Home > Rhythm & Views > Archives > 2008 > September > 29 > Entry
Gay Marriage Not The Issue For Black Clergy
Last week, the Florida Baptist Witness published a story online about a group of 40 black pastors gathering at a Tampa church to announce their support of Amendment 2, the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment that seeks to “protect traditional marriage” by prohibiting marriage between same sex couples.
“America is in moral freefall,” the story quotes Bishop Harry Jackson Jr., founder and chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, as saying, “This is not a partisan issue. This is an issue in which we are believing that Democrats and Republicans, blacks and whites, rich and poor should come together.”
“Our job as clergymen is to speak out against the moral ills of our day and we’re saying marriage is right and we want people to vote ‘yes’ on Amendment 2,” Jackson said.
How exactly is keeping gay folks from getting married protecting “traditional marriage?”
Two-thirds of traditional marriages end in divorce. and that’s first marriages. The stats are even higher for second and third trips down the aisles. These are all supposedly heterosexual couplings. And among these divorcees are many Christians. Even members of the clergy.
How about clerics banding together to announce they will not perform weddings for couples who have not had extensive marriage counseling? Since so many people get married in churches - and all that’s required for this life altering and supposedly life long commitment is a blood test - this would seem like a good place to begin “protecting traditional marriage.”
Perhaps, those clerics who are trained only in theology, how to deliver a good sermon and manage a church, could become properly trained to provide pre-marital and post-marital counseling themselves.
Keeping homosexuals from legalizing their already existing relationships does nothing for their so-called cause of protecting marriage. Being proactive instead of reactive just might.
Comments
By agraf
September 29, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this
Right on Rhonda!
By Taylor Siluwé
September 29, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this
Amen. I couldn’t agree more.
By Becky
September 29, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this
I enthusiastically agree with you Rhonda. How does giving loving and committed individuals equal legal protections harm any other’s marriage? It has always seemed to me that those who worry about values and moral ills should encourage the concepts inherent in marriage for all people. My real fear about amendment 2 is that passage will harm people, gay and straight, by eliminating the legal status of domestic partner. There are currently , mostly medical protections provided by valid domestic partnership that could be eliminated. This could effect untold senior citizens who have merged their lives later in life but have not legalized their union by marriage. If this were not he next step of amendment 2 they why the following wording? ”treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof”
By Jeremy
September 29, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this
Your point about requiring every engaged couple to go through extensive pre marital counseling is an excellent and well thought out point, and it is a sad state of affairs that more than half of marriages end in divorce. I am currently engaged, and going through a thorough premarital counseling class as well as meeting with a mentoring couple, and would recommend this to all engaged couples. However this arguement is seperate from gay marriage. Marriage is a union under God were a man and a woman become one flesh, and as christians we shouldn’t support any marriage that doesn’t fit that criteria, even if it is a man and woman getting married. Just because people get married and divorced is not an arguement for gay marriage. As Christians we do not agree with gay marriage, and why would the fact that we have a huge Divorce crisis change our opinion on that?
By Tom
September 29, 2008 8:56 PM | Link to this
Jeremy your comments are appreciated but lets take your thoughts one step further.
Does our constitution name only one God or even any God? No, of course not because there is a separation of church and state in our nation. If you wish to ge married under YOUR God get your license from the church of your choice.
Let others who wish to be married under the laws of our nation be married with a license from the states that choose to issue marriage licenses for everyone.
That way everyone is happy. Unless you feel threatened by myself and my partner of more than 15 years.
By james
September 29, 2008 10:31 PM | Link to this
don’t you think we should be focusing on our economy instead of a divisive pointless issue that puts government where it doesn’t belong? we keep polarizing ourselves and distracting us from the real problems america is facing. wake up for gods sake …
By james
September 29, 2008 10:34 PM | Link to this
and i forgot, did you read the language? what does “substantially equivilant” to marriage mean? does that mean domestic partnerships for gay and straight couples will be eliminated?
By Zeke
September 29, 2008 11:38 PM | Link to this
Thanks Rhonda, you are right on point, you couldn’t have said it more eloquently. I’ve been with my partner for 29 years, all our brothers and sisters are on their second a few on their third marriages. We’re getting married in Mass. for our 30th anniversary. Even though it won’t be legal in Florida, it will be our and God’s eyes.
James Yes, ‘substantial equivalency thereof’ does mean domestic partners registries. Michigan & Kentucky both repealed them after their amendments passed. Florida could be next, that is unless, ya’ll Vote No On 2.
By Zeke
September 30, 2008 12:03 AM | Link to this
By Jeremy
With all do respect, you said “Marriage is a union under God were a man and a woman become one flesh.” This an opinion, not a fact, your referring to scripture from the Bible, not law. Marriage is a legal civil union, not only Christians have the right to marry and not all marriages are performed in a church or house of worship are still legal. State law dictates who can and who can’t marry, not God. I happy you have a strong faith in God, as do I. God created all his children in his image and he loves them all equally, both gay and heterosexual. He also wants all his children to love, be loved and experience happiness with the life God gave them. Congratulations on your engagement, I wish you and your future wife much love and happiness. May God Bless Both of You
By Daniel
September 30, 2008 8:47 AM | Link to this
Jeremy, you’re exactly right, marriage is defined by law, which is why the current Florida state law defines marriage as between one man and one woman only. Gay marriage is illegal. Amendment 2 simply moves the law into the constitution to protect it from activist judges like in California and Mass. It will uphold the exisitng law from being over turned by one person. It will protect the will of the majority of citizens in the state.
By Becky
September 30, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
Daniel, 1)The law is the Florida Constitution so there is no need to duplicate it. 2)The real reason for admendment 2 is to spitefully dismantle legal protections for domestic partnerships. 3)Does the term “activist judges” only refer to legal interpretations you disagree with? Was Thurgood Marshall an activist Judge? A bet there were alot of people who though so after Brown v. Board of Education.
I pray that someday future genrations will look back and see the ridiculousness of these homophopic laws. But then I am disheartened when I relaize that racism is still alive and well.
By RD
September 30, 2008 8:08 PM | Link to this
I agree that no fault divorce and heterosexual cohabitation have contributed more to family breakdown than homosexuality.
That being said, gay marriage is more like the nail in the coffin of the traditional family than the root cause of its demise. Allowing gay marriage will do nothing to improve family stability. In fact, same sex unions will guarantee that more children grow up in without a mother and father in the household. That isn’t in the best interest of the family within the African American community or elsewhere.
I am concerned about a number of issues including peace and economic justice but preserving the family unit as God created it is also important. The African American church leaders have sound reasons for endorsing Amendment 2.
By Benn Setfrey
October 2, 2008 7:10 PM | Link to this
My educated guess would be & history substantiates this: The Black Clergy U are referring to in this article are GAY. Being gay is NOT a lifestyle choice LIVING gay is. Living a lie is always an option by why should these clergy & many others have to. The real problem is if U give gay & lesbian people CIVIL RIGHTS, then everyone will want them!
By prettyskin
October 3, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this
The clergy communities should go out and find real jobs. Mostly, they are half educated, at best. Repulsive bunch!