Democrat Congressman Argues God Says You Can Marry Your Dog If It Makes You Happy
The slippery slope is gaining speed. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia warned in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision that the Supreme Court had created “a massive disruption of the current social order” by striking down a Texas law barring sodomy. He went on to write: “State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity … every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision.”
The latest disruption was made on the House floor by Democrat Whip Steny Hoyer who argued that that same-sex couples are endowed by “their Creator — by God” with the right to marry.
Once again, a Democrat has brought God into the debate when for decades Democrats have argued that religion and politics do not mix and there’s a separation between church and state. Apparently these prohibitions only apply to arguments made by conservative Christians.
Stoyer went on to say:
“‘Our Declaration of Independence, as all of us quote so often, says: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men’—of course, if Jefferson were writing today, it would be either all people or all humankind—‘are created equal, that they are endowed by’—not a Congress, not by a Constitution, not by a will of the majority—‘their Creator’—by God—‘with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’”
Trending: When Does the Bible Say Life Begins?
On this point Steny Hoyer is absolutely right. I and others have been making this same argument for decades.
Now that Rep. Hoyer has brought God into the debate, on what basis does the congressman believe God would approve of same-sex marriage? God certainly didn’t design “humankind” in such a way that would lead anybody to believe that same-sex sexuality is biologically possible.
How does Hoyer know God would approve of same-sex marriage? There’s nothing in the Bible that supports same-sex sexuality. So on what is he basing his happiness morality?
Maybe it’s Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson did not support homosexuality. In fact, “Thomas Jefferson advocated ‘dismemberment’ as the penalty for homosexuality in his home state of Virginia, and even authored a bill to that effect (1781, Query 14; cf. 1903, 1:226-227).”
The following image is from the Library of Congress and Apologeticspress.org.
Hoyer won’t get an help from William Blackstone or George Washington.
Instead of appealing to some moral standard for legalizing and legitimizing same-sex sex and marriage, Hoyer appeals to happiness: “Is there a happier time in one’s life than when one pledges themselves [sic] to another?”
“Happiness” is the new moral standard. Whatever makes you happy is morally and rationally acceptable! Criminals will have a field day with this:
Your Honor, Congressman Hoyer said that I can do whatever makes me happy as long as I love doing it. The Declaration of Independence says so. I love robbing banks.
And when it comes to sexual relationships, Pandora’s Box has been opened wide. If a woman loves her dog and wants to marry it – and get a tax deduction in the process – and such a marriage makes her and her dog “happy,” so be it. And if a man wants to marry his mother, daughter, or son because such marriages would make him happy, then so be it, and God and his law be damned (Ex. 22:19; Lev. 18:22-23; 20:13-15, 16; Deut. 27:21).