Creationism rarely exists as a stand-alone issue in the brains of its followers. There’s almost always a vast collection of craziness swirling around in the minds of such people. We’ve previously discussed the connection between creationism and climate change denial, and there’s no avoiding the larger topic of science denial, which is almost always indistinguishable from full-blown reality denial.
And then there’s sex. Gasp! Yes, dear reader, sex seems to be part of the package, as today’s post about Bryan Fischer will demonstrate. We’ve written about him before. The last time was Lifetime Vomit Opportunity: Bryan Fischer. You already know he’s a hard-core creationist.
If you’re not familiar with Fischer or his organization — the American Family Association — you may want to read our earlier post: Meet the American Family Association. Any outfit with the word “Family” in its title, but not “Planning,” is either creationist or it’s connected with Charles Manson. We also wrote about him here: Bryan Fischer: Flaming Creationist Theocrat, and our title today was inspired by that one. For more of his creationist views, see Vomit Opportunity: Bryan Fischer & Georgia Purdom.
We found him this morning at the RenewAmerica website, which is far more extreme than even WorldNetDaily, and is therefore the natural home for Fischer’s article: Let’s NOT get government out of marriage. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
A number of well-meaning and well-intentioned Christians have begun to argue it’s time to just get government out of the marriage business altogether. Marriage ought, they say, to be a religious matter only with no role whatsoever for the state.
Interesting issue. What is the proper function of a government? Jefferson, who understood such things, was very clear in his acceptance of John Locke’s description of our individual rights — life, liberty, and property — and he wrote in the Declaration that it was “to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed … .” (But as we all know, Jefferson rephrased the last of those rights as the “pursuit of happiness.”) What does Fischer think government’s role should be, and where does that role come from? His thinking is very different from Jefferson’s. Brace yourself, because you’re about to find out how different it is:
There are two profound problems with this view. The first is that recognizing, affirming and defending natural marriage is in fact a proper role for the state. Let’s not forget that, according to Romans 13, civil government is God’s idea, not man’s. The authority civil government possesses, every last bit of it, has been delegated to it by God himself. “For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God” (Romans 13:1).
That theocratic pronouncement, dear reader, is utterly alien to the Founders’ concept of government, and it deserves a triple Aaaargh!! Let’s read on:
Government, then, by God’s design and intention, is not to be neutral on matters of morality. It is not designed by God to be a bystander in the culture wars, but to take sides. And the side it has been instructed to take is the side of what is right and good. It has a divine responsibility to know the difference between good and evil and to reward the former while punishing the latter.
Scary, isn’t it? He continues:
We know that natural marriage, one-man, one-woman marriage, is a good and right thing. It was designed by God from the dawn of time for our benefit. It meets man’s need for companionship, sexual intimacy and procreation. It is the state’s job, according to Scripture, to recognize the immense value of this institution, and to affirm it and protect it.
So when government defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and prohibits recognition of immoral and unnatural same-sex counterfeits, it is doing a good thing, a divinely-ordained thing. It is fulfilling its role as a “minister of God” (Romans 13:6). It is doing what God designed it to do. No Christian should retreat from supporting the government’s role in defining marriage even one little bit.
According to Fischer, it is the proper — even essential — function of government to decide not only what you may do with your genitalia, but also when, how, and with whom.
Here we shall digress for a moment to tell you your Curmudgeon’s view of such things, which is essentially libertarian: If you’re an adult and you can find another adult who consents, we don’t care if you play Tornado in a Junkyard with each other. Just do it in private, and don’t demand that everyone else should help you with whatever expenses you may incur. And don’t forget that freedom of association is a two-way street — it also means freedom not to associate.
But let’s return to Fischer. Skipping some stuff about divorce, division of marital property, and determining custody of children, which can be determined by contract and therefore are legitimate state functions (not federal), he expands on that exponentially and tells us:
It is altogether right for the state to grant natural marriage special protections in law, to identify it as the relationship in which sex may be legitimately enjoyed and as the optimal nurturing environment for children to be brought into the world and raised to become responsible members of civil society.
Did you get that? No state-sanctioned marriage, no legitimate enjoyment of sex. Here’s the final paragraph:
Let’s not keep the state out of marriage. Instead, let’s work to see that it uses its God-given authority to define and defend the institution that is the bedrock of any healthy civilization. Our future as a nation depends on it.
Fischer probably thinks of himself as a true conservative, and a Republican. Alas, he’s not alone. However, we don’t think there’s any place in any American government, state or federal, for even a trace of theocracy. But then, your Curmudgeon is a relic of the past. We became a Republican back in the Goldwater days, when people like Fischer were seen but not heard, and were mostly in the other party where they had a long tradition of fervently supporting people like William Jennings Bryan. Times change, and so do political parties, but your Curmudgeon doesn’t.
Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.