.

Why I Am Voting Yes for the Minnesota Marriage Amendment

This post is my attempt to put forth an understanding, yet Biblically faithful explanation for why I am planning to Vote Yes for the marriage amendment this fall.

I am hesitant to even wade into this conversation because 1) I am not any sort of official spokesperson; 2) I have many friends on both sides of the issue; and 3) I don’t care much for the vitriolic rhetoric that is often used against those who feel the way I do.  

However, I think it is important for both sides of a conversation to be shared and heard.  I don’t think that many people on either side of the marriage amendment debate have taken a whole lot of time setting aside their personal feelings and preferences in order to understand the positions of others.

Before I explain why I am planning to Vote Yes to the MN Marriage Amendment this fall, let me take a moment to explain what I am not doing with my vote.  

(Of course many will disagree with me on the following points, but I will have to let that be.)

  • I am not voting against the worth, dignity or value of any person.
  • I am not voting against the need to find a solution for people in same-sex relationships to experience some of the benefits of people in heterosexual marriages.
  • I am not voting in the hopes of creating some kind of Christian theocracy.
  • I am not voting to minimize, criticize or condemn the feelings people in same-sex relationships have for one another.
  • I am not voting to uphold what some would claim as the ‘traditional’ view of marriage.
  • I am not voting because I believe broken, abusive, destructive marriages are somehow inherently better than even the best same-sex marriage.

That being said, let me share the reasons I am voting for the amendment. Actually, there is only one reason.  

I believe that the God of the Universe decided from eternity ago that marriage would be between one man and one woman.

I take the following statement from Dr. John Piper who I believe defines marriage in a Biblically accurate when he says,

Marriage is created and defined by God in the Scriptures as the sexual and covenantal union of a man and a woman in life-long allegiance to each other alone, as husband and wife, with a view to displaying Christ’s covenant relationship to his blood-bought church.  (for the entire sermon click here)

I believe that defining marriage in a way that is faithful to the entire breadth of teaching in the Bible, completely removes the option of same-sex marriage just as thoroughly as it removes the option of polygamous marriage, open marriage or any other so-called marriage relationship that is not constituted by one man and one woman alone.  My stance on the amendment is not one of hate, judgement or bigotry.  It is simply my best faith effort to be faithful to the what the Scriptures declare as God’s intention for his created world.

I understand that those people outside of the Christian faith will not likely be swayed by my opinion.  It is not my intention, nor my responsibility, to try and convert anyone to any kind of thinking.  

Many opponents of the amendment who are sympathetic to Christian faith, and yet plan to Vote No, say they are doing so because God is a God of love.  I don’t disagree, He most definitely is.  But the fact that 'God is love' is not a blanket that can be simply dropped over any idea or action, as justification for what a broken humanity desires to do.  God has certain ideals and mandates for the world he created.  Marriage, between a man and woman, is one of those.

However, I do call on those people who claim to follow Christ to study the above definition closely, and to decide for themselves if this is in fact what the Bible teaches.  And if it is, a very difficult personal decision will need to be made, namely,

1) to set aside personal opinions and culture influence and be faithful to Christ, or

2) to sit in the place above Scripture and determine what God’s declared will is.  

Only when we first love God, demonstrated by our willing obedience and submission to His declared Word, can we then rightly love all the world he has created.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Melissa S. October 12, 2012 at 04:24 AM
Amen! =)
Marte October 15, 2012 at 07:27 PM
I am voting YES..and glad to say so... Yes, I do have my faith that is pushing me to vote YES. You have your opinion and I have mine... Isn't freedom of speach a great thing...at least I know my vote will knock out someone else's that is voting no...
Seebs October 15, 2012 at 07:55 PM
Your faith pushes you to demand that other people be denied basic legal rights? Keep in mind, there is nothing, nothing at all, on the table here but legal rights. We are not talking about who can or can't stand at altars, we aren't talking about who gets to show up for Thanksgiving dinner. The only question on the table is whether same-sex couples are entitled to legal rights like hospital visitation rights or notification if one partner is killed in action. What religion is this, that teaches that it is necessary that people die alone for having the wrong kind of sex?
Kev November 01, 2012 at 11:20 PM
How about a different angle here. Civil legal rights. Two people pretend to have a legal relationship so they can get on the others health plan, cheat their employer, or the government so they can collect their partners social security check after that person passes away. and the list goes on. Who would police this and do I want to pay more taxes for all of this. I believe this will certainly open another can of worms and lead us farther down the road of no return in this country of dependency on everyone else but our self.
Seebs November 01, 2012 at 11:25 PM
Pretty impressive red herring. People have been getting legally married for health or legal benefits for as long as we've had health or legal benefits. It's nothing new, and in practice, it's a very small number of cases; it's not common enough to justify effort spent worrying about it. In short, if you don't want to pay more money, the answer is "don't police this". If you want to spend $10 to prevent $1 of alleged fraud, well, that's up to you to make the case for new legislation. Fact is, there is no real legal requirement that people being married be in love, or have romantic feelings, and there's no obvious reason there should be. Marriage was not historically about romance; it was about property ownership and family ties.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »