As the nation wonders whether the Supreme Court will, or should, make a sweeping ruling on the issue of homosexual marriage, Matthew Ung, of the Woodbury County Republican Executive Committee, weighs in for social conservatives.
The Siouxland conservative points out that as the executive branch has aprogated their duty to uphold existing laws protecting marriage as a privilege, the vacuum has opened for political chaos on the issue. The federal Defense of Marriage Act, duly passed and signed by President Clinton, defines marriage between one man and one woman. This law is suddenly up for immediate debate in a way that confuses many on both sides of the issue, because DOMA concerns federal definitions of marriage for the purposes of determining federal benefits. It has nothing to do with what states choose to rule on their definition of marriage for their own benefits. “It’s a simple concept and yet social liberals are attacking both the rule of law and the core of federalism with their arguments,” said Ung.
Ung, a devout Christian, also believes the homosexual marriage debate is about forcing religious leaders to condone sin, and intimidating Christians in particular, despite the fact that every major religion shuns homosexual marriage. “Most social liberals center their attacks on Christians, but I find it puzzling that they don’t attack Muslims in the same fashion, given that Islamic Sharia Law commands homosexuals to be purged from society or executed. The same homosexual radicals who told us years ago that civil unions would placate the movement and that it would never extend to a push for gay marriage, are now pushing for gay marriage. Their arguments are inconsistent and destructive to our laws and processes that foster honest debate. They may say pastors can still preach the Bible on marriage, but they don’t want it to be heard by society; Just like they may claim to support freedom of speech from the pulpit on political issues, but as long as IRS regulations are used to intimidate many preachers from addressing politics in any way that actually influences elections–and therefore the culture.”
Ung argues that social conservatives will not win this argument by only bickering about processes and procedures, pointing out that social liberals will argue just as vehemently against state’s rights when it may institutionalize gay marriage at the federal level, while later argue for state’s rights when it may institutionalize gay marriage at the state level.
“The case we have now is gay marriage activists attempting to dismantle their own logic in order to advance their social agenda. Whether by hook or by crook, by fiat or a fundamental attack on federalism, social liberals divide and conquer to get what they want, and social conservatives end up blasted by the media for being “too divisive.” How I wish more social conservatives would come out from behind the four walls of their homes and churches and engage the culture war, because that’s what it is. The left doesn’t just want to overcome the Church’s preaching, they want to silence the Church’s voice in society.”
Mere months ago at Obama’s second inauguration, a well respected reverend–respected enough to be invited to speak at Obama’s second inauguration–saw his invitation canceled when the media and White House uncovered some sermons he gave on the sinfulness of homosexuality. Said Ung: “Social liberals preach tolerance but go out of their way to prove their intolerance. If homosexuality is really about being left alone and distancing gay couples from the churches that they supposedly don’t need to be happy, then why do so many gay couples request that unwilling churches marry them? Why, after being refused, do they then feel compelled to sue those churches and pastors?”
“The radical left-wing cannot ‘live and let live’ on the issue of gay marriage. Recent events prove that their philosophy is to force those who disagree with them to condone and even celebrate their lifestyle and behavior. The religious right must stop being embarrassed of their own existence, and unashamedly voice their principled disagreement. I think one reason the Church has a hard time building respect on marriage is the unfortunate truth that, statistically, their divorce rate is no different than the whole society. Clearly, keeping political views inside the four walls of our churches has watered down the health of our marriages and therefore our families. Social conservatives must engage the culture war because the building blocks of our communities–the families–are at stake.”
About the Author
blog comments powered by Disqus