Foundations of Christian Thought Impact Blog Post

I am fairly confident that if I said: “marriage has always been a sacred union,” nobody would argue with me on that. Assuming that is the case, why is it that the definition of the word “marriage” has become so loosely interpreted in the past few years? Looking over the past several decades, it is evident that, when it came to the concept of marriage, the couples involved had some sort of moral understanding of what they were getting into. What I mean by this is that people who were around during these times behaved very differently from a societal standpoint in comparison to now where everything–and by that I do mean everything–is individualized. A majority of technology, fashion, commodities, etc. are made to be done or used by the individual and to express each persons’ “individuality” as opposed to enhancing humanity as a community. I do realize that this is a relatively broad generalization, but since it connects to one of the most controversial topics in recent years, I feel as though it is highly justified. In case anyone is wondering, the topic I am referring to would be the legalization of gay marriage in the United States of America. Yes, one could say I am late on this topic, but so be it since, like I stated, it fits perfectly into the point that I am making. While the legalization of gay marriage is hailed as a triumph for freedom in the US, or however it may have been worded upon the news of the event, it is merely another case of the famous, grandfather of excuses: “I can do what I want, and there is nothing anyone can say about it.” I admit that my phrasing here was very simple and crude even, but regardless of how well articulated it can be, the concept stays the same. How this relates to the modern concept of individualism is that people wanted gay marriage legalized, bottom line, because they themselves desired to be married to whoever they wanted, without feeling “restricted” by any sort of law, and the advocates of gay marriage had gone so far as to oppose any form of logical arguments that stood in their path to “freedom.” In doing this, these advocates have completely re-written the definition of marriage into what better fits their desires. This has opened the door to a sort of “moral anarchy,” so to speak, and is therefore enabling several other acts which would have previously never even been considered as being “okay” or “morally/culturally acceptable.

Leave a Reply