Monday, April 27, 2015

Fallout For the Left From Bruce Jenner's Transition

Christians don't hate homosexuals, transexuals, etc., etc. It is a Leftist LIE that Christians hate homosexuals, a lie which is necessary to the AtheoLeftist narrative. The issue of homosexuality is a political issue, driven by the Leftist Will To Power. It is true that many, probably even most, Christians view homosexual activities as immoral. But it is also true that under the Christian worldview, that issue is between the individual and God. Not between Christian "jihadists" and the sexcapade community. What Christians - some Christians anyway - oppose is the theft of the religious aspect of marriage, where the three-way contract is no longer between two individuals and their deity, it is now between two individuals (for the time-being) and the state. This entirely destroys the concept of "holy matrimony".

The problem arises purely because the state has co-opted the definition and control of marriage improperly. There is no exception to the tenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution which allows the federal government to do that. In a properly interpreted Constitutional society, marriage would be purely a three-way contract between two people and their deity. There is no need for government intervention in that process. It is that un-Constitutional government intervention in that contract which creates issues that should not be issues.

There should be no federal discrimination in favor of (or against*) people who are "legally" married, as marriage has traditionally been known and defined. No tax reductions, no hospital benefits, no inheritance benefits outside of a legal will. There are legal mechanisms which can do all that without any reference to, or position on, religious three-way marriage.

Marriage should be a religious contract. Nothing more. Nothing less. In order to create marriage benefits outside of the religious contract, the government has opened for itself the extra-Constitutional fundamental right to define marriage as something else, something that is not the original contract, something that confers rights and benefits not intended for or by the original three-way contract. The third party is now the government which through the court system gives itself omnipotence in defining the terms and principles of the institution of marriage.

If LGBTQSLKNDKICAEB's, or groups of people, or a person or persons and a bridge, animal or pickup truck, want a legal union, then there should be separate contractual understandings which are outside of the religious three-way contract called "holy matrimony". Whether these are called civil unions or even civil or secular marriage, or something else entirely is a pointless argument.

People who are joined in holy matrimony, i.e. in the three-way union of religious marriage, should have to get a separate civil/secular union/marriage contract as well as the religious marriage contract. That would divorce the religious union from the secular, and all the government intervention would intercede, not with religious marriage, but with the secular contract.

Government intervention in the religious three-way contract is constitutionally prohibited, but that is ignored by the Left, as are any Constitutional restrictions to their hegemonic drive to eradicate religion from western societies using the national government as a proprietary weapon of the Left.

I support secular contracts, including for LGBTQSLKNDKICAEB's. I do not support calling such contracts "marriage" because that confuses the secular use of the term with "holy matrimony", which secular contracts are not, unless some sort of new, faux but harmless otherwise, religion opts to do such marriages and call them "holy". That issue is one which exists now, outside of the presumptive omnipotence of the government. It should be obvious that Christians recognize the existence of faux religions, just as they recognize secular contracts, and so long as those do not interfere in the affairs of Christians, for the most part, they co-exist.

Bruce Jenner's situation is not related to marriage; it is related to the Left's conception of Christianity and its principles, attitudes and morality, which the Left cannot comprehend. The Left cannot comprehend much of anything outside the Leftist narrative; that narrative defines them and their thought processes completely. And that is the definition of bigotry and closed-mindedness to the point of blind-belief and anti-rationalism.

*The US government discriminates against married couples by providing financial support to "single mothers" which is not available to marrieds, and that encourages co-habitation as well as unmarried, one-parent households purely for the financial benefits. I know this happens; it happens to people I know.

No comments: