Advertisement
What People are Reading
Recent
Popular Alltime
Recent Comments
- Mark Verrill is clearly not
55 min 11 sec ago - Russ, clearly you are
1 hour 3 min ago - Not to be confused with The
2 hours 29 min ago - It is really nice that there
9 hours 2 min ago - I am a member of that
10 hours 34 min ago - "the order also gives
20 hours 27 min ago - What kind of grocery store
21 hours 45 min ago - "Selectman Ronald Riendeau
1 day 3 hours ago - Thanks for the correction!
1 day 6 hours ago - This is the view from the
1 day 22 hours ago
Advertisement
Letter: Keep church, state separate
Jun 08, 2009 4:20 pm
Rev. Sandy Williams' recent letter shows that he is out of his depth in matters of social science and civic policy.
He claims that "most people would condemn" the same list of sinners mentioned by Paul of Tarsus in the New Testament. I beg to differ: alcoholics, as we now generally call "drunkard," need treatment and help, rather than being told the Kingdom of God is closed to them.
But it is really Paul's adulterers, greedy and swindlers I want to talk about. Rev. Williams was replying to a letter about Maine's new same-sex marriage law. He wants it repealed. But, since he cites the authority of Paul, does he want new legislation banning adultery, greed and swindling, making them subject to civil penalty? These new civil crimes would swamp the court dockets and produce defendants from some new portions of the demographic spectrum. Maybe we would need ecclesiastical courts.
The majority of Mainers, in my view, really do understand that civil law and church teaching and precepts are different things, as our founding fathers were very wise to see. State and church serve different purposes and answer to different authority. Under current Maine law, Rev. Williams will not need to marry any gay or lesbian couples. But, whether he likes it or not, they are entitled to full justice and equality under Maine civil law.
Stephen C. Farrand
Freeport
Comments
stephen.c.farrand says:
ManOfFaith says:
I'm pretty sure I could not disagree with Stephen Farrand more.
To my understanding, "swindling" is currently both a civil and criminal offense (see Bernie Madoff, Jack Abramoff, and many others), and being an adulterer and drunkard was also illegal until very recently. Both adultery and being drunk may be grounds for civil litigation currently, depending upon specific circumstances.
And Mr. Farrand conveniently leaves out two other important (and illegal) vocations that Paul cited: thieves and male prostitutes. Should we no longer punish thieves, Mr. Farrand?
Perhaps, Mr. Farrand, it is not Pastor Williams who is out of his depth here, but you.
eabeem says:
Edgar Allen Beem Stephen Farrand's essential point remains true -- gay marriage is a not a religious issue, it is a matter of civil rights. Any organized religion is free to promulgate its ethics and morals among its adherents, but that does not give it the right to dictate law and behavior to the rest of society. As long as churches are not forced to recognize or perform gay marriages, it is simply none of their business if the majority of Americans want to extend basic civil rights to our gay brothers and sisters.
ManOfFaith says:
So let me understand this correctly: Farrand's reply to Williams falls apart when actually reviewed in context and yet Farrand's "essential point" remains true? The particulars of Farrand's argument are refuted, but the whole of the argument remains intact? How so? What are Farrand, or you for that matter, using to back up your assertion that 'marriage is not a religious issue,' other than just saying so?
If one asserts that the moon is made of green cheese, then that does not necessarily make it so, correct?
And, by the way, gay marriage is not supported by "the majority of Americans." We're discussing gay marriage here, not gay rights, nor gay civil unions. You'll kindly maintain a modicum of consistency in your claims in order to remain credible, eh?
Mr. Hein:
My essential point was rather submerged by The Forecasters' editors. It was this: if Sandy Williams picks and chooses his way through Paul's list in Corinthians, he at least ought to offer us an explanation, so that we do not conclude that a suspect animus drives his (and your) argument. Sandy Williams admitted to me face-to-face that he has never spoken publicly about any item in Paul's laundry list of sins ASIDE FROM homosexuality. Why is that, precisely? You omit greed. Why? If you and Sandy Williams condemned adultery and the greedy as vociferously, I for one might be more inclined to listen.
Obviously there are civil and criminal penalties in Maine against some items on Paul's list, but not all at present--you admit this yourself. Thieves are one who, we all agree, deserve punishment. You may be certain that Paul was referring to 'male prostitutes', but I am not (how much Greek have you studied, by the way?). I note that 'male prostitutes' is not the translation quoted by Sandy. You and he will have to sort that out.
I am hardly convinced that my point here has fallen apart. As for marriage, again, obviously it is a matter of current concern to Christian churches. But it is also a civil status (my wife and I, for example, have a marriage license signed by a notary). CIVIL law governing marriage extends back to the Twelve Tables in Roman Law, if not earlier. There was no Christian marriage sacrament until the Middle Ages--this is well established. The early Christian church was very ambivalent about marriage as an institution.
Let's drop the red herring of civil unions, shall we? I doubt you support them. I don't either. As Gertrude Stein might have said, equality is equality is equality. All the states that tried civil unions have given them up in favor of marriage, except for NJ, which has a pending court case. I like the thinking of the New York State Bar Association here.
What matters to all of us, Mr. Hein, is how many Mainers will accept equality before the law in civil marriage for gay and lesbian persons. The tide is turning in favor of marriage equality and will continue to, as demographics make same-sex marriages inevitable everywhere in the US.