The Massaschusetts Supreme Court has issued a ruling favoring gay marriages.

This whole debate over gay marriages seems to be simply a matter of words. I understand why religious conservatives, among which I count myself, are vehemently opposed to this. It certainly flies in the face of most of the major religion’s teachings about marriage, family, and sexuality. But the problem here is the gay community. Rather, it’s the government.

Marriage has historically been linked to religion (and many different types, at that), as a sacrament or rite. The government certainly recognized the benefit of licensing and regulating this religious act, for the purposes of taxes and other purely civil ends. In doing so, the government decided that among all the religious acts performed and observed in the Church, marriage was worth regulating. Baptisms aren’t regulated. Neither is Holy Communion. Nor are last rites, christenings, brit milahs (Jewish circumcision), bar/bat mitzvahs confirmations, or any of the hundreds of other religious rites practiced in this country. Maybe because these things don’t have immediate revenue potential or legal advantages from which the government would benefit.

I think the time as come for the state to simply recognize civil unions only and stop regulating marriage. Civil unions should be open to any two people who wish to be united for the purposes of receiving the rights bestowed by the government.

This means that a wife and husband who are married in a church would eligible, but so would two gay men who choose to live together in a relationship. It might also apply to two friends who live together in a platonic relationship. If the idea is that certain rights are bestowed because of a relationship, then let’s open it up and get rid of the religious connotations that have long stifled this debate. Keep marriage in the church or the synagogue or the mosque or the temple and let the government do what it does best (allegedly), and that’s regulate.

Seems that this would make both the religious conservatives happy because you start messing with their vocabulary and it makes the gay community happy because they are given equal rights. If a particular church or denomination or sect doesn’t want to let gay people practice the sacrament of marriage, then they can either find a church that does or apply for a civil union.

I think there is an implicit violation of church and state when the government decides that it be in the business of telling my wife and I that we are legally married. My marriage is not a governmental contract. It’s a mystical union between my wife, myself, and God. It’s ordained by God and exists outside of any governmental recognition.

I’m grateful for voices like those of Brian McLaren who are clearly articulating the values of the emerging church. I saw this article about two months ago but just got around to posting it here:

My linear Liar-Lunatic-or-Lord arguments, either-or propositions, and watertight belief system didn’t enhance the credibility of the gospel for my new friend; rather, they made the gospel seem less credible, maybe even a little cheap and shallow.

Oh no, I thought. That way of thinking I encountered in grad school has caught on, and Christianity as I know it is in a heap of trouble.

Since then, I’ve grown less anxious and much more hopeful about the future as I’ve discovered how many opportunities arise along with the challenges of the emerging culture. (Modernity, after all, was no Sunday school picnic for the church.)

The way we traditionally expressed Christianity may be in trouble, but the future may hold new expressions of Christian faith every bit as effective, faithful, meaningful, and world-transforming as those we’ve known so far.

Go read the whole thing.

Wheaton College held its first dance tonight. This really is a lot of excitement over nothing. I understand that to the media it’s a great human interest story. It’s such a novelty, I know, that here’s this backward college that has prohibited dancing for so long and is now getting with the times. Of course, there are alumni, parents, and other Christians that are denouncing this as an example of Wheaton’s slow decline into liberalism. Frankly, both groups are simply wrong.

The policy was put into place at a time when dancing carried with it a taboo among evangelicals that is no longer widely held. There was a time when card playing, co-ed swimming, movies, and a whole host of otherwise generally innocent activities were looked down on by religious people because they took their religious beliefs seriously. Were such prohibitions misguided? The clarity of hindsight may suggest they were. But at a time when drinking on college campuses poses a major problem, sexual crimes and diseases among college students are commonplace, and students show up for their freshmen year knowing less and less each year, I think some of these prohibitions should be revisited.

Wheaton is the kind of school that other colleges should try to emulate. The kind of problems that plague other colleges simply don’t exist at Wheaton College. There are undoubtedly students who break the rules, but for the most part, it’s a school that considers character and morals to be more than buzz words. It’s lived out in the classroom, the dorms, and in the community. Students are committed to service and scholarship. I’d encourage anyone who is quick to dismiss Wheaton as either a dinosaur or a fallen angel should take a closer look.

Went to hear Dr. Lyle Dorsett give a talk tonight on the spiritual formation on C.S. Lewis. He spent his sabbatical working on this project and hopes to publish it soon. Dorsett suggests four categories through which to understand Lewis’ spiritual formation: prayer, scripture, his church life, and his reluctant role as a spiritual guide. In one room, you had Dorsett, Jerry Root and Wayne Martindale all together. The collective Lewis braintrust in one room at the same time.

One of the areas which I’m looking forward to reading more about is Lewis’ view of scripture and his ability to balance a somewhat literalist view of scripture while at the same time being able to maintain the mystery of God’s word. I have to confess not having read much of Lewis on scripture, but I’m intrigued, now.

The Senate is in the midst of a 30 hour marathon session to try to break the impasse over judicial nominees. Good luck. The Republicans want an up or down vote, but the Democrats are filibustering several controversial (read conservative) nominees. So is there any way to break the deadlock? One suggestion from Stephen Bainbridge offers a comparison between the situation in the Senate and a game of chicken. Both parties are set in motion towards a head-on collision unless one of them swerves first, achieving self-preservation but losing the power struggle. Such an analogy requires that a terminal outcome may eventually be achieved and that the two parties choose their strategies simultaneously. Probably not the case as it stands right now in the Senate. Short of a move by the Republicans to change the Senate rules to prevent this kind of filibuster (which some have called “going nuclear”), I don’t see any other way. Ultimately, the Republicans have to realize that the Democrats have something they want, and they will only be able to get what they want if they give the Democrats something else or take something as hostage. In the short term, I don’t see any resolution.

I didn’t post anything about Veterans’ Day yesterday because I didn’t want to be accused of using the day to promote a position on the current war. But I ran across this story, which details the death of the man believed to be the oldest surviving veteran. Robert Hodges died on Monday at the age of 115. He served in World War I and was one of less than 200 living veterans of that war. He lived an amazing life.

The networks are tripping over themselves this sweeps month to get big name interviews during prime time. This year it’s been Martha Stewart, Britney Spears, Elizabeth Smart, and Jessica Lynch. I think the Jessica Lynch story, while certainly heroic and important, has simply been exploited by everyone. The military was quick to use it as rallying point during the war. The media had no problem using first to promote the war and then to critique it. Now, the networks can’t get enough of Pvt. Lynch. But there’s another story that’s more important and more revealing. It’s the story of Lynch’s roommate at Ft. Bliss, Pfc. Lori Piestewa.

She was the first American Indian woman ever killed in combat. She died during the ambush of the 507rh Army Maintenance Unit. She left behind two young children. Her story is so compelling not just because of her Native American heritage, but because she’s a third generation soldier. He grandfather fought in World War II and her father fought in Vietnam. She was known as the “Lady Warrior” to her family and friends, and the morning that the Pentagon annouced her death, a light snow fell in the Arizona Desert. According to Hopi tradition, the deceased let their families know they are safe by sending moisture as a sign. Pfc. Lori Piestewa was 23.

Read the Lori Piestewa legacy blog

I find stuff like this fascinating. It’s a collection of slides taken by an amateur photographer during a thirty-year span from 1938 to 1969. Charles Cushman travelled around the country and the world snapping pictures. The collection was recently donated to Indiana University. It’s a firsthand perspective on the changing American landscape during the last century. I found myself looking at the pictures of places I’ve lived, like Chicago, Baltimore, and Annapolis, mentally comparing and contrasting. Great stuff! (via The Cartoonist and Metafilter)

Anyone looking to buy me something for Christmas should consider Pioneer’s DVD recorders with TiVo. It’ll set you back around $1500 or so, but you know how much I’ll appreciate it! The unit is reviewed by Mark Evanier (via PVRBlog).

I finally sat down and watched CNN’s Rock the Vote debate coverage from last week. I’d read about most of the interesting moments, but I sat through it anyway. First, Anderson Cooper was much more interesting hosting ABC’s “The Mole” three years ago. He’s not very good in live, unscripted settings. He’s also not hip or cool. I do believe at one point he said, “We’re rocking the vote pretty darn hard.” Huh?

Nothing terribly new form the candidates. Dean continues to backpedal after his foolish remarks about the Confederate flag. Kerry and Lieberman both come off reminding me of Michael Dukakis. Sharpton remains the best soundbite of all the candidates. Edwards continues to impress me with his smooth delivery and charisma. Kucinich reminds me of a high school guidance counselor who really wanted to be principal but wasn’t a golf buddy with the influential members of the school board, so he didn’t get the big office. Carol Mosley-Braun sounds good, looks good, but needs to be more aggressive.

In the wake of the event, it’s being reported by the LA Times (via Captain Ed) that at least on of the so-called spontaneous questions from the audience was actually planted by CNN. I wish they had done a better job, because asking, “PC or Mac?” came off like a question that weird kid in third grade would ask you on the playground.

I didn’t get a chance to actually see or hear this speech, but I keep reading high praise for it all over the place. I finally read it in its entirety. This is an amazing speech that should be ranked among the most important of this era. I consider this akin to Reagan’s “Tear Down this Wall” speech. Go read it for yourself.

Our commitment to democracy is also tested in the Middle East, which is my focus today, and must be a focus of American policy for decades to come. In many nations of the Middle East — countries of great strategic importance — democracy has not yet taken root. And the questions arise: Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism? Are they alone never to know freedom, and never even to have a choice in the matter? I, for one, do not believe it. I believe every person has the ability and the right to be free.

I don’t why I find this so funny, but I did. It nicely sums up my feelings about what’s going on in Iraq:

“It’s not difficult to understand why somebody might pick up an AK 47 against us. Maybe we killed his father in the first Gulf War, maybe in this Gulf War, maybe he’s just a dick.” — Sergeant Reginald Abram