This evening Cam Slater continued his campaign for gay marriage of the grounds of equality and the ongoing difficulties within the church (on the right) and the current inmate of the White House has come out in favour of it…

This article was bout to my attention by the good people at NZ conservative. It is worth reading the entire thing… because it argues that my moving sexuality into marriage it desexualised the culture and allowed development. However the best bit is this.

Jews or Christians who take the Bible’s views on homosexuality seriously are not obligated to prove that they are not fundamentalists or literalists, let alone bigots (though, of course, people have used the Bible to defend bigotry). Rather, those who claim homosexuality is compatible with Judaism or Christianity bear the burden of proof to reconcile this view with their Bible. Given the unambiguous nature of the biblical attitude toward homosexuality, however, such a reconciliation is not possible. All that is possible is to declare: “I am aware that the Bible condemns homosexuality, and I consider the Bible wrong.” That would be an intellectually honest approach. But this approach leads to another problem. If one chooses which of the Bible’s moral injunctions to take seriously (and the Bible states its prohibition of homosexuality not only as a law, but as a value — “it is an abomination”), of what moral use is the Bible?

Advocates of the religious acceptance of homosexuality respond that while the Bible is morally advanced in some areas, it is morally regressive in others. Its condemnation of homosexuality is one example, and the Torah’s permitting slavery is another. Far from being immoral, however, the Torah’s prohibition of homosexuality was a major part of its liberation (1) of the human being from the bonds of unrestrained sexuality and (2) of women from being peripheral to men’s lives. As for slavery, while the Bible declares homosexuality wrong, it never declares slavery good.

It is very simple. The teaching is that homosexuality is wrong. So is oath-breaking, stealing, oppressing your neighbours, lusting after your neighbours wife, or adultery.

This does not mean that that people who enjoy this are no more worthless or worthy than our local politicians. Having met many politicians and having many colleagues who live with their same-sex partners, I prefer many of my Gay colleagues to the suits and liars who inhabit are parliament.

Nor that we should not accept people who are gay into our midst. We all sin.

But we should not pretend it is morally good. Sex should be within marriage: this is very hard for all singles… and our acceptance of this broadening (among heterosexuals) is a scandal. The problem is that we end up not shaming that, while concentrating on those men who (being generally intellectually honest) say that the Bible is not correct, and want to be left alone.

For the one place where I agree with Cam is that the institution of civil marriage for Gays will not damage the institution. Us heterosexuals, including those in the church, have done that ourselves, by tolerating something else God hates. Divorce.

UPDATE  Son one looked up the blog at school. His classmates are now asking him what it is like to live with a homophobe, as this site is homophobic.

Love it how people use words of abuse rather than deal with the issues we face around obedience. Which are, for many, painful.

Words? Meh.