“I sometimes get pushback from people who claim they are Christian but who look to government to “protect” marriage.”
That’s because anyone who thinks this way about the state and marriage is obviously a raging pro-gay marriage libertarian just like Pope Leo XIII. Or something.
>>>
Well sometimes not. But they confuse the force of government with moral force of the eternal God. They can have faith that a government that is tangible to them can and will enforce its (secular-based) laws that for the moment at least happen to roughly agree with God’s law that they (roughly) understand. They can’t have sufficient faith that God’s laws are above and beyond government.
Strangely, they don’t ever complain about “hippie communes” or where young people increasingly don’t get married, but conduct their lives in faux-marriage relationships and faux-family units. (Any relationship that includes producing children without any commitment to be permanent enough to raise those children to adulthood is not a “family”.)
So, the argument they pick with my position that it is time to revoke government’s power over defining who is married shows they don’t care what kind of sexual morality people have, or how people who are not married conduct their sexual lives. So, what exactly is “marriage” to such people? I think they being reactionary conservatives, that is they are strongly attempting to conserve some aspect of society yet they cannot understand why except that it is “tradition”.
It is for this reason that I beg people who call themselves conservative and especially if they also consider themselves to be a follower of God, that they stop and consider what, exactly, they are attempting to “conserve” and why. Some things should not be conserved, but returned to their original roots in timeless moral law.
“They can have faith that a government that is tangible to them can and will enforce its (secular-based) laws that for the moment at least happen to roughly agree with God’s law that they (roughly) understand. They can’t have sufficient faith that God’s laws are above and beyond government.”
Many have been conditioned to think marriage comes from and is defined by the state, that’s why so many accept the concept of ‘gay marriage’ in the first place. It can exist because the state says it can, it comes in little pieces of paper. The paper denotes a contract with benefits and strictures between any parties the state chooses and can be broken and resumed as long as the state gives its permission again.
A lot of times those faiths that accept ‘gay marriage’ won’t even act on this belief until the state tells them that it also accepts ‘gay marriage.’ Which might be more insane than buying into ‘gay marriage’ in the first place.
Freegards