Christians are to be marked by “discipline” and are not to be like those who have a “depraved mind” (2 Tim. 1:7, 3:8, Titus 1:15). We are warned not to be taken captive by sly words of speech (Col. 2:8, Eph. 5:6). This means we do not glorify God when we let our emotions control our thoughts. We instead show ourselves to be truly made in the image of God when we rule over our emotions through the faculties God has given to us.
Shallow, emotionally-driven thinking is not an option for those who wish to honor God and His truth. Yet it is shallow, emotionally-driven thinking that is the staple of today’s decaying Western culture. At the highest levels of academia, culture, and government, the abuse of sound thinking through the manipulation of those who think without accuracy or depth is rampant. It is the very foundation of political success and advancement. The “spin” is all that matters anymore. Corrupt politicians know this very well.
A people who will allow themselves to be told what to think will soon become slaves to their intellectual overlords. Muddled minds are not worthy of liberty, and if liberty is bestowed upon them (possibly as the capital of their ancestors) they will lose it quickly, taken captive by those who know how to deceive and mislead them.
In the United States today an argument has established itself in the minds of, it seems, the majority of those in power, and in a large portion of the populace, especially the young, that is so vacuous, so empty, so lacking in logical and intellectual rigor, that it must leave the truth-honoring mind grasping for words to express its disdain. I am being kind to use the term “argument,” for it is truly nothing more than a mantra, generously slathered with emotion. I refer to the “marriage equality” argument, the mantra of “marriage equality,” a slogan that may well result in the highest court in the land completely redefining (for the brief time any culture could survive such a catastrophe) humanity’s fundamental relationships in the very near future. Very, very few actually believe in what this mantra means, and they are the most radical ethical nihilists in the land. The vast majority of those who repeat the slogan do not, actually, believe it, and sadly, are not even aware of the contradiction in their thought.
Here is an example from this morning’s news. This article appeared in my news feed. As soon as you look through it, you see its true intention, or, at least, you should. This is not a piece of news reporting. It is advocacy, plain and simple. Read the words, look at the pictures—all intended to communicate the same thing. Happy, smiling, joy-filled people, victims of a puritanical system that was set up with one specific purpose: to deny them happiness and fulfillment! But, as you know, there’s nothing new here. It’s becoming old hat, right?
So here is my reason for taking part of my morning to write this article: I wish to ask the very, very few people who might read my words who profess to believe in “marriage equality” a simple question, a thought experiment, as they say today. Here’s one of the pictures from the article (being used for specific criticism of not only the article and attendant worldview, but likewise as part of the criticism of the specific framing of the article in question, as it is my contention above that the photographer had a particular bias that was then expressed in the pictures included with the article). The culture today is saying that not only does this picture represent a moral good, but a morality that is so good, so wholesome, so right, that it is evil not to celebrate it! But that amazing moral madness aside, I have a simple question to ask: and please do not respond with such high-brow intellectual retorts as “Eww,” or “gross” or “that’s just silly” (the devastating retort of Piers Morgan when he was skewered by Michael Brown on the same topic).
What if the two men in the picture were…brothers? Siblings? What now? Still for marriage equality? Still have warm, fuzzy feelings? Are you just as likely to be sending them a Target gift certificate on their “wedding” day? If not, why not? Can you give a consistent moral reason for denying them fulfillment? For opposing their rights? For imposing upon them your own moral values? Let’s expand it a bit: how about if it was a father/son relationship? Grandfather/grandson? What now? Again, given the moral standards you have adopted to redefine marriage so that two men are to be celebrated for their desire to call their intimate relationship a marriage, how can you consistently deny to these others their desires?
I conclude with a simple observation: defining marriage based upon the aberrant desires of a small minority in a culture is a sign that culture has no earthly idea what it takes to survive and flourish in this world.