Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Alan Reinach
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000123
|
00:22 Welcome to the Liberty Insider, this is the
00:25 program that will bring you updates, 00:27 news discussion and all around information 00:30 for religious liberty issues. 00:32 My name is Lincoln Steed, Editor of Liberty Magazine 00:36 and my guest on the program is Attorney 00:38 Alan Reinach. Alan, welcome back to the program. 00:41 Thank you very much Lincoln. 00:42 Let's really hit a contentious topic now, 00:45 marriage. Well. Of course, I can hear 00:48 a thousand standup comedians lining up 00:52 to take shots at marriage. 00:53 Well you know, Robin Williams had the best 00:55 line about same sex marriage, he said 00:58 I don't see what the big deal is everybody 01:00 has been married now, it's all the same. 01:04 Well, we'll not even get into that, bad marriage is 01:07 in that way easily or marriages to generate 01:10 and that's true. But you know there is no question 01:14 that the rising prominence, 01:18 the homosexual lifestyle and the new found rights 01:22 and you know the movements toward 01:24 homosexual court marriage and this is you know 01:27 that we call it marriage it has brought marriage 01:30 itself into prominence and there's being efforts 01:32 most notably the proportionate in California 01:35 to legally redefine or legally define marriages 01:39 between a man and a woman, any Christian 01:43 is known that so for a long time. 01:45 But here there's a legal attempt to, to limit it to 01:48 what we have understood is true marriage. 01:50 The courts have come a long way Lincoln 01:52 we think that the battle is simply over you know 01:56 a marriage is a man or woman whether it wil be 01:58 extended to same sex couples, 02:01 it's far beyond that point. 02:03 Marriage itself has been ruled not just by 02:08 a court in California, but in your own neck 02:10 of the woods in Washington D.C. 02:13 Marriage itself is illegal discrimination, 02:17 it violates basic human rights and the logic 02:20 of it is really not simply to open up marriage 02:25 to same sex couples, but to really undermine 02:29 any authority of the state to either promote or 02:33 even restrict marriage because marriage now 02:37 is as a fundamental right, an expression of pure 02:43 personal choice, personal gratification, 02:46 sexual fulfillment. And when you look at it 02:49 that way what business does the state 02:52 have to tell you that you can't marry your sister, 02:56 that if you're a bisexual that you can't marry 03:00 a man and a woman at the same time. 03:03 If that's what the fundamental right is, 03:06 a fundamental right of sexual freedom, 03:08 of privacy, of autonomy in personal relationships. 03:12 And marriage is no longer a social institution 03:17 for the preservation of the society and the 03:19 raising of the children in the welfare of the next 03:22 generation, we're undermining the 03:25 foundation of the entire civilization. 03:27 Well it seems to me there's two things going on, 03:29 there's a lowered respect for the norms 03:32 that might derive from Christianity or any 03:35 religious tradition and also there's clearly a 03:39 devolution of society from it's accepted 03:41 morays of previous times. 03:44 Because it seems odd to me or it's not odd but 03:47 it's bizarre that we're trying to shore up 03:51 marriage in using Christianity where 03:53 with very few exceptions throughout the whole 03:56 cavalcade human history. Marriage has been accepted 04:00 for what it is, the only divergence might be 04:02 how many wives? Right. But marriage is hardly 04:05 a unique construct that you can say well just this 04:08 relation. It's not a Western, it's not a 04:09 Christian, it's not a Jewish, it's a Universal. 04:13 So, so. But try to understand. 04:15 That our society is about to throw it out tells me 04:18 quite apart from morality that just society, 04:22 we don't really have the guidelines anymore, 04:25 we're in an open territory and. And let's be clear 04:29 the issue is not whether same sex marriage poses 04:32 some sort of, you know terminal threat to the 04:36 to the institution of marriage. 04:38 Same sex marriage is not a cause it's a symptom, 04:41 exactly, of a much larger disease. I don't for, 04:46 for a moment believe that what a same sex 04:50 couple does in their relationship is going to 04:54 determine the future of marriage, 04:56 future of my marriage. 04:58 It's not that what they're doing is somehow harming, 05:01 it's that the fact that society is redefining 05:05 marriage from being an institution that protects 05:09 children that provides for the social, emotional, 05:12 spiritual, physical, academic 05:16 prosperity of children. I mean one of the things 05:19 we don't hear about in the media, we're not 05:22 hearing about it enough in the court cases 05:25 is all the statistics show that yes children 05:29 really do need a father and a mother, and this is 05:33 not a religious thing. Children in intact 05:36 homes with the father and mother have better 05:38 economic futures, better academic outcomes, 05:42 better social, better emotional health, 05:44 there's no question. And, and, you know 05:47 I don't wanna be foolish and I would be attacked 05:50 via letters and phone calls if I claim to be 05:52 an expert on the psychology and the 05:54 sexuality and all of that. But it's abundantly 05:57 obvious that a significant precipitating factor 06:01 in homosexual behavior is the dynamic of parents. 06:06 And I mean a troublesome dynamic often where 06:11 one parent is absent or a parent that 06:14 assumed another role. So I think we're on, 06:16 but I Lincoln, there's so much, psychology 06:18 that underlies it shows that our 06:20 society is disruptive. So to institutionalize 06:24 that disruption cannot be good. 06:26 There's so much in this discussion where those 06:29 of us who favor marriage are I think unfairly 06:32 characterize as homophobic 06:34 and hostile to homosexuality. 06:36 To me the issue of homosexuality is beside 06:39 the point okay, we have a federal court, 06:43 it was besides the point for this, you know 06:45 Judge Walker, Judge Walker in San Francisco 06:48 ruled that there is no other bases for a society 06:52 to preserve marriages of man and a woman 06:55 except essentially for religious bigotry. 06:58 Marriage is nothing short of religious bigotry. 07:00 What I, you know what I'm trying to say is 07:03 it has nothing to do with attitudes towards 07:06 homosexuality, it has every thing to do with 07:09 an understanding of the significance of marriage 07:12 itself as a social institution and the 07:15 importance of a father and mother to children. 07:19 It has nothing to do with homosexuality, 07:22 so for Judge Walker to equate, to equate the 07:27 voting for proposition aid for a ballot 07:30 initiative in favor of marriages of man 07:33 and a woman to equate that with bigotry 07:36 towards homosexuals, I think it's completely 07:38 misguided. Does he say that the, the promotion of 07:43 proposition aid is religious bigotry 07:45 in marriage? Yes. Yes. Or that marriage as it 07:48 exists is religious bigotry? 07:51 The judge here in, judge, well we've got a 07:54 trial judge here in the district of Columbia 07:59 and we have a three judge panel on the district of 08:01 Columbia court of appeals who said that marriage is 08:05 discriminatory, it violates the human 08:08 rights charter of the city of Washington D.C. 08:11 They would not even permit the voters, 08:15 the citizens of Washington to vote on an initiative, 08:19 on the ballet whether to preserve marriage as a 08:22 man and a woman. This was beyond, 08:25 I wanna go back to a point we made earlier 08:27 which I think the judge couldn't be so 08:29 unaware of it. It's no question that Christians 08:33 in America are anxious to protect marriage 08:36 but by means historically could you show that 08:40 marriage just exists in our Western continuum 08:43 because Christianity suddenly appeared. 08:46 Marriage is not exclusively Christian, 08:48 it exists in every culture, every civilization, 08:52 India, China, Buddhist, Hindu I don't care, 08:54 Muslim, it's a universal. It's true, I think an 08:58 argument could be made that Christianity taking 09:01 an existing, at least in recent history an existing 09:04 social structure has arguably moderated or 09:08 softened the contractual relationship and made 09:11 it more emotional and spiritual, but it's 09:14 certainly not a Christian construct as far as 09:17 history is concerned. Well from a Christian 09:19 stand point of course we go back to the 09:22 Garden of Eden that there were two institutions. 09:25 Biblical, if you accept the, I mean with the 09:28 premise of course that God created everything 09:30 all from one but as far as the historical record 09:34 all societies have seem to come at the same 09:38 point in their different development and they 09:40 didn't throw off marriage just because they, 09:42 they departed from the worship of God. 09:44 So it's something innate in the way 09:46 human beings interact. Well, and one of the 09:48 legal arguments I think the judges have ignored 09:51 is that the burden of proof given thousands 09:54 of years of human history where marriage 09:56 has been the norm. The burden of proof is 09:59 on those who wanna change it to show that 10:02 society would somehow be improved by changing 10:05 the basic norms. And, and, and, and I haven't read 10:08 all of the arguments of that case but. 10:09 I have read it over and over again. 10:11 Well then tell me if I'm on to this, I, I, 10:13 years ago, I used to listened to that, 10:15 I've mentioned on this program before I listened 10:17 in Australia, beginning in Australia to some of the 10:19 public debate from socialists and Anarchists 10:24 for want of a better word. Many of them were 10:26 pushing a homosexual agenda or even then 10:28 when I was young long ago and the premises 10:32 basically a socialist one or a progressively 10:35 socialist one that the norms of our society 10:38 including Christianity are false and abusive and 10:42 that we need to get rid of this prosthetic, 10:44 they're ultimately opposed to a male domination 10:48 and the nuclear family structure and all 10:52 should be thrown out. You don't see that, 10:54 I believe it, you don't see that, that's what I'm 10:58 fishing for. I hope the judge is gonna drop that 10:59 because that's usually the argument underlining 11:02 the more radical philosophically inclined 11:05 gay movement. I don't hardly think that 11:07 all those involved in the gay movement 11:09 I don't understand it. But it predates the modern 11:11 gay moment because the gay movements 11:14 sense of change from the existing society 11:18 derived from this earlier thinking 11:20 which was very problematic. 11:21 And it's amazing that in a day when we're being 11:23 told that the present regime is bringing 11:25 socialism and so on. This view that many people 11:28 have adopted it, route I think is realistically 11:31 socialistic. Well, there's two different prospectives 11:35 in terms of attack on marriage, the lesbian 11:38 prospective clearly sees marriage as an 11:41 institution of male oppression and they'd 11:44 like to do anything they can to end it. 11:47 So the specter of two women desiring to 11:50 marry, well they may genuinely desire that, 11:53 but from the stand point of the lesbian 11:56 philosophical agenda is not to get two women 12:00 to be able to marry, but to destroy 12:02 the institution entirely. Yeah now there's no 12:04 question in gender, I think part of it is an 12:08 unfortunate out growth of a break down in society, 12:11 people were carrying the neurosis to unfulfilled 12:14 desires to marriage even though that they might 12:16 have an alienation toward the institution. 12:19 But as you point out what suffering is religion 12:23 itself and the prerogative of those 12:25 people that hold that faith and the value of 12:27 marriage, it's really being literally 12:29 restricted isn't it? Well, there's a very 12:33 serious implication for religious freedom, 12:37 because the right, the fundamental right to 12:40 marry has been extended to the same sex couples 12:42 at the same time that religious freedom has 12:44 being diminished. That's true, we'll be back 12:46 after the break to continue this very 12:49 interesting discussion on a topic that's as real 12:51 as what's happening on your headlines today. 13:02 One-hundred years, a long time to do anything 13:06 much less publish a magazine, but this year 13:09 Liberty, the Seventh-Day Adventist voice of 13:12 religious freedom, celebrates one hundred 13:14 years of doing what it does best, collecting, 13:17 analyzing, and reporting the ebb and flow of 13:20 religious expression around the world. 13:22 Issue after issue. Liberty has taken on the tough 13:26 assignments, tracking down threats to religious 13:28 freedom and exposing the work of the devil in every 13:31 corner of the globe. Governmental interference, 13:34 personal attacks, corporate assaults, 13:36 even religious freedom issues sequestered within 13:39 church community itself have been clearly and 13:41 honestly exposed. Liberty exists for one 13:45 purpose to help God's people maintain that 13:48 all important separation of Church and State, 13:50 while recognizing the dangers inherent in 13:53 such a struggle. During the past century, 13:56 Liberty has experienced challenges of its 13:58 own, but it remains on the job. 14:00 Thanks to the inspired leadership of a long 14:03 line of dedicated Adventist Editors, 14:05 three of whom represent almost half of 14:07 the publications existence and the foresight 14:09 of a little woman from New England. 14:11 One hundred years of struggle, 14:14 one hundred years of victories, religious 14:17 freedom isn't just about political machines and 14:19 cultural prejudices. It's about people 14:22 fighting for the right to serve the God 14:25 they love as their hearts and the Holy 14:27 Spirit dictate. Thanks to the prayers and 14:30 generous support of Seventh-Day 14:32 Adventists everywhere. Liberty will continue 14:35 to accomplish its work of providing timely 14:37 information, spirit filled inspiration, 14:39 and heaven sent encouragement to all who 14:42 long to live and work in a world bound 14:45 together by the God ordained 14:47 bonds of religious freedom. 14:59 Welcome back to the Liberty Insider, 15:01 before the break I was discussing with my guest 15:03 Alan Reinach some of the ramifications for 15:07 religious freedom in the gay marriage issue. 15:11 And of course that just spins out in many 15:14 directions, but to bring it back to something 15:17 that's currently happening as we record this, 15:18 this a hearing before the Ninth Circuit on the 15:23 constitutionality I guess of the Proposition 8. 15:27 Well all our arguments were already heard by the 15:29 Ninth Circuit. Yes, just a few days ago, I was. 15:31 And whether, you know California voters in 15:33 2008 approved a ballet initiative defining 15:38 marriages of man and a woman. 15:39 And a gay federal judge struck it down and said, 15:43 society has absolutely no legitimate interest in 15:49 restricting marriage to a man and a woman 15:51 that that restriction is the product wholly 15:54 of religious bigotry. And that's the ruling 15:57 that is now up on appeal before the Ninth Circuit. 16:00 And we have it as we're sitting here in the studio 16:02 today, we have not yet had a decision from the 16:06 Ninth Circuit. And I heard a lot of the argument 16:08 and on both sides, they were very 16:10 interesting points put forward, so it's not an 16:13 absolutely one dimensional argument, at least as 16:16 far as the legal prospective, but I think 16:18 that sociologically there some serious things 16:20 applied. And from the point of view of where 16:23 we go here on religious freedom and 16:26 understandings of marriages of religious 16:28 institution and have that impacts 16:31 employment in churches, the right of churches 16:33 to hold a viewpoint. I mean it's just scary. 16:35 The implication is due but before we get into the 16:38 details Lincoln, I have to observe, God's wisdom, 16:43 the authority of the creator who gave us 16:45 marriage before sin ever entered in the 16:48 Garden of Eden. The authority of the creator 16:51 was put on trial in a federal court in 16:54 San Francisco, and the Christian world has been 16:56 and the Adventist world has been largely 16:59 apathetic to this idea that God Himself is on trial. 17:05 And essentially His wisdom, His law was 17:09 defeated in the trial court. I agree with you 17:15 I don't agree with you. On one level I think 17:17 we shouldn't make what, even in the Bible it says 17:22 the times of ignorance God winked, God winked at. 17:24 And I think there is some even gay judge 17:28 says one thing. I'll tell you the Judge Walker 17:30 was ignorant, I think that there's some secular 17:33 ignorance at play here, yes, because they 17:34 follow through one thing I'm not sure our whole 17:37 system has seen is just gonna strike God down. 17:40 It's a telling thing that people don't recognize 17:43 the greater values and the representation of God 17:47 is at play, but I'm a little lowest to cast it 17:52 absolutely that way but we should recognize 17:54 that a lot it takes here that the image of God 17:57 is being snuffed out in our society 17:59 and here in the very institution. 18:01 And, and, I'm glad you talk about the image 18:03 of God because if you go back to the Genesis 18:07 chapter 1 verse 27, it does not say that you 18:12 as a male are created in the image of God, yeah, 18:16 it says male and female created he them in his 18:20 image.Yeah And so as in what we need to recover 18:25 is the sense that in the intimacy of marriage 18:28 we get the only experiential glimpse 18:33 that will, can have as human beings into what 18:36 it means for the divinity to be three in one, 18:40 to be Father, Son and Holy Spirit in a, you 18:44 know close intimate relationship, the two 18:48 become one flesh in marriage. And there 18:51 is an intimacy and a, and a oneness there that is 18:56 an imperfect to be sure reflection of the unity 18:59 of God head. Now very unfortunate part of this 19:02 debate not in the legal hearing, and it came up 19:05 a little bit I must admit I heard it's a sniping 19:08 attack about well the state of marriage, you 19:11 know if the Christians are trying to defend 19:13 that you know so many end in divorce. But 19:16 that's, that's a rebuke against man's custody of 19:20 institution, not of the institution itself. True. 19:23 There are so many stresses in our 19:25 society and you know just looking as a 19:28 sociologically, you know a whole, since 19:31 the industrial revolution, taking 19:32 people off the land making them workers in 19:36 factories that break up their home and now 19:38 women have to work and so on. There are 19:40 many factors that have worked to destroy 19:42 the biblical model of marriage quite apart 19:45 from the gay. Right, and I want to be clear, 19:49 I'm not suggesting the same sex marriage is 19:52 you know critical to the destruction of marriage 19:55 as some have said and I don't disagree with 20:00 Judge Walker on that particular point. 20:03 I think there are much larger issues. 20:04 And the problem for religious liberty is that 20:07 the fundamental personal right, whether 20:11 it be simply gay rights in general or especially 20:15 the right to have a same sex marriage 20:18 has been elevated to the same level as 20:21 a race. Right. In some courts, California being 20:24 among them where universally religious 20:28 freedom has been reduced to a very 20:32 trivial kind of right. Now you're getting to. 20:34 And so what we have is, we have this 20:36 unleveled playing field. Now President Obama 20:39 appointed a renowned law professor Chai Feldblum 20:43 to head up the Civil Rights Agency of the 20:46 Federal Government, the Equal Employment 20:48 Opportunity Commission. She's on a record 20:50 having said and having published, her view 20:53 is in there is no potential conflict 20:57 between gay rights and religious freedom 20:59 that she can imagine where religious freedom 21:02 ought to win over gay rights. Yeah. And there 21:06 is no question, yeah, it's just wrong headed, 21:07 we come into court with two strikes against us. 21:11 There is an unleveled legal playing field. 21:13 And the presumption is that if there is a 21:15 religious objection of any kind by an 21:18 individual, by a church to something that 21:20 implicates gay rights somehow, the church 21:24 and the religion are going to lose. And 21:27 the implications are very serious for the 21:30 survival of religious institutions in America 21:33 as we know it. Yeah, now you're right there's 21:35 something serious at play and I'll throw 21:37 a wild card in, but it's the most effecting 21:40 to me. We're seeing what's happening in 21:42 this country and because it's not 21:43 the only country, Canada is in some ways even 21:46 quite ahead but Abu Ghraib, when I look back 21:51 at what a disgraceful moment the western 21:56 nominally Christian world in the United States 21:59 has come to where at Abu Ghraib not just 22:02 tortured was visited upon the detainees 22:04 but aberrant, psychosexual behavior 22:12 is visited on them and President Bush said, 22:16 this is not us unfortunately 22:18 this is us. And this type of motion I think 22:23 institutionalizes in our very law or something 22:26 that I think its fine to respect the human being. 22:31 But its behavior that's biblically and socially 22:35 and in every other country most that I can 22:37 think of aberrant other than Europe which 22:39 is going along with it a bit. And yeah we 22:44 need to speak out against it where I have 22:45 the problem? At a point where the society 22:49 is so out of harmony with the nature of reality 22:53 and that's the way I describe it. God's law 22:57 to establish marriage was not arbitrary, 23:00 it's biology, it's nature and when we become so 23:05 contrary to human nature and biology 23:09 in reality as to approve same sex marriage we 23:12 have to be on the borders of eternity. 23:15 It has to be close, absolutely, judgment 23:18 day for the civilization. Of course now you 23:21 know just looking at history I can't find in, 23:23 I've never been never be able to find evidence 23:25 that in the early Christian church which 23:28 was extend there at the time of the Roman Empire 23:30 and the remainders of the Greek Empire, 23:34 I mean it had gone but Greece was still 23:35 very much alive and we know that there was 23:40 a severe homosexuality. But there is no evidence 23:43 that early Christianity harassed the homosexual 23:46 life style. It was just as Paul said, some of 23:49 these you once were, right, Christians came 23:52 out that. And other than even now, a few 23:56 misguided Christian activist you know 23:58 chanting things that gay rallies and that, 24:01 there's no really evidence of Christians trying 24:04 to victimize gays in my view. What 24:08 has happened is, is this new right has now being 24:11 turned against religious practice and we need to 24:14 see this as a new model and as you say 24:18 EOC signaling there that Christianity or 24:21 religion? It's not just Christianity. Religious 24:24 rights may not be seen as a primary right. 24:26 Look we've already seen two Christians 24:29 institutions, Catholic institutions closed 24:33 down because from a regulatory standpoint 24:36 there were adoption agencies in San 24:38 Francisco and Boston that were required 24:41 to offer services to same sex couples and 24:44 they could not do that on conscience grounds 24:46 and their conscience rights were not 24:49 respected. And we can expect in wide range 24:52 of places, graduate programs in physiology 24:55 and social work will be shut down will not 24:58 accredited if they don't comply with the gay 25:03 agenda. Do you think as is hinted at in 25:06 Canada, the ministers of religion will be required 25:09 on paying of losing their right to perform any 25:11 marriage, required to perform such marriages. 25:14 I actually think. You see that Alan. I think 25:16 that's a long short in America, there are 25:19 those who I respect who fear that realistically, 25:22 I think that's the end of a long course. 25:26 And I frankly don't know that the pendulum 25:29 gonna keep swinging in that direction before 25:31 it swings back. Because I believe this whole 25:34 thing is just begging for overreaction back 25:38 the other way, which will be sociologically 25:41 very bad. So all we could do in discussing 25:43 what the risks are to the church is to say if 25:47 these legal principles are allowed to work 25:50 themselves through what are the likely result? 25:54 For example there was Amathus Camp meeting 25:57 property, beautiful place on the Jersey shore, 26:00 lost the first round battle for its tax 26:03 exempt status from real property taxes not 26:06 because of the same sex marriage but a civil 26:08 union. Yeah, the ramifications of this 26:11 spread out in all sorts of church and religious 26:14 behavior don't they? The ramifications 26:16 are the serious threat for the future survival 26:19 of the religious institutions, if 26:22 Christianity is regarded as discrimination and 26:25 our rights to be Christians into half 26:27 Christian institutions subordinated to 26:30 gay rights then if we are not willing to have 26:33 gays represents us school teachers, 26:35 as Pastors, etc, we're not going to be allowed 26:39 to have our institutions, it's that simple, we 26:42 can't exist if we're discriminatory. 26:47 It's very significant to me that at the beginning 26:49 of the Christ's Ministry the first miracle that 26:52 He performed was at the marriage feast 26:54 in Cana. Marriage back then was both societally 26:59 approved and encouraged and biblically required, 27:03 however 2000 years later many, many things have 27:08 changed and I cannot see it as anything 27:11 but the sign of deteriorating social 27:14 norms, as well as the disregard for religious 27:18 requirements that we are having some of 27:20 the arguments that we have over not just 27:23 marriage but gay marriage. Of course we 27:26 required to be charitable toward 27:28 people, of course we are required with the 27:30 separation of the church and state, to live our 27:33 lives and to, in the spiritual fulfillment of 27:39 what God requires and to leave the state 27:42 to its own requirement. But surely we cannot 27:45 be indifferent to the state going in the 27:48 direction that could end dangerous for all 27:52 concerned. It's up to Christians to object to 27:56 this and yet live in charity with all of our 27:58 fellowmen with whatever sexual persuasion. 28:02 This is Lincoln Steed for Liberty Insider. |
Revised 2014-12-17