proposition 8: a christian response?

While walking around downtown Sacramento with my parents last weekend we observed a large group of people protesting the recent passage of Proposition 8.  In a nutshell, prop 8 amended the California constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, thereby reversing an earlier supreme court decision to allow same-sex marriages.  The proposition passed by less than 5 percentage points leading many to believe the evangelical Christian vote (both black and white in this case) was responsible for this change to the state constitution.  One example: mega church pastor Rick Warren is on the record telling his congregation they “need to support Proposition 8.”

In addition to the public protests that have followed Prop 8’s passage, the New York Times reports that specific churches and Mormon temples have been protested for their public support of the measure.

A large protest against the measure, Proposition 8, at the Mormon Temple in Oakland led the California Highway Patrol to close two nearby highway ramps. A patrol dispatcher said the ramps had been closed to protect pedestrians from traffic…  In Orange County, about 1,000 advocates of equal rights for gay people fanned out along sidewalks leading to Saddleback Church, in Lake Forest. They were angered by the church’s support of Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that voters approved Tuesday.

Less predictable than the protests have been the individuals and companies who have been publicly identified for their financial support of Prop 8.  Lists of companies that backed the proposition can easily be found on-line, making it easier to boycott or support them depending on your political disposition.

The public Evangelical response to Prop 8’s passage has been predictable.  Focus on the Family praised the election results claiming that it, “helps protect millions of children from radical indoctrination in the homosexual lifestyle.”

What do you make of this?

Yesterday author and producer John Marks posted a very direct challenge to Christians’ support of Proposition 8.  Marks is an atheist who, along with seminary professor Craig Detweiler, directed the documentary A Purple State of Mind (which I’ve mentioned before).  In his post on the film’s blog Marks asks,

Where were your people, Craig? Shouldn’t progressive Christians and not gays have been the ones to demonstrate? Shouldn’t Christians appalled and outraged by the hypocrisy of their fellow, sexually conflicted Christians been the ones to protest congregations who whined about being persecuted while persecuting their neighbors and fellow citizens at the ballot box? Or is it better to just shake your head and bemoan the general deterioration of dialogue? Hasn’t that posture become a disgrace yet? A way of supporting the conservatives while appearing to deplore them?

I’m genuinely interested in what this blog’s readers think about the passage of Proposition 8.  Frankly, I’m somewhat confused by the whole thing.  On one hand I understand why many American Christians celebrated this constitutional amendment.  There is a general sense among many that one of our primary roles as Christians in this country is to pass legislation that reflect and honor God’s principles.  Laws that seem to contradict these principles, according to this view, should be opposed and overturned.  The long and bitter history of Roe v. Wade is a prime example of how this plays out.  To be overly simplistic, churches and individual Christians engage in these cultural battles in order to hold America to its Christian heritage; a heritage which many believe has been blessed by God in unique ways.  Towards the end of A Purple State of Mind Detweiler points out that many of these Christians have felt under attack for many years by a culture that seems increasingly secular and pluralistic.  For a culturally besieged people, a victory like Prop 8 is worthy of celebration.

But what if a Christian understanding of God’s work in the world is not tied to the fate of our nation?  Assuming America is no more or less intrinsically christian than any other nation, why the emphasis on legislating our brand of morality?  To over-simplify again, it seems to me that our enegry as Christians is best spent on proclaiming the Kingdom of God and embodying its ethic.  The Christian persona is already a list of traits (judgemental, hypocritical, and anti-homosexual among others) that is best labled “unChristian”.  It seems this latest round PR will only add to these perceptions.

I’ve been trying to understand what the American church would have lost had same-sex marriage in California been allowed to proceed.  I’m not worried about the “radical indoctrination in the homosexual lifestyle” that concerns some folks.  While I don’t want churches to be forced to preform same-sex ceremonies against their will, this doesn’t seem to be a realistic concern.  What is the real issue here?  Is it possible for Christians who disagree with same-sex marriage from a theological perspective to retain their convitions while also supporting the will of their co-citizens who don’t share their beliefs?  Is it right to expect that the ethics within our churches should also be the exact ethics of our very diverse nation?  Is it possible for a Christian to support equality for all citizens while still maintaining distinctly Christian beliefs and behaviors?

I realize the many simplifications and generalizations that have been made in this post.  Even so, I’d like to hear your (charitable) perspective on this.  How do you think about the intersection of Christain faith and our American citizenship?  What might a Christian response to Proposition 8 look like?

18 responses to “proposition 8: a christian response?”

  1. I have not spent nearly enough time considering this, but I kind of felt compelled to at least post my initial response. From my reading of the New Testament, it seems that Paul and the other apostles spent more time building the church than trying to change society via government and/or legislation. The culture of the early church really was not all that different from ours. In fact, there may have been more that the early church had to contend with. How did the early church deal with it? Paul wrote to the churches, built them up, gave them guidance for interacting with each other and the world.

    Like I said, I need to consider it more. . .but I am convinced that true societal change cannot and does not come via laws and constitutions.

    For what it’s worth. . .

  2. Thanks for posting this – I particularily appreciated the thoughtfulness of your questions towards the end.

    To be honest, I’m pretty baffled by the whole situation. Your thoughts and questions pretty well sum up where I’m at.

    It seems that everyone I know has strong, strong feelings on this – some believe that the passage of Prop 8 has kept America out of the grips of evil; others believe that the Christian/social-conservative response to Prop 8 is itself a sign of evil..and hatred and fear.

    Its funny to know so many people so strongly on each side, and to hear that the insults they hurl at each other are so very similar. How can both side’s motives be evil, when each sees his/her own side as being motivated by goodness and love and values and ethics and morality?

    Mostly I just listen and wonder and wish we could find a way to bridge the cultural civil wars that seem to go deeper and deeper each year, or at least have less discrepency between how we see ourselves and how others see us (and by “us” I mean Americans on both sides of the issue.)

    But I’m afraid I have no suggestions to offer….

  3. I am more and more persuaded by the sense that Christians are not benefiting or promoting Christ by acting as a straight line conservative voting block, especially on this issue. When people around the country see cause to protest churches for their politics, I don’t see those churches acting as witnesses to Jesus’ love for every person. So while theologically perhaps Christians need to remain strongly opposed on this issue, I do not feel that it is the Church’s place to bring that into politics. When the Church makes the political issue of same-sex marriage a battleground, is it leaving any room to fight for the souls of those wishing to engage in same-sex marriage? I don’t think so, because by acting as a political entity the Church sets up the “Us vs. Them” mentality that so sorely disengages the “Them” (whoever they are) from any future relationship with a body supposedly founded on love and brokenness.

  4. David, I loved these questions:
    “Is it possible for Christians who disagree with same-sex marriage from a theological perspective to retain their convitions while also supporting the will of their co-citizens who don’t share their beliefs? Is it right to expect that the ethics within our churches should also be the exact ethics of our very diverse nation? Is it possible for a Christian to support equality for all citizens while still maintaining distinctly Christian beliefs and behaviors?”
    My answer is yes, yes, and yes. Christians are labeled as judgmental and intolerant and when I see pastors instructing their congregation on how to vote or people screaming at the “enemy” in a protest or outside an abortion clinic, it’s hard to blame them. My fear in all of these protests, from both sides, is that we forget that God loves the homosexual just as much as He loves the heterosexual. We are all His children and I believe it is our responsibility to be representatives of His love. Is it loving to view anyone or any group on the earth as the personification of evil? The truth is no one is perfect and I’m sure even the most vile person you can imagine- Hitler, Osama bin Laden- at one time showed goodness and love to someone in their life. Loving someone, of course, does not mean condoning their actions. And there is the dilemma in this situation. I don’t agree with the homosexual lifestyle but I have gay friends. Is it right for me to support an amendment (I don’t think this issue justifies an amendment but that’s a whole other story) that denies them the right to marry? It’s not just denying them the right to the ultimate commitment, but also to insurance, tax breaks, benefits, etc. I believe CA has something in place so that life partners can access these benefits and I’m on board with that. I don’t think we can hold nonChristians accountable to Christian standards, which is what Prop 8 is attempting. Since more than 50% of heterosexual marrages end in divorce, I would think the church would do well to focus more on strengthening existing marriages, developing hard-hitting pre-marital counseling, and walking alongside those whose marriages end in divorce. We would also do well to foster relationships with those who are gay (How many of the proponents of Prop 8 can say this?), not only to share God’s love with them but also to deepen our understanding of the issues that face the gay community. If our hearts were in the right place, then the Prop 8 results would not matter as much as they will now seem.

  5. Whew. There is so much to unpack here and so much that could be said. I think one of the things I take issue with was the notion that this is in some way, in any way, a Christian nation with some sort of Christian heritage. America’s history and heritage is far more characterized by racism, fear, and consumerism than Christian faith. I also fear that to call the United States a Christian nation denigrates the American identity of our many Muslim, Jewish etc. friends, colleagues and fellow citizens.
    I find it interesting that Jeff says that true societal change cannot and does not come through laws and constitutions. I wonder if he has ever experienced the systematic oppression and denial of rights that has made women, blacks, jews, homosexuals, and many other minorities long for the change that comes through laws and constitutions. These legislative changes are not the be all/ end all of societal change, but they are meaningful change nonetheless.
    The intersection of Christian faith and American citizenship? Well, if I acknowledge that rather than a Christian nation I live in one that is pluralistic and democratic than I have no reason to expect my government to operate explicitly under Christian ethics. However living in a democracy allows me to engage with my fellow citizens for policies and programs that reflect the justice, mercy, and kindness I hope to see in my society. I think that’s my role: finding where my values intersect with those of my neighbors and working to bring those values to our government.

  6. Daniel, thank you for the reminder about the importance of government and legislation in limiting oppression, etc. I never intended to overlook that aspect. I guess my statement is a reaction to what I see as an over-emphasis on political activism in some Christian circles. Christians can and certainly should interact with government, but our main business needs to be introducing our neighbors to Jesus not trying to bring them to our side of the political aisle or force them to act like we do.

  7. i may tip my hand towards what i’m leaning towards here, but i thought one thing should be clarified here. the problem isn’t so much that we lean too heavily on politics in the Christian and spec Evangelical world in America. though it has happened and in many cases does happen that politics becomes our god, that i don’t think is the problem here with this issue – or at least not the main issue. the primary problem here is that our actions in regards to politics is not informed by what the Bible says all of our actions should be informed by: love. in regards to certain people groups we are not concerned for the rights and well-being of others. if we are to introduce our neighbors to Jesus, it has to be done in acts and words of love. and love isn’t just tolerance (tolerance is too easy), it’s actively seeking the welfare of others, and placing their needs as importantly as our own.

    instead, we are motivated by self-righteousness and self-preservation. in short, our politics are centered around selfishness and fear. that – regardless of whether or not people outside the church see that (they do) – is immoral, sinful and anti-Christ.

    i’ll post a longer response later.

  8. I often feel caught between the comments that Jeff and Daniel make. Certainly there is a role for supporting and working for certain legislation, particularly as it protects and empowers those who have been left out of the American political system. On the other hand, it seems our recent history is riddled with ugly examples of Christians who put all of their eggs in the political basket.

    It seems that the comments thus far reflect the position that while a person may disagree with a gay person’s choices, he or she may still desire freedom for that gay person to marry based on the secular and pluralistic nation we live in. Is that a fair representation?

  9. We were discussing this on tues at my bible study.
    I threw out the comment, “You can’t legislate morality.” To which my dear leader, Jo, said: “Sorry, hon, Every law we have is legislating morality.”
    Which is true – Starting with the Ten Commandments and on down the line in minute details……
    Many Christians are worried about the ‘slippery slope’. Many are worried that insane things will happen if those sinners over there get the legislation they desperately lobbied for. And others, who don’t want to offend just say. “God is Love and who are they hurting anyway?”
    God does Love us beyond anything we will ever show to each other here on earth. But God is also Holy and no amount of warm fuzzies will change His judgement. No amount of lobbying for ‘Christian’ legislation will guarantee us a place in Heaven, either.
    My dad fired a woman who worked for him after she took some vacation days to get ‘married’ to her girlfriend, she sued him for unemployment, saying that she was unfairly fired for her homosexuality, and won. And I was glad for her since I’m sure she was right. But I was sad for her too, I saw a lot of anger in her life and she never had much respect from her co-workers. She’s just one person, though. I don’t see the whole gay community that way.
    I’ve met a lot of people who love a certain gay friend and I am glad for that, we are called to love with the Love of Christ, We are told to not judge lest we be judged. I know I’m not righteous of my own accord. None of us are. And neither are they until they accept Jesus as the only way.
    And all we can do is pray for them and be ready with an answer when our personal example reflects Jesus enough to get their attention. I am constantly working on my attitude toward everyone I differ with. I don’t know the answer either. I realize that God will deal with me privately on these issues when I get to heaven. Thank the Lord Jesus died for US ALL as individuals.

  10. Addressing only proposition 8 – Whether there is an absolute right or wrong answer to this question, only God knows. Unless we are God, the side that we fall on depends on our perspective (which we are all entitled to).

    For those who support proposition 8 – Apart from the legal status of marriage, the belief is that marriage is an institution created by God to support the union between a man and a woman. Therefore, it cannot be any other way. Since the creation of marriage by God, it has been given a legal status with benefits granted by the government and the two have become intertwined in America. If you hold this view, you have no choice but to support proposition 8 because to not support it would be to condone the lifestyles of homosexuals in a way God had never intended.

    For those who oppose proposition 8 – It’s not really about granting married homosexuals the same benefits as married heterosexuals. They can derive most of these benefits through civil unions. Any other benefits can be obtained contractually. As far as the tax benefits of marriage, the tax system is set up to reward a one income earner family. For two working people, you actually have a lower cumulative tax amount if you are not married by filing individually, which is more likely the case for homosexual couples.

    It’s really about the acknowledgement that the homosexual lifestyle should be treated as equally as the heterosexual lifestyle. Therefore, the title of being “married” is what is actually being sought. If you believe that marriage is strictly a governmental function available to all without regard to education level, social status, race or gender preferences, then proposition 8 should be opposed.

    Because the boundaries of marriage as an institution created by God and as a government function have become so interconnected, we have the great debate. This doesn’t come close to answering the question, but I can understand the passions on both sides.

  11. Which is worse in God’s eyes: a married gay couple or a hetero couple living together and not married? Against which does the church spend the most time and effort fighting?
    Further to Kristen’s point: if there was an ammendment to allow murder and stealing, should the church fight this moral issue?
    Why do gay people want marriage? It’s an institution started by God. Why do they want any part of it? Someone above mentioned the financial benefits. So is it about money? What about love?
    Why do we evangelicals want small government except when it supports our morals? Then we need government to legislate our wants and beliefs. I don’t think we need the ammendment to further the church or protect society. We need to be Jesus to our friends, neighbors, co-workers, and strangers…this will do more than any government ammendment or constitution could ever do.
    Now that I’ve spent time to read and respond to this blog, I’m going to be late for work, which is stealing from my employer. Perhaps we need an ammendment to outlaw being late for work. Or, perhaps I’ll work late or work at home to make up the time I steal.

  12. One more thing: why are we intolerant when we vote against homosexual marriage but supporters of homosexual marriage are expressing their freedom when they protest agains our views? Aren’t they being intolerant too?

  13. I’m not sure where I land on the issue. However, I have this growing suspicion that the Church has become too dependent upon the government. Some even seem to lean on it almost sacramentally.

    What I’d like to see further discussion on is the nature of Church’s role within the government. The issues themselves are important, but I’m not sure how they help articulate something of a standard for engagement. Whether it is homosexuality or global warming or human trafficking, everyone seems to want the government to do SOMETHING. Often, I’ve noticed one side, either fundamentalist or social-justice oriented Christians, bashing over what I see as essentially the same problem they both have.

    If we could step back a bit and ask what our engagement with the world should look like, I think that would be helpful for me. It would help me find some way to consistently work those these issues without trying to devise a litmus test for which ones are really important.

    My sense at least is that the Church needs another language to speak. We’ve been co-opted by the rhetoric of politics, on both sides, and do not really possess the capacity to address these things from an authentic Christian standpoint. I don’t really know what that looks like, but I know I’m a little weary of the language games that seem to never go anywhere.

  14. **correction** Often, I’ve noticed one side, either fundamentalist or social-justice oriented Christians, bashing the other over what I see as essentially the same problem they both have.

  15. I don’t agree with what the christians are doing or what the lgbt people are doing. This is the problem, Jesus has called us to love people where they stand, thus forming a friendship with them and then teaching them about the word. What I’m seeing from a Christian’s standpoint is other “christians” protesting gay pride parades with signs that say, “gay people are going to hell” and “Jesus doesn’t love you”… etc Jesus also has called us to not stand on the corner like a clashing cymbol and a banging drum, but to go to a quiet place to pray. God is the only one who can change lives, but when we pray, God will listen to our prayers. There is a wonderful article in the christian woman magazine that talks about mothers and gay sons. It bring reality to what is really going on. These so called “gay” people are people that God loves very very much. Jesus didn’t go to the pharacies to tell them about God’s love, he went to the most broken of people to spread the GOOD NEWS that God loves them. I don’t think that an Antigay marriage ban is going to do anything possitive, it’s only going to bring a group of broken people farther away from God. All we need to do is to find broken people and just become friends with them. God will do the rest of the work, we just need to take the first step. Just remember, God loves everyone, so when we think that we are better than anyone else, we will be mistaken. God can heal the most broken of people. We must trust and believe.

  16. A letter from one Christian woman to other Christians. I am struggling with an overwhelming sense of hurt and sadness. The hurt comes from the discrimination of my relationship. The discrimination that my relationship with my Lesbian partner of 5 years. Writing into the California Constitution that our relastionship does not deserve the equal rights under the law and in society that straight people enjoy. As most straight people love and respect their spouse, I love and respect my partner. As fiercely protective as straight people are of their family, I feel the same fierce protective instinct for my partner.
    This issue that Prop. 8 brought to the forefront is highly important to me because it has everything to do with me and my personal life and has no effect on straight people and their family. If I were to get married, it would not diminish or take away anything from straight marriages one bit.
    Isn’t there enough in this world stacked against love, and against hope, and against those very few and precious emotions that enable us to cope with life?
    We are just a couple of people excited and passionate at the prospect of just a chance of nourishing love and having all the tools available to fight against its destruction.
    How could we not be disappointed and angry? How could we not carry a deep sense of injustice? The votes against our lives and our equality are unfair, unjust and wrong.
    The fact that religious people were at the forefront of taking the right to marry away form thousands of people is shameful. How does this follow what Jesus calls the second greatest commandment “Love each other as yourself”? This violates the core belief of our Christian faith to treat others as we want to be treated and the promise that every American citizen makes, no matter their religious belief, to uphold the values of liberty and justice for all.
    People should be allowed to make their own choices and that they can read the Bible for themselves and get revelation for their own lives. Human beings should not be the dictators of revealing the meaning of God’s intent.
    This idea is in alignment with the basic fundamental Baptist principles of liberty and protection from the denomination in the majority’s ethics imposing its standards on the denomination in the minority.
    Why should the governing authorities prefer the conservative Catholic or conservative Evangelical definition of marriage over the Buddhist or United Church of Christ or Unitarians’ definition of marriage? Not everything that comes out of secular society is good. Not all faiths are created equal.
    This may force Christians into reconsidering what it means to be united in Christ. Are we united with traditions like the Mormons, who claim the name of Christ, but under radically different interpretations than the Baptists? Are we even members of the same body of Christ? When we are suspicious of each other’s faith, is this how the body functions? Could it be that our acceptance of others who do not believe exactly as we do, be the test of our true faith?
    This raises a question unanswerable at this point. In fact, no one has come up with a satisfactory answer to it yet: how do we live in a diverse society, with the courage of our convictions but respect the views of others? Or to put it more simply, how does God intend for us to live together, yet apart?
    Liberal believers, particularly from denominations such as the United Church of Christ or the Universalists, acknowledge that belief exists in a diverse cultural setting. For them, the church is pretty much where it was in Paul’s day: aware of, and impacted by, other belief systems. These are not seen as a threat so much as an opportunity to hear how “God is still speaking.” There’s nothing to lose, no way to go backwards, because things are continually moving forward.

  17. Cherryl- thank you for sharing your thoughts along with your experience. It can be easy to talk about issues like this in a very detached kind of way. Your comments are an important reminder that this conversation directly affects many people’s lives. Thanks.

  18. Quoting David…

    “I’m not worried about the “radical indoctrination in the homosexual lifestyle” that concerns some folks. While I don’t want churches to be forced to preform same-sex ceremonies against their will, this doesn’t seem to be a realistic concern.”

    I think it is naive to think churches or denominations will be able to opt out of performing any ceremony for marriage as defined by the state without some consequence.

Leave a reply to Mike Cancel reply