RR Freak Out over Obama Support for Marriage Equality

President Obama’s declaration Wednesday that he supports marriage equality for same-sex couples has religious-righters practically foaming at the mouth. Here are just a few of the comments from right-wing extremists in Texas.

Dave Welch of the Houston Area Pastor Council says the president is an enemy of God:

“When marriage is everything, marriage is nothing. Obama and his radical allies of the sexual diversity agenda cannot redefine marriage, they can only undefine it and destroy it. Our prayer and commitment is that the people of this nation will continue to make it clear that we will not allow enemies of God and His design of marriage and family to destroy it on our watch. President Obama today not only came out against marriage, he came out against God.”

Steve Riggle, a Welch ally and senior pastor of Grace Community Church in Houston, went for a two-fer — attacking President Obama as well as Houston Mayor Annise Parker (already one of Riggle’s favorite targets):

“In November, the people need to speak once again, overwhelmingly, and tell President Obama by not giving him another term that we want our leader to believe in and support traditional marriage. In addition, since Houston Mayor Annise Parker has not only refused to honor the will of the people of Houston regarding their overwhelming support of traditional marriage, but has now as our mayor expressed jubilation at President Obama’s support for gay marriage, it may be that the people of Houston should consider adding her to the November ballot by the process of recall.”

Dwight McKissic, an African-American pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington who in 2005 suggested that God sent Hurricane Katrina to “purify” New Orleans because of tolerance for homosexuality, said the president’s announcement was bad for African-American churches and parents:

“President Obama has betrayed the Bible and the Black Church with his endorsement of same-sex marriage. The Bible is crystal clear on this subject, and the Black Church strongly opposes same-sex marriage. His endorsement is an inadvertent attack on the Christian Faith… This means that parents are now going to have an extremely difficult time teaching their children that marriage biblically and traditionally is between a man and a woman, when the President that many love and admire is now on record endorsing sodomy. This is painful and shameful. The Black Church should galvanize, mobilize and address this matter with the same (if not greater) intensity, velocity and resolve as we did the Civil Rights Movement. If we don’t, our children and grandchildren will pay a far greater price in suffering from a governmental sanction of same-sex marriage than we would have under segregation.”

Jonathan Saenz, a lobbyist for Liberty Institute, the Texas affiliate of Focus on the Family, was so agitated that he told one reporter he “absolutely” agreed that marriage is a states’ rights issue — but then suggested that a federal constitutional amendment is necessary to keep states from, well, having the right to decide for themselves:

“I think this is something you should see decided at the state level, but not exclusively at the state level.”

OK. Sure. He’s “for” states’ rights — except when he’s not. And too bad for the same-sex families who live in states where their marriages and civil unions are already legally recognized, right? Just another example of how, at its core, the religious right is anti-freedom.

7 thoughts on “RR Freak Out over Obama Support for Marriage Equality

  1. Well, I have a question here. In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul says that human beings who go to Heaven will be spiritual beings like God, the angels, and whoever else is there and that no such thing as marriage will exist in heaven. Now, lets explore this a little.

    Paul says that people will be given a “spiritual body” for Heaven, but he never defines what that is or what it looks like. So, will people who are female here on Earth be given female spiritual bodies? Will males here on Earth be given male spiritual bodies for Heaven?

    The Christian fundamentalists also believe (just looked it up) that no procreation will occur in Heaven. This likely means that these spiritual bodies will have no sex organs. What would be the point? That is what the fundies say. However, they do insist that two people who were married on Earth can and will still be spiritually close to each other in Heaven. Might they even share the same mansion? We are also told throughout the New Testament, usually by Jesus himself and the disciple John who loved Jesus, that LOVE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING for people to do.

    Now, let’s review. We have Heaven. We have former humans there that have spiritual bodies no longer made for sex. It is doubtful that they are either male or female—probably neuter in some way. They have no sexual organs because there is no need for procreation. There is no sex in Heaven. However, the beings there are required to love each other, and they can even live with each other as if they are man and wife—even though they are neuter and there is no such thing as marriage.

    This sounds a lot like what gay people do here on Earth right now. Admittedly, they have bodies with a sex and sex organs. However, the Bible argues clearly that the spiritual condition of man is far more important than his physical condition. However, if a spirit trapped in a female body loves another spirit trapped in another female body, that spirit-to-spirit loves is exactly what the Bible contemplates as the normal condition for all of mankind in Heaven—forever.

    So I guess this poses a key question. If a Christian fundamentalist can use his rusted pick-up truck to body-drag Matthew Shepherd down a rural road—just to give him a headstart on the Hell he deserves for his gay abomination, why is it that a gay couple cannot get a head start on the true nature of heavenly relationships and love while still right here on Earth?

    P.S. I know Matthew Shepherd was not body dragged—just a “what if” example.

  2. The United States Constitution clearly provides for separation of Church and State. Everyone is entitled to his or her own beliefs, but in this country, no government has the right to require its citizens to follow the beliefs of any religious group. Most people have some family member, close or distant, who is GLB or T, even though they don’t admit it. Please respect the rights of those of us whose beliefs are different from yours.

  3. These people sound eerily like those in another generation who said that interracial marriage was against God’s will.

  4. Charles, this topic has been discussed by (Catholic) theologians for centuries. One view was that women, by nature defective, would get ‘repaired’ when going to heaven (I wonder what happend to Holy Mary). Then there is the parable of the rich man inviting people for a feast. One of the poetential guest comes up with the excuse that he is freshly married. At least one sainted theologian combined that with the verse that he who abandons something in this life for Christ will get repaid manifold (I forgot the number) in heaven => men who abandon their spouses to become celibate clerics/monks will get a harem.
    All the apostles were married (esp. St.Peter), which posed a problem for the proponents of mandatory celibacy. Since according to legend all apostles died as martyrs, this has been declared to be a divorce in blood (‘the shame of marriage got washed off with blood’). Then there are the 144000 male virgins of Revelations. Not only Jehovah’s witnesses came up with the idea that those would be the only humans that would go to heaven, some saints had the same idea while others were content with a heavenly class system that would distribute the heavenly awards depending on the degree of not having sex while alive. 100% only for virgins (of both sexes), people who conducted a ‘marriage of Joseph’ (=sexless) 80%, those that were married but took the celibate vows later 50%, non-abstinent married people 30% (there was some dispute about the exact numbers).
    Btw, another hot topic of discussion was, whether Adam and Eve had sex before getting kicked out of Eden. St.Augustine came to the conclusion that they had but without the sin of pleasure. Adam could control his member and the purpose was purely procreative. Original sin led to the rebellion of the male member which would afterwards be beyond the control of the rational mind.
    You see, nothing as perverted and depraved as a sex-deprived religious brain 😉

  5. “Redefining traditiona; marraige?” Ha! I’d suggest that thoae who use this argument should actually read the entire chapter of Leviticus 20, and see the distinctions that are made, for example, between ‘mother’ and ‘father’s wife’ — distinctions that only make sense in a polygamous society. The fragment of autobiography from Josephus similarly shows that polygamy was still being practiced, at least among the highest ‘Upper Class’ in Jerusalem. And even Darby’s translation and Young’s Literal Translation — Bible Gateway is such a useful site — give the requirements for an ‘overseer’ of the church that he be the ‘husband of one wife.’ (But stating that as a ‘special requirement’ for church leaders implies that it was NOT a requirement for the laity as a whole, or why bother — imagine the ‘special requirement’ was that overseers be at least 5’6,” would that mean that short people were barred or accepted as members of the laity.

  6. Interestingly, every post concerning disagreement with Obama Support for Marriage Equality, no one seems to establish any thing that they KNOW anything academic about those who desire to marry someone of their own sex. It’s all about what someone with religion defines about morality…and no one has done any eduational research to understand why this fringe activity exists and is now being recognized; only that it is bad. When speaking to an educated, worldly community there has been no one giving any information, while there has always been this unique group of individuals amongst us. Interestingly, the more people don’t know about a subject, the more or worse it is!