inclusivity

I went back to church tonight - Tex Sample was speaking on inclusivity, which to me is a broad term, but perhaps in progressive-speak is known to be limited in the current context to gay and lesbian issues.

To me, it is sad that this is even an issue, especially for Christians. Paul said in Galatians there is neither Gentile nor Jew, slave nor free, male nor female, but that all are one in Christ Jesus. Now, if there is no male and no female, how can there be a Christian distinction between heterosexual marriages and homosexual marriages.

I understand the procreation argument, but what Augustine is talking about - and particularly I would reference In Defense of Marriage as I have not read On Marriage and Virginity though I assume the philosophy is the same - is the raising of children in the Kingdom of God. In the Catholic baptism, godparents are selected to represent the community of the church. In the Methodist baptism, the community as a whole speaks and takes responsibility for the raising of children within the kingdom of God. Couples do not have to be straight to participate in this. Quite simply, there is nothing in the history of the church that says that homosexuals cannot be married.

Besides, if we want to take procreation more literally and demand that the actual bearing of the biological children of exactly these two people is required for marriage, what does that mean for straight people? Should post-menopausal women not be allowed to marry? Other infertile people? What if we don't know? Should a couple applying for a marriage license be required to provide evidence of a satisfactory sperm count and healthy ovaries? Of course, this is nonsense. But it is also the logical continuation of an overly literal interpretation of this stuff.

And yet gay marriage is a real battle, and it is sad. It is sad that churches as progressive as the UMC have not gotten it right. Yet.

So I sat and listened for two hours, and anytime you are surrounded by people with live hearts and live minds, it is not two hours wasted. But of course, given the political climate in Texas, it is hard to imagine that whatever "defense" of marriage law our insane legislature comes up with could be defeated. It is prejudice, pure and simple, to deny marriage to homosexuals. Forty years from now, we will look at the fight for the dignity of GLBT people and wonder how anyone could be against it in much the same manner as we look back at the fight for the dignity of blacks and women. That it has to be waged against the church is the saddest part of it all.

For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourself with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free person, there si not male and female; for all are one in Christ Jesus.

May it someday be true.

And yet it is almost exclusively "Christians" leading the charge against gay marriage. That is simply sad to me. This nonsense will be on the ballot here in November.