Stephen
Tanner
In
the debate over “gay marriage”, some have branded as anachronistic the
Australian government’s determination to uphold the Marriage Act amendment
(2004), which uses the common law definition of marriage as “a union between a man and a woman to the
exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life”. Supporters of
homosexual civil unions commonly defend their cause by stating that
we are in the 21st century and that Australian law does not reflect
contemporary Western values.
But
isn't it disturbing that many people think popular opinion – or what is
perceived as such – should dictate what is right and what is wrong? Some
firmly believe that if the masses seem to be accepting behaviour that was
once considered criminal, harmful and perverted, the laws of the land should
follow suit. Perhaps they believe that man is constantly improving by
evolution, and that this makes current values superior to all previous ones.
This
philosophy has always been disastrous. Equally devastating to civilisation
is the notion that government or church leaders can dictate morals. In
reality, the basic principles of the natural world don't change, and neither
do those that concern human society. Scientific principles are seen in
nature, and they do not conflict with moral principles, which are found in
the Holy Scriptures.
In
an attempt to disqualify the Bible, those wishing to hold onto their sin
will cite judicial and ceremonial laws that are clearly no longer required.
Their argument is overthrown when it is understood that these laws and
sacrifices were a shadow of things to come, of the taking away of sins by
the sacrifice of Christ (Hebrews 10:1,
see also I Corinthians 9:8-10). But the moral law remains (James
2:8-12), summarised in Ten Commandments that concern love to God
and our neighbour (Exodus 20, cf. Matthew 22:37-40).
The
seventh commandment is, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Exodus 20:14). This means that as
marriage is a lifelong union between a man and a woman – "Therefore
shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife:
and they shall be one flesh" (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5, 6) – any sexual
relationship outside of this is forbidden. "Marriage is honourable in
all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will
judge" (Hebrews 13:4).
So
in the timeless laws given by God we see that not only is homosexuality
forbidden (Romans
1:24-27), but also all other perversions of marriage. If you accept
sodomite behaviour, by whose law or by what rationale do you reject
paedophilia? If you argue that children should be especially protected, does
this mean that you also oppose the abortion of babies? God has given us a
fixed set of principles for all time, and we should take note of them.
“Know ye not that the
unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom
of
God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor
effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the
kingdom
of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but
ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our
God” (I Corinthians 6:9-11).
June
2006
