. Every civilization grows at its own pace and ours is no different. Growth means change and acceptance of that change. And as difficult as growth may be, it is necessary. Mike needs to understand that. In our society, our civilization, it is the only civilized way to go.
The actual word “marriage” is used a countless number of times but most examples are like, “It is not our custom here to give the younger daughter in marriage before the older one.” (that’s Laban in Genesis 19:26). Or one of my personal favorites, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her.” (Deuteronomy 22:16), which I’m sure, still happens every single day.
Bear with me here, I’m getting to the point, I promise.
We see the word “wife” for the first time in Genesis 2:25 where it says, “Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.” Good for them. They shouldn’t feel any shame. Unless of course, well, never mind. And wife (or wives) is also found a countless number of times. As in "And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah (Genesis 4:19).
Ok, so where am I going with all this? Right here: I looked up “marriage”, “wife”, “wives” and all kinds of variations of those words in the Bible and every single time the wife was a woman and the husband was a man. But nowhere, nowhere, did I find that it couldn’t be two men or two women. NOWHERE.
Now, as I said, I am no Biblical Scholar. If I’ve missed it, then please point it out to me. I’ll gladly retract what I’ve said, and maybe most of what I’m going to say (I say most because I’m not actually sure of what might come next). And for heaven’s sake, please don’t point out some roundabout, esoteric, indirect reference. I can be a pretty black and white kind of guy, I don’t relish in the grey. If the Bible says that Gays can’t marry, show me where. It may say a man can’t marry a man, or a woman can’t marry a woman, but unless it specifically mentions Gays, it doesn’t count.
Which brings me to Mike Seaver, or as he’s known now, Kirk Cameron. He was everybody’s teen idol in the eighties, even mine (a little). He has used his celebrity for good, there is no doubt of that. He and his wife run something called the Firefly Foundation which gives terminally ill kids a chance to spend a week or so at Camp Firefly with their parents. Very noble. Very inspiring. But now, in an effort to shatter all of our dreams and fantasies, he has taken the role of, well, the village-fucking-idiot.
Prosecution Exhibit A, Friday March 2, 2012, “Piers Morgan Tonight”, CNN: “Marriage is almost as old as dirt, and it was defined in the Garden of Eden between Adam and Eve. One man, one woman for life till death do you part. So I would never attempt to redefine marriage. And I don’t think anyone else should either.”
REALLY???? C’mon Mike! I went over this already. Genesis does not “define” marriage. Yes, it refers to Eve as Adam’s wife but is that a definition? Hell, the Bible makes that reference three chapters after the be fruitful and multiply command! (Apparently, even God knew that the sex was going to dry up once the “ I do’s” were uttered). But seriously, I ask again, show me the definition. Show me the one man, one woman part. Show me the till death do you part line. What chapter? What verse. The earliest version of “till death do you part” came with the advent of the Catholic Church. I may be wrong, but was that not quite a while after Adam and Eve? Oh, and the “old as dirt” part? I’m gonna give him that one, even if dirt is probably BILLIONS of years old.
And, although I am a believer in the Bible (but not as good a Jew as I should be), I should probably point out that there are many things in there that, well, are pretty outlandish. Incest for one. You really want me to believe that Noah, and his sons, and their wives, were able to repopulate the earth without it? How about bigamy? How many in the Bible had multiple wives (see previously referenced Genesis chapter on Lamech). Animal sacrifice? Why isn’t PETA boycotting the Bible?
So let’s not pick and choose what we want to carry forward to serve our own agendas. Let’s be reasonable and look at the whole picture before we say, “It’s in the Bible so it has to be so.”
Prosecution Exhibit B, Same date, same show, same channel: In reference to homosexuality Mike says, “I think that it’s unnatural. I think it’s detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many foundations of civilization.”
Now we are all entitled to our own opinions, that’s what makes America great. No matter how fucking idiotic what we have to say is, we have the right to say it. I’m sure there are people who think my very own opinion, written in this very space, is fucking idiotic. But I can say what I want and they can feel however they want about it. So for the sake of time (and my own sanity) I’m going to leave the “unnatural” and “detrimental” comments alone. I’d much rather go after the “ultimately destructive to so many foundations of civilization”.
Of course, Mike doesn’t get specific. Which foundations are in danger? How are they in danger? In what way, specifically, will they be destroyed? I mean, our economy is in the shitter, there isn’t a day when there isn’t some natural disaster somewhere, innocent people are being slaughtered all over the world, and Rush is still on the air. I also have to worry about solar storms, terrorism, whether or not someone is going to bring a gun to my kid’s school and why Ron Paul is still in the race. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Is Mike saying that what I really have to worry about is homosexuality? That the civilization we have all come to know and love is going to be decimated by men who want to marry men and women who want to marry women? Do I really have to answer that??
Maybe, just maybe, Mike has done history a great favor. Because there is tiny, microscopic chance that he might be right, he may have solved some of the biggest mysteries of all time. The Mayan Civilization declined precipitously around 900 AD and, by 1500 AD was gone altogether. I’ve got news for Mike, homosexuality is “as old as dirt.” Might that have been the contributing factor to the Mayan demise?
I jest of course. No way homosexuality was responsible for the disappearance of Mayan Civilization. We all know it’s that stupid calendar thing.
I have a lot of friends who are gay. Some are in committed relationships, some not. I respect them for the people they are, for ideals they have and for the friends they are. None of which has anything to do with the fact that they are gay. As my friends, I believe they should be able to live the lives that they choose. To do what makes them happy; what makes them feel whole. It is what I want for me and my family, why wouldn’t I want that for them? I will not pass judgment on them for who they love, only be happy for them that they have someone to love. And I want them to be able to have the same rights and privileges that every other married couple have. Every civilization grows at its own pace and ours is no different. Growth means change and acceptance of that change. And as difficult as growth may be, it is necessary. Mike needs to understand that. In our society, our civilization, it is the only civilized way to go.
Comments
I love you (in a strictly platonic way), but the reason there is no same sex marriage is that homosexuality is prohibited by the Bible entirely. Here are two passages that are not so subtle on this point:
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. (NKJ, Leviticus 18:22)
If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. (NKJ, Leviticus 20:13)
I'm not advocating that, of course, and am glad you allow for the fact that your disagreement with the conclusions drawn by every civilization from every corner of the planet that made it into modernity may be wrong. Also consider that in earlier times, people had advantages in understanding human nature due to the smaller size of their communities. Did you know people better when you went to camp, or from the images people portray in front of cameras on TV?
I respect and admire your good intentions, and of course Cameron is wrong in his facts.
But interestingly enough, you seem to condemn open bigamy. That strikes me as wallowing in political correctness. For someone so stridently in support of same sex marriage to be so stridently opposed to the most common mammalian arrangement and clearly the most natural lets be honest - a man with multiple women - seems a tad unthoughtful.
Of course, arguments can be made against polygamy, most notably that it leaves a lot of guys out in the cold, who then turn around and understandably get violent. Homosexuality almost certainly leads to the same place. Nature gives us roughly equal numbers of men women, but there is no guarantee that equal numbers of men and women are interested in same sex relationships. In the United States today, among people under around 45, the tilt among same sex arrangements is overwhelmingly girl on girl - leaving a lot of guys out in the cold, especially in a country where prostitution is a crime just about everywhere and without nearby legal outlets such as in Europe, or in China where the laws are completely unenforced.
So, time will tell. IMO, same sex marriage takes the gloss out of same sex relationships on the whole, and so I expect there will be fewer same sex relationships in a society with same sex marriage and sanction. If there aren't, don't be so sure that the future will be more civilized - every society from every corner of the earth didn't come to the same conclusion by coincidence.
I don't begrudge anyone their happiness, though its clear to me that same sex marriage is all about getting a stamp of approval - there are few benefits that aren't available without the state stamp of approval that don't depend on someone else suddenly having to foot the bill - and the justification for benefits such as SS survivors benefits are based on traditional marriage where the wife doesn't work outside the home because she is raising kids. Anyway ...we all know there are some gays staying home and raising kids and straight people marrying at age 60, but that's besides the point - the latter are a better argument to kick off survivors benefits than to add more people to it.
Anyway, my two cents...
Not every society came to the same conclusion. Gay people are slightly less common and people don't accept what isn't the norm. That's the way shit is. Also, http://www.progressivepuppy.com/the_progressive_puppy/2009/12/gay-rights-and-penalties-with-global-map.html America's only as good as China and Russia according to that map. And, take a strong look at South Africa. A country that was all about keeping shit black and white. When I grew up in school I was told that South Africa is a terrible place with lots of racism, bullying and bull shit. Take a look at it now. They're right at the bottom of a continent that's full of rape, murder and STD's and they're fighting against all of it.
Also, at first I thought you were on the right track by yelling at him for condemning open bigamy, but then you put a foot in your mouth. If you're going to call someone out on being close-minded have a fuckin' open mind. A woman with multiple men is way more natural.. Obviously.
Anyways, you should probably start arguing about Marijuana. You'll probably get a few more facts right and Dirk won't have to think of a way to make it seem like his horse is bigger.