The catch phrase of all oppressed individuals for the last fifty years or so is "Civil Rights." In the United States of America "Civil Rights" are established by the constitution intending that all of it's citizens must be treated equally under the law and protected equally under the law.
First put to the test by skin color civil rights were found to be violated if anyone was persecuted or denied basic liberties because of their skin pigmentation. This was, without a doubt, an essential step in the evolution of our democracy, a good step. Next came the test on the rights of women and the law and civil treatment was found wanting and women became protected and the government was charged with considering both sexes equally, another good step. Though the issue of "Protected Status" has created an imbalance the white male has grown to accept it as some sort of penance for the sins of our fathers.
However, the idea of Civil Rights has become misconstrued. In certain cases it has come to mean the equivalent of "If you can have apples then I am entitled to oranges".
Take the issue of sexual orientation, for example. The law currently states that one man and one woman may be legally married under the laws of the United States. Some feel that because man "A" can marry a woman, then man "B" should be able to marry a man. It's apples and oranges. What they don't see is that the law does not guarantee anyone the right to marry the one they love or the one they desire. The law simply allows for the family to be established.
Neither the law nor the constitution should establish sexual preference as being entitled to a set of rights all its own. Granted some courts have given sexual preference protected status so that because of their bent they are not denied other civil rights. The right for a man to marry a man has been given to no one under the constitution so it cannot be said that same sex marriage is a civil right.
If we were to establish sexual preference as a civil right what a Pandora's Box that would open. I won't go into the deranged desires of men except to say it is not discriminatory to maintain the status quo in this regard. You may be able to decriminalize each perversion one at a time as the test of potential harm is considered. But to open the door to sexual preference being a civil right is ludicrous.
Personal privilege, freedom, and liberty are not unilaterally guaranteed in the intent of the constitution. No one can deny that we are not free to do as we please. Liberty is the freedom to follow your conscience. It is not the freedom to live without the burden or constraint of conscience. We, as free people, have decided that what free, mature, people do in the privacy of their bedroom is not a legal matter but one of conscience. We do, by our own conscience however, limit that to adults who have the ability to consent, and we limit the bedroom in other ways I won't describe in polite company. But we have set this arbitrary standard for "same sex couples" and called it "civil rights", when it has only been a right in this country at all by a minority influence on a judicial system that takes pride in creating law instead of interpreting it as they are assigned to do.
Same sex couples have no "Civil Right" to wed. The criteria doesn't fit. What is a civil right in private is not necessarily a civil right in public. The civil people of this country have the right to establish what is a freedom of conscience and what is an act of depravity. We do it every day, why does it not apply to same sex couples?
All people regardless of skin color have their civil rights protected.
All people regardless of gender have their civil right protected.
All people regardless of sexual orientation....? No way! You wouldn't want that, it is not a civil rights issue.
Everyone has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex. The purpose of that is to form and establish a family. There is no civil rights violation until a right, under the law, has been established. It is not a civil right to seek happiness in your own way. You have the right to pursue happiness but the citizenry maintains the right to deny that pursuit.
Blacks and women were denied rights. Gays are not a selected people entitled to special rights and they are denied no right given to any other US citizen.
You think gay love is pure and innocent? Go to a Gay Pride parade some time. It's a cesspool of perversion. It's not about family or partnership or even love for that matter, it's about sex and the right to be deviant and there should be no civil right for that.
It has been noted in history that when the church failed to set the moral standard the government did and turned it back on the church resulting in the church being persecuted. This is what will happen if we let sexual orientation become protected under the law as a new race or third sex. All great countries collapse from the inside out. When the church is not the spiritual/moral leader of the people freedom will collapse.
Tim Lamb writes The Message, a weekly Christian-based faith column, for the Chelan Mirror. He lives in Entiat.