Here we go again. I’m about to get myself in hot water. I’m about to argue that homosexual marriages should be legal and that being a good American citizen and a “good” fundamentalist Christian simultaneously is nearly impossible.

Recently, conservative politicians have been peppering the media with comments that they are against the legalization of homosexual marriages, but the more I think about the constitutionality of such claims, the more I question what is truly the “right” ruling on the issue.

From a fundamentalist Christian perspective, there is no question. The answer is simple because the Bible is clear that homosexuality is a sin that leads to eternal damnation.

Under this assumption, based on Biblical scripture, allowing homosexual marriages would be the equivalent of allowing our society to be polluted by immoral behavior; it would be vicariously approving of and giving consent to a great many people’s eternal damnation, suffering and separation from God.

From a non-biblical, non-Christian perspective, there is no question either. To ban homosexuals from getting married seems like a blatant modern-day form of religious persecution.

Without the assumption that the Bible is true, there is nothing immoral about homosexuality. It doesn’t hurt anyone, and it doesn’t violate anyone’s rights.

Furthermore, what DOES violate people’s rights is isolating and refusing to accept an already-suppressed group in society.

A lot of politicians are saying we need to refresh America’s morals and get God back into society if we are going to save the country. The homosexual marriage issue is an extension of that belief.

Clearly America was founded on principles of free speech and the right for individuals to live as they choose, free from religious persecution. America was created to be “One nation, under God, with Liberty and Justice for all.”

You might, as a good fundamentalist Christian, believe that homosexual marriages are an abomination in God’s eyes; but you cannot, as a good American citizen, persecute such individuals.

The dilemma here seems to be a role conflict surrounding the responsibilities attached to being a Christian and those assumed in being an American.

You either serve God by upholding his commandments, or you serve your country by upholding its principles of freedom.

It’s a lose/lose situation for American Christians, but I still think the right thing to do, as a Christian, is not to force-feed or cram your values and beliefs down the throats of other members of society because, in doing so, there are frightening repercussions.

If you were a Christian but the majority of Americans were Mayan Indians who believed that you had to sacrifice virgins to please God, would you agree with legalizing the sacrificing of virgin women?

If you were a Christian, but the majority of Americans were Satanists who said that child molestation must be practiced if you are to please Satan, would you feel your beliefs were violated?

Of course, you would.

Obviously and thankfully, neither of these situations is the case. However, while Christianity may be the predominate religion in America, that does not make it the official, doctrinal religion of the country.

It never has been the case, either, and to make it so would violate the non-establishment clause of the First Amendment.

Is it true that most of our 55 founding fathers were Christian men? Yes.

Is it also true that a number of incredibly influential Americans were non-Christians who were adamantly against organized religion? Yes.

George Washington was a Freemason.

John Adams was a very anti-dogmatic Unitarian.

Thomas Paine was labeled an atheist but he was actually a deist who was extremely critical of organized religion.

Furthermore, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Edison and Albert Einstein all made extremely anti-religious statements.

Christians need to take a step back and examine the issues with the assumption that being the majority is not the most important criterion for public policymaking.

Issues of morality need to be decided from a secular point of view in order to assure the maximum religious freedom for people of all religions, not just the most popular.

Homosexual marriage is an issue that should be decided on religious terms. As a country, we cannot expect all of our citizens to live according to the moral standards of one group, no matter how large it is.

Freedom of religion means avoiding the atrocities of the past.

It means making an allowance for differences — and that includes lifestyles.

---

April Goodwin is a junior in journalism and mass communication from Ames.