Send us some feedback!
| I have a problem. I believe in freedom and human rights. I also believe that there are some things that are wrong and immoral. Indeed, there is an inevitable tension between morality and freedom that we all have to grapple with. Most agree that a person should not have the freedom and the right to do anything. Such freedom is called anarchy and that is why societies have laws. However, in our pluralistic society it is becoming increasingly difficult to agree on what things are wrong or on how and to what extent we should limit freedom.
When something is immoral is that a compelling reason for society to make it illegal or to restrict someone’s freedom to engage in that particular activity? Sometimes it is, but not always. For instance, most people agree that lying is wrong (with some exceptions) and our laws reflect this orientation. Perjury and false advertising are against the law, but not all lying is unlawful. When a child tells his parents a lie it may be wrong but, thankfully, it is not illegal. Society does not try to control all lying through the law but it does try to curtail it. Lying may not be absolutely controlled but it is not an inalienable right either.
A much more controversial subject that undoubtedly will be with us for quite a while is the liberalizing of marriage laws to include same sex marriages. This is increasingly being framed as a personal rights issue for a minority group. It is debatable whether someone’s lifestyle or sexual preference should qualify him/her for minority group status and special protection. That is most especially true when it involves behavior that most members of our society consider immoral. For those who believe that homosexual activity is morally wrong – as I do for a large number of reasons – this raises the tension between morality and personal rights.
But in the case of same sex marriages the issue has become more than whether we should restrict homosexual activity between consenting adults – it is about whether our society should endorse homosexual relationships by granting them the status and privilege of marriage. Is such societal endorsement a right and an entitlement? No it is not! I would not suggest that it is the job of our government to eliminate immorality from our society but neither is it appropriate for the government to endorse or promote immorality. If something is immoral it is, by definition, detrimental for both the individual and the society at large.
Marriage is not a right; it is a privilege. To extend the privilege of marriage to same sex partners would condone their lifestyle as a legitimate expression of love. Indeed, for those of us who oppose such legislation for moral reasons our obligation to God and to our fellow man requires that we speak up for their good and for the good of society. We are (when our motives are right) driven by our love for God, our love for homosexuals, and our concern for the society at large. |
|
by Dr. J. Patrick Curtis, Senior Pastor |
Send us some feedback!