Can of Worms

Can of worms

Though I have done it before, let me once again go on record saying that I do not object to gay couples having some sort of union. Let me also go on record as saying, I do object to states being in the marriage business.

I’m sure that will upset some folks.

As a Christian, I see marriage as a union God had a hand in establishing.

It reads in Genesis Chapter 2:
The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
[Genesis 2:22-24]

This is the union of marriage.

With the establishment of Christ’s church, marriage served as a reflection of God’s union with his people.

Paul wrote in his letter to the Ephesians:
Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. [Ephesians 5:22-30]

As a Christian, this is what I believe marriage is.

What does that have to do with the state?

So why, you may ask, would I say I do not object to the union between two gay people?

Because a legally recognized union and a Christian marriage are not the same thing.

Yes, Christian couples who choose to marry apply for and receive a marriage license so that their marriage will be recognized by the state. But it is not the secular marriage license that defines their union, but God.

States also issue marriage licenses to people who do not believe in God, have no interest in cleaving to one person, becoming one flesh, or loving one another as Christ loves the Church.

Since to me marriage is something that was established by God, why on earth should states be involved in licensing marriages at all?

If two atheists decide they want to enter into some kind of loving union, go ahead.

If two gays decide they want to enter into some kind of loving union, why should I care?

But marriage shouldn’t be the same as getting a hunting license or being able to drive a car. It has nothing to do with the State.

It has everything to do with fulfilling a covenant with God.

That being said, I strongly object to the decision the Supreme Court revealed today.

Not because I don’t think gay couples should be able to enter into a loving union. I’ve got other reasons to be horrified by this idiotic decision.

First. As it stands right now, Marriage, in the legal, secular parlance, is and has always been the responsibility of the states. They determine, for example, age of consent. In Mississippi, you must be 21 to marry. Whereas in Missouri, you can marry at 18 — 15 with parental consent. Most other states, like Missouri have the age of consent at 18. And most states, like Missouri, allow for younger people to marry provided they receive parental consent (as young as 13 in New Hampshire).

States determine if couples must comply with certain medical testing prior to receiving a marriage license. I know when I got married in 1987, my future husband and I had to undergo an HIV test in order to receive our Illinois marriage license.

In some states it is illegal to marry your first cousin. In other states, it is not. For example, in Hawaii, you can marry your first cousin, but in Arkansas, you can’t.

Marriage has always been something the states controlled. More’s the pity.

By ruling as they did, the Supreme Court opens up a can of worms in terms of an individual state having the right to determine the qualifications to receive a marriage license within that state.

This is another example of the Supreme Court nullifying the Tenth Amendment, not to mention the will of the citizens within a state and the consent of the governed.

But for me, it isn’t just SCOTUS thumbing its nose at the Tenth Amendment. If I don’t believe a state should be involved in the marriage business. You can bet I don’t believe the Federal Government should.

Second. The justification the Supreme Court used for stripping all states of their right to determine whether or not homosexuals can marry one another was the Fourteenth Amendment.

Keep in mind. The purpose of ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment was to not only enshrine in our Constitution that all former slaves within the United States were heretofore free, but to also ensure that these freed slaves were fully and completely citizens of the United States of America. And, as such, were to be recognized as having all the rights and equality of every other citizen of the United States of America, regardless of skin color.

What in Lucifer’s reach does that have to do with two people of the same gender being able to legally marry?

Let me answer that for you.


Third. Gays could marry in all fifty states before SCOTUS ruled.

Think I’m bullshitting you?

Think about it.

If a gay man wanted to legally marry in a state that prohibited gays from marrying each other, he still could legally marry. Provided he was over the age of consent, complied with any blood tests necessary, was marrying someone who was not a first cousin (in states where that’s illegal), and was marrying someone of the opposite sex. Which are the exact same conditions every other person in that state has to meet. There was no undo burden on gays. They had to comply to the exact same marriage laws as every other citizen of a state.

Let me repeat that. He wasn’t being denied the same legal rights and protections as anyone else. As a matter of fact, he was expected to comply with the exact same laws and guidelines as everyone else in order to get a marriage license.

It is not unreasonable to ask, if SCOTUS makes all states comply with their determined rules to receive a marriage license, couldn’t a brother and sister say, “Hey! We want to get married and that’s illegal in our state. The Fourteenth Amendment should apply to us as well!” Couldn’t the man who wants to marry a twelve year-old-girl say, “Hey! We can’t get married in our state because age of consent is 18. The Fourteenth Amendment should apply to us as well!”

What this ruling does is open up a can of worms with regard to a state’s ability to manage the issuing of marriage licenses across the board.

Finally. My biggest concern is that with the SCOTUS ruling comes a whole new can of worms that can not only erode the Tenth Amendment, but the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.

As a member of a Christian church, will our pastor be compelled by the state to comply with the SCOTUS ruling and officiate a gay wedding despite the fact that our church does not recognize gay unions as a “marriage?”

Given the current climate where Christian business owners are being hounded out of business for refusing to participate in gay services, will churches find themselves on the receiving end of the wrath of the Gay Mafia?

The Obama Administration lawyer more than hinted at the fact that churches may lose their tax exempt status for refusing to officiate gay weddings.

In their effort to please the Gay Mafia, advance the cause of Liberalism, and go down in history as the Court that sided with the gays, SCOTUS has created a whole new grab bag of civil liberty issues, constitutional problems and legal nightmares for every other American. All to please a very small, gratingly loud, wee little minority.

I wonder. If states immediately repealed all marriage laws — all of them — simply remove from state authority what marriage is, will it render this moronic, knee-jerk, short-sighted decision moot?

If the government got out of the marriage business, wouldn’t that be actual freedom and liberty?

Sure, it may open up a whole new can of worms, but because of this SCOTUS ruling, worms are already sliming up our Constitution as we speak.

So, does it really matter?

If you like the work at Patriot Retort, please consider contributing

Hit the tip jar DONATE button in the side bar. Even a few bucks can make a world of difference!

Books by Dianny:

RANT 2.0: Even More Politics & Snark in the Age of Obama,
Liberals Gone WILD!!! The Not-So-Silent Conquering of America,
RANT: Politics & Snark in the Age of Obama,
and two novels: Sliding Home Feet First and Under the Cloud

You can find my e-books at all of these fine, Amazon Kindle Store, Apple iTunes, and Barnes & Noble Nook Store.

Check out — my Conservative & Christian T-shirt Store.

Share, share, share