The blog entry that my friend wouldn’t post:

I got an email from a friend this morning. The subject line read: THIS IS A BLOG ENTRY THAT I WILL NEVER POST. I read the would-be post and then encouraged my friend to reconsider his reluctance. He wouldn’t budge, so I am posting it for him. Because it’s good… and because maybe some of you reading this will forget that I didn’t write it.


This morning, I was listening to a fairly famous talk-radio show here in Birmingham. It should be noted that I can’t stand the show, and I disagree with its approach to issues: talk-radio, the church, politics and just about everything else they spew. I think they are bullies with a platform. They shroud themselves in the flag of the Church and the flag of our country and do not allow or encourage opinions that might fall outside of their personal views.

This morning the hosts were discussing a gay rights group (and they joked about the group’s disappointment with President Obama’s lackluster support for their cause: gay-marriage). The hosts made mention several times that “the people of this country don’t want to redefine marriage,” and they went on and on and on suggesting that the President was flip-flopping on the issue because he doesn’t want to alienate anyone in the Democratic Party. That may be the case – but it’s far from the issue.

I started thinking.

The show’s hosts implied that our country wanted to ensure that marriage would not be redefined. “We want to keep marriage based on God’s laws,” they said. Yeah, but what would happen to the political scene in this country if the church was involved in the truth, and the government was involved in building highways?

The conservative right is so quick to say: Marriage is between a man and a woman. Period. That’s the way God intended. But then they turn around and condone common-law marriage and divorce (for unbiblical reasons).

I started thinking.

If we’re gonna stick with God’s laws – and I think that’s a pretty good idea – let’s do it across the board. Jesus said the only reasons for divorce are adultery or the desertion of a non-believer, but the same conservatives who want to alienate a homosexual couple for desiring marriage benefits are not also in uproar that a heterosexual couple can get an uncontested divorce claiming “irreconcilable differences” for around 500 bucks!

Let’s compare apples to apples. Why wouldn’t we want two gay men or women to receive the same benefits as a “normal” married couple? Do we really care that much about insurance and taxes? You know, if Jim and George want to get married, I don’t see that as an attack on what the STATE calls marriage. The STATE allows couples to divorce because they “just don’t like each other anymore.” Seems like a double-standard to me.

The fact is, as a country, we don’t hold marriage in high regard at all, and by spending all this energy talking about it all we’re really doing is further pushing away a group of people. A group of people, by the way, that Christ loves and cherishes and died for a couple of thousand years ago.

I started thinking.

What would happen if early morning DJ’s and loud-mouthed “advocates” for the Church pulled out of the political process, and started simply loving people?

How about starting with the person in front of you. Right now. Share your brokenness. Share how you are fallen, and then share how Christ has redeemed you.  Spend your money and time and energy influencing the person right in front of you, instead of trying to create laws out of your anger and YOUR sense of righteousness.

How is it that the Church has failed so monumentally? And how is it that we feel somehow entitled to legislate morality on our terms? We’re all for individual freedoms and responsibility as long as we can mandate behaviors in the bedroom.

WAKE UP, Church! Wake up early morning DJ’s. Start loving people. Start trying to influence people with the love of Christ, instead of trying to write more laws by putting your own personal spin on the only Law that really matters.


Friend’s disclaimer: I don’t agree with homosexual lifestyles. I think that acting on tendencies, like any other sin, is sin. But, nothing is beyond the realm of redemption by Christ. If He can redeem me from my greed and lust and for being a drunkard and a glutton, He can certainly save someone in sexual sin – hetero, homo… whatever.



  1. Thanks for posting. And to your friend, thanks for writing. If we really went to “God’s law” we’d allow slavery and polygamy.

    Anyway, let’s remember what Jesus said about homosexuality …

    (Cricket, cricket)

  2. Never mind the whole premise comes from a “we/them” perspective, with an assumption that people are either Christian OR gay, how about both…

    And since it is all relegated to a person choosing a “lifestyle”, I hope people will then address how old they were when they “decided” to be heterosexual, or is it a daily choice, hmmmm….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s