John Holzmann has an interesting post concerning the “gay marriage” controversy; he says he’s clueless as to what all the fuss is about. I think he’s just anti-HSLDA and Mike Farris, and since he received an alarmist letter (or email) from HSLDA alerting him to the danger that “gay marriage” poses to the homeschooling community, Mr. Holzmann is taking the opportunity to express his disdain for such fundraising tactics. However, he raises some valid points. If marriage and family have already been devalued by the prevalence of heterosexuals living together without benefit of marriage ceremony, why should we care if the government gives a couple of men or women a piece of paper so that they can wave it around and pretend to be married? Actully, I think it matters a lot, but maybe we should be able to articulate the reasons that it matters a little more clearly. Some thoughts:
1) Maybe civil marriage and Christian marriage should be two separate entities. For example, the Southern Baptist Convention could vote and say as a group that these are guidelines for performing a marriage for two people and then further proclaim that only under these circumstances will our churches perform marriage ceremonies. Then, if the United States of America or the State of Texas wants to recognize marriage between a man and his cow, they could do so, but it wouldn’t be a Christian marriage. Maybe this is what the churches should have done in regard to divorces long ago (similar to what the Catholic church does).

2) I still think that recognizing homosexual unions is NOT good public policy because two men living together in sin or two women living together in sin (let’s call a spade a spade) are not best suited to raise children and transfer vaues to the next generation. (It’s not the two women or the two men that are really the problem. Maiden aunts or or other same sex couples have raised children in the past and have done a good job. The problem is that the Bible says that the sexual relationship of homosexual couples is sinful, and if God says so, be sure there’s a reason for the prohibition.) Similarly, the state should encourage (but not require) traditional marriage relationships and family structures because these arrangements create a more stable society. Polygamy should be against the law because it exploits women and is not good for children. Homosexualygamy (it’s NOT marriage) should be against the law because homosexual relationships are notoriously unstable and are not good for children.

3)I agree with John Holzmann that all this has very little to do with homeschooling freedoms. Except that, as homeschoolers, we say generally that parents should have the right to direct the education of their own children. If we as a society are all mixed up as to who are the parents of any given child, we start to have problems. We already have custody battles between divorced parents arguing about how the children should be educated. Let’s add homosexuality iinto the mix and see how complicated it can get.

4) What is the state doing when it bestows a marriage certificate upon a couple? Is it not certifying that a marriage has already taken place? How can the state certify that a marriage, a union of one man and one woman, has taken place when no marriage has taken place? Isn’t this the idea behind some states’ recognition of common-law marriage? Obviously, a marriage has taken place between a man and a woman who live together, have children, and present themselves publicly as a married couple–whether a ceremony has been performed or not. What I’m getting at is that the State doesn’t marry people. Two people are married when they come together, Biblically, as “one flesh.” Since same sex couples cannot become “one flesh” in the Biblical sense, they are not married no matter what the mayor of San Faancisco thinks about it. So if that mayor or any other government official or entity wants to issue a certificate to say that Mr. X and Mr. Y have decided to live together in one house and play at being “married.” maybe we should let them do it. It’s stupid, but it’s a free country.