When we discuss the issue of sodomy and sodomite unions, emotions can run high. It is hard for many to separate the love of their sodomite friends and the acts that make them sodomites. So, it is understandable when people come out and say that they do not want to cut off family and friends because they are sodomites. The thought of abandoning this person or refusing to take part in portions of their lives hurts us and brings feelings of dread. But for politicians there is more to consider.
If you are a politician, there is the fear that your stance on sodomy might make you a target and thereby ruin your chance of being elected. So, when Marco Rubio said that he would attend a sodomite union of a friend or family member that he was close to, we can understand why he would say that.
Christian News reported:
In an interview with an internet publication on Wednesday, Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio stated that while he personally opposes same-sex “marriage,” he would attend the ceremony of a friend or family member if asked.
“If it’s somebody in my life that I care for, of course I would,” he told Fusion’s Jorge Ramos.
Before we go any further, I must remind myself that Rubio is not a conservative, he just plays one on T.V.; therefore this should not bother me so much. But I have to confess that it does bother me. This man wants to be the leader of the free world but does not see how foolish his stance is on this. Let me show you what I mean.
Rubio continued, “As I said, I’m a member of the Catholic faith that teaches, for example, that divorce is wrong. But if someone gets divorced, I’m not going to stop loving them or having them a part of our lives.”
On this point, I agree. With divorce, there may have been mitigating circumstances outside of that person’s control. Such mitigating circumstance as adultery, abandonment, abuse, or a host of other issues may have been present in the marriage. In these cases, divorce might be allowed, but this is a false equal to homosexuality. There is no circumstance in which homosexuality is not sin.
It has also been pointed out that the most loving thing to do for our sodomite friends and family is to refuse to participate in their sinful behavior. By attending the union ceremony, we are justifying and validating the act. But for me, there is a deeper and more troubling concern here. Rubio either believes that this is not sin, or he believes sin is not serious.
Rubio explains, “I’m not going to hurt them simply because I disagree with a choice they’ve made or because I disagree with a decision they’ve made, or whatever it may be. Ultimately, if someone that you care for and is part of your family has decided to move in one direction or another or feels that way because of who they love, you respect that because you love them.”
Okay, well said. But what if that person you love has chosen to molest children? What if the choice they made was to kill their spouse for the insurance money? What if they asked you not only to continue loving them, but to come watch? Would Rubio then decide to respect them and come to a human sacrifice, child rape, etc.? This points to our first option, he does not think that sodomy is a sin. If Rubio does not see the union of same-sex partners as sodomy and, therefore, on the same level as the things we listed, then he does not think it is a sin.
Even worse, if Rubio does see these issues as the same, but still would attend, what does that tell us about his view of sin? It tells us that Rubio does not think that sin is serious. The commandments are just a lists of things that God would prefer we did not do. Suggestions really. But, we know that this is not the case. Sin is an offense against a Holy God. They are an offense to Him because when we sin, as God’s image bearers, we lie about God. Lying is a sin because God is not a liar. Sodomy is a sin because God is our Husband, and the Church is His bride.
Sodomy is idolatry. It proclaims a false view of Christ and His Church. It places a false god as savior.
We will end with Christian News’ quotes from Rev. Peter Ould:
Peter Ould, a former homosexual who now serves as a minister for the Church of England, made similar comments.
“Marriage is a God-given ordinance that speaks to more than just the love between two people. Biblical teaching on marriage shows us that the union of a man and woman is the icon of the union of Christ and His Church,” he said. “The Book of Revelation envisions the great wedding feast at the end of time, the union of the Bridegroom and his bride.”
“So doing marriage incorrectly is an act of idolatry. It’s a rejection of both the ordinance God has given and the meaning of that ordinance,” he continued. “Since the gender of the participants in marriage is important, mixing those sexes up destroys the point marriage was meant to represent. How can a Christian be involved in such a thing?”