Here are some helpful posts related to the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments regarding “same-sex marriage.”
9 Things You Should Know About Same-Sex Marriage – Joe Carter (TGC)
10 Questions About Marriage From The Supreme Court Arguments – Russell Moore and Andrew Walker (ERLC)
“It Is Going To Be An Issue” – Albert Mohler
Why Not Gay Marriage? – Kevin DeYoung
Among the latest to come out of the so called “same-sex marriage” debate is the religious persecution of Barronelle Stutzman for declining to make flower arrangements for a “same-sex wedding.” For her “crime,” the judge’s decision will essentially put her out of business. She is appealing the case. You can read more about it at the following links:
State Says 70-Year-Old Flower Shop Owner Discriminated Against Gay Couple. Here’s How She Responded. – Kelsey Harkness (The Daily Signal)
A Florist Loses Religious Freedom, and Much More – Denny Burke (CNN)
Plea for Sanity – Mike Wittmer
In the first post, the homosexual couple is quoted as saying, “We respect everyone’s beliefs, but businesses that are open to the public have an obligation to serve everyone.” Stutzman replied, “I did serve Rob. It’s the event that I turned down, not the service for Rob or his partner.”
In the third post, Mike Wittmer suggests this idea as sensible middle ground: “Any business must serve any person, but it must not be required to serve every act.” Read his post for his explanation.
I’d like to key off both Stutzman’s and Wittmer’s statements, and suggest: Any business must serve any person, but it is not required to offer every product or service. This, it seems to me, is just common sense.
I have worked for several Christian bookstores, and we sold Christian books. We didn’t sell Muslim books or New Age books – just Christian books. And different stores drew the line differently on what constituted a Christian book. We willingly served any customer who came, but only with the products that that particular store sold.
Recently our local grocery store stopped selling a delicious chocolate candy bar that my family really enjoyed. They are still willing to serve us; they just won’t sell us that product that we want. This is not discrimination; it is simply a business choosing what to sell and what not to sell.
I suggest we extend the same courtesy to florists, bakeries, and photographers. They must serve everyone, but they are not required to offer every product or service. They must (and should happily) serve homosexuals because they are human beings. But they can choose what services or products they offer. They might choose not to do any weddings. They might specialize in “same-sex weddings” if that is their choice. They might specialize in “traditional” weddings if that is their choice.
And it should be their choice. The government should not take it upon itself to tell businesses what products and services they must offer.
Any business must serve any person, but it is not required to offer every product or service. Here is a necessary distinction that I hope our nation will grasp. The alternative will be continued religious persecution in a country founded, ironically, for religious (not sexual) freedom.
Apparently the answer to people hating homosexuals is to now hate people who believe homosexual behavior is wrong. The answer to discriminating against homosexuals is to now discriminate against those who disagree with homosexual behavior. The answer to drumming homosexuals out of the military is to drum out those who disagree with homosexual behavior. The answer to same-sex couples being unable to marry is to make people opposed to same-sex marriage unable to not participate in such ceremonies. Isn’t it more than a little interesting that the very things the gay lobby decried when aimed at them, they so quickly pick up to use against others? And I suspect it is only the beginning. Standing up for Biblical morality is quickly becoming an American anathema.
Gospel Singer McClurkin Cut From MLK Event Over Gay Rights – Gospel Coalition
Sergeant dismissed for saying … nothing – Baptist Press
N.M. Supreme Court: Photographers Can’t Refuse Gay Weddings – Christianity Today
With the Supreme Court hearing two cases last week about same-sex marriage, this issue continues to be huge. As Christians, we need to think carefully about this issue. Happily, a lot of good thinking and writing is being done. Here are some posts for your consideration:
Marriage in the Dock – Albert Mohler
This is a helpful introduction to the Supreme Court and same -sex marriage.
For Christians, the issue of marriage is not merely a legal or constitutional issue. The Bible reveals marriage to be the sacred union of a man and a woman for a lifetime. The goods of marriage are revealed to be intimacy, union, companionship, friendship, procreation, children, and a host of related gifts. Christians must see marriage as essential for human flourishing and not open for human negotiation.
Why the Arguments for Gay Marriage Are Persuasive – Kevin DeYoung
A very helpful look at the issues behind the issue.
I don’t think the arguments for gay marriage are biblically faithfully, logically persuasive, or good for human flourishing in the long run, but they are almost impossible to overcome with most Americans, especially in younger generations….it fits in perfectly with the dominant themes and narratives shared in our culture. Gay marriage is the logical conclusion to a long argument, which means convincing people it’s a bad idea requires overturning some of our most cherished values and most powerful ideologies….
A Few Things to Consider Before Supporting Gay Marriage – Kevin DeYoung
By recognizing gay unions as marriage, just like the husband-wife relationship we’ve always called marriage, the state is engaging in (or at least codifying) a massive re-engineering of our social life. It assumes the indistinguishability of gender in parenting, the relative unimportance of procreation in marriage, and the near infinite flexibility as to what sorts of structures and habits lead to human flourishing.
Read the Fine Print Before Supporting “Marriage Equality” – Trevin Wax
As the Supreme Court considers the merits of adopting or banning same-sex marriage, many politicians are voicing their support for changing the law. But just as smart shoppers know to look beyond an advertisement to read the fine print, Americans should look beyond the surface issues to the surprising details no one is discussing….
Bracketing Morality – Albert Mohler
The “seismic shift” on the issue of homosexuality is a profound moral revolution as well. And yet, what makes this moral revolution so vast in consequences and importance is this: the moral dimension has virtually disappeared from the cultural conversation….
Five Gay Marriage Myths – Robin Phillips at Salvo
Not sure if I agree with everything here, but there are some good points to consider.
The issue of same-sex marriage is often framed in terms of a choice between either preventing or allowing gay people to get married. When the issue is framed in these terms, that is usually a good indication that the person has fallen victim to another key myth. The reality is that legislation to introduce gay marriage would not remove a ban on same-sex couples getting married because no such ban exists. There is no more of a ban on same-sex couples getting married then there is a ban on two-wheeled unicycles or square triangles. The very nature of what marriage is necessarily excludes same-sex unions.
Brian J. Mikul 