I came across an article on the creation Today website recently that made the claim that there was no such thing as gay marriage, and to say otherwise was to fraudulently redefine the word marriage, so that members of the LGBT community could make a legal, public declaration of love and commitment that offered them the same rights, responsibilities and protections under the law, as are enjoyed by many millions of heterosexual married couples all around the world.
Eric Hovind wrote a little note on his napkin and posted the image on his FaceBook page. The image you can see at the top of this article.
The post sparked quite a heated debate and led to this comment by Nathan Hoffman:
Separating man and woman from marriage is like separating sodium and chloride. Remove either chemical from the equation and it’s not salt anymore. It’s lost its saltiness and is good for nothing. Remove either man or woman from the equation of marriage, and it’s not marriage. Calling it “gay marriage” is like having a water bottle filled with nothing but oxygen and calling it water. Sorry, but you’re missing part of the equation.
Quite a clever little soundbite is it not? Until you realise that the salt analogy is flawed. For one thing salt isn’t just a combination of sodium and chloride. Salt is:
A number of ionic compounds that result from the neutralization reaction of an acid and a base. They are composed of related numbers of cations (positively charged ions) and anions (negative ions) so that the product is electrically neutral (without a net charge). These component ions can be inorganic, such as chloride (Cl−), or organic, such as acetate (C2H3O2−); and can be monatomic, such as fluoride (F−), orpolyatomic, such as sulfate (SO42−).
In fact there are quite a number of different salts and a large number contain neither sodium nor chloride.
Simple, just as there are many different types of salt, there are any different types of marriage, both in the modern world and throughout history.
Also, if you’re going to use an analogy, make sure it fucking works.
A list of different types of marriage can be found here.
In his article, Eric concludes with this statement:
Redefining “Marriage” to include “Gay” really is like redefining the word circle to include square. It is attempting to change the entire concept of marriage. When we leave the absolute standard set forth by God’s word, we are in big trouble. Please pray for God’s people to turn from their wicked ways. The world over needs to hear from heaven.
Ah! Now I get it. Marriage is only marriage when it complies with the words of the bible and is one man, one woman and nothing else.
Okay then, shall we look at what the bible says about marriage?
Genesis 2:24 – That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
Okay, so far so good. Looks like Eric’s on the money with the bible teachings about what a marriage should be. Sorry everyone, looks like I backed a loser this time. Nothing to see here, move along.
But! Hold on just a Jesus-shagging minute! What about those other little nuggets to be found in the Big Book of Bollocks? Such as:
Genesis 38:6-8 – Judah got a wife for Er, his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death. Then Judah said to Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to raise up offspring for your brother.”
WTgold-platedF? Didn’t Er’s widow have any say in this? Her husband pops his clogs and she is given… FUCKING GIVEN to her dead husband’s brother. Okay Eric, so that means that freshly widowed women have absolutely no say in the planning of their next marriage? And can be handed over to someone as their wife instead. Well, that sounds like something we see every day in the western world, eh?
But that isn’t the only example. For instance several characters in the bible were married but in addition to their wife had concubines as well:
- Abraham – 2
- Gideon – 1
- Nahor – 1
- Jacob – 1
- Eliphaz – 1
- Caleb – 2
- Manassah – 1
- Solomon – 300
- Belshazzar – 1
Really? This is acceptable is it? This is what make up a morally acceptable marriage? One man, up to 300 women? Sounds a bit fraught to me! You know there’s gonna be a cat fight at least once a day. And one really wonders what wife number one had to say when wife number two was dragged over the threshold.
Still, I suppose that the extra wives and concubines wanted to be there or they wouldn’t have signed on the dotted line.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 – “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”
You fucking, bloody what now?
A man can rape a virgin and then she HAS to be married to him? On what possible planet would that be more morally acceptable than two people of the same gender wishing to tie the knot?
Honestly, I can’t see that as the basis of a long, happy and loving relationship.
I mean I could go on and talk about:
- One man, one woman, her property
- Male soldier, female prisoner of war
- Forced slave marriage
I could, but I really don’t think I have to. Not after that rape/shotgun wedding scenario!
If Eric Hovind considers the bible to be the ultimate guide for living a moral life, I wonder just how he has managed to avoid following in his father’s footsteps all the way to Alcatraz.
I find it despicable that the bible should be held up by right-wing religitards as evidence (hah!) that same sex marriages are immoral in any way, especially when you consider that in any gay marriage, both people actually want to be there!
And if same sex marriage is a redefining of the biblical moral standard for marriage, I say it’s about time!