iOS app Android app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Kristen Hotham Carroll

GET UPDATES FROM Kristen Hotham Carroll
 

When Child Actors Should Retire

Posted: 03/ 5/2012 12:03 pm

Kirk Cameron recently took a break from his summer camp planning and Marriage Tour to speak with Piers Morgan. I'm always eager to hear the insight of completely irrelevant members of our society, so I tuned in. Kirk offered the following:

Marriage was defined by God a long time ago. Marriage is almost as old as dirt, and it was defined in the garden between Adam and Eve -- one man, one woman for life till death do you part. So I would never attempt to try to redefine marriage. And I don't think anyone else should either. So do I support the idea of gay marriage? No, I don't.

Aside from the fact that he believes his reference to the religion of his preference is somehow grounds for an argument regarding a civil issue, I will bite.

Did God really define marriage by the standard of Adam and Eve? If so, how would that marriage work? One man marries one woman, and then they have children. In order to avoid extinction, their children would marry, and then their children would marry, and so on. By that logic, I can only assume that the definition God laid out in the Garden of Eden was one that was designed for incestuous relationships. Not to mention the fact that God created Eve out of Adam's rib, so he was kind of marrying himself, as well.

Either way, it's probably not the best couple in the Bible to hang your marriage hat on. Let's fast forward a bit. We find Abraham, leader of the Hebrews, and he's decided to marry his half-sister. I guess incest is still OK years later.

What if one wife isn't enough? How about two? Not a problem! There are countless examples of plural marriage in the Bible, from Abraham to Lamech to Jacob to Moses. And don't forget about the concubines and, of course, all the marriages involving elders and minors.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not picking on the Bible. Times were different then. That's why the Bible isn't the Constitution, and that's why we can't pick and choose which pieces of the Levitical Code are relevant today. One verse may say homosexuality is an abomination, and one after it may say the same about braiding your hair, eating pork, or wearing jewelry. You can pick and choose hate speech from the Bible all day long, just don't pretend it's out of good Christian love. It wasn't love when you were using the Bible to argue against interracial marriage, just a few decades ago, and it wasn't love when you were making your case for slavery, either. It is hate, mixed with fear. Let's just call it what it is.

So many founders of the United States came here in hopes of finding religious freedom, and all these hundreds of years later, we can't help ourselves from repeating the mistakes of the past.

Perhaps to Kirk Cameron's surprise, marriage as we know it is not at all older than dirt. Marriage based on love is a very new concept. The Bible has nothing to do with the marriage we enjoy today (and by we, I mean those of us who live in the 10 countries that allow gay marriage, or in one of the eight U.S. states that allow it -- unless of course you are heterosexual, and then you can get married anywhere you want, as many times as you want, no questions asked).

It is not for any group of voters, any judge, any politician, or any person to decide whether gay marriage should be legal. The Constitution was created to ensure equal rights for all citizens. It is time to put this embarrassing debate behind us.

 

Follow Kristen Hotham Carroll on Twitter: www.twitter.com/KHCart

FOLLOW GAY VOICES