Barney Frank is no longer in Congress, but the former Democratic representative from Massachusetts apparently has a new gig – lecturing the American people on morality as a columnist for Politico.
This week he compared the legalization of same-sex marriage to the decriminalization of marijuana.
How? Why?
He explains: “The momentum same-sex marriage had gained even before June’s Supreme Court decision gives me confidence that we will see significant growth in marijuana legalization – and in less time than many now expect.”
That may be true.
But the question Barney Frank doesn’t answer is this: “Are there some things that are just plain wrong, immoral, (dare I use an old-fashioned term?) sinful?”
I think we would all agree, atheists included, that some things are.
- Murder is wrong, immoral and sinful, right?
- Stealing is wrong, immoral and sinful, right?
- Rape is wrong, immoral and sinful, right?
I don’t think very many people would advocate legalizing murder, theft or rape, right?
I would even suggest that Barney Frank would be opposed to any attempt to legalize those things no matter how popular the idea might become.
So the question remains: “Are some things just plain wrong, immoral, sinful?”
What makes them so? Is it simply a matter of opinion? Can you make immoral things moral by simply persuading enough people to do so? Would Barney Frank assent to legalizing murder because public opinion shifted dramatically in favor of murder?
The question might seem absurd, but it’s important to determine what makes something right or wrong. Barney Frank certainly has opinions about what is right and what is wrong. We all do. But how do we determine what’s right and wrong? Are there any transcendent guidelines we can use?
I would suggest to you that the same historical-spiritual documents that defined murder, stealing and rape as immoral might be a good place to start.
Those documents, purported to be inspired by the Creator of the universe, are compiled in a book we call the Bible.
It has been the foundation of this country’s laws since the beginning. Only recently have we deviated in a dramatic way from the moral principles it offers for a better life on earth and an eternal life with God.
Any discussion of morality apart from God is quite useless.
Without God, it’s all a matter of opinion. Everyone would do what is right in their own eyes, barring the police power of the state.
You can believe there’s no God if you wish. You can believe there’s a god other than the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – the God of Israel. You can even believe you are god, if you like. But I can guarantee one thing: You wouldn’t want to live in a society where most people had no faith in the one true God with no ultimate accountability for their actions.
Right and wrong are defined by God – not by Barney Frank, much as he might prefer.
Apart from God, there is no right or wrong, just opinions, just suggestions, just man-made laws based on the whims of a dictator or the dictatorship of the majority.
Barney explains, from his vantage point why same-sex marriage should be legal: “It begins with an entirely voluntary activity that some adults want to do – marry someone of the same sex. This increases their happiness without having any tangible negative impact on anyone else. It does, however, make many of the unaffected unhappy because they think it is a bad thing for those other people to do. There are a mix of reasons for this opposition, all of which are based entirely on a dislike either of certain kinds of people, or of the nature of their association with each other, or both.”
Not true.
I am not opposed to same-sex marriage because I don’t like the people who want to take part in such a union. I am opposed to it because I do like them and do care about them. I would discourage such unions because the practice is wrong, immoral and sinful. I am also opposed to it because, just as I predicted long ago should it become the law of the land, it would be used as a battering ram against people like me who disapprove.
Barney sings a moral libertarian tune about free association and consenting adults. That old tune sounds appealing – until you really think about it.
Some people want to die. Would you agree? For some it’s a matter of depression, illness, pain. It can be a temporary feeling or a chronic one. Other people like to kill. Would it be appropriate to set up a matchmaking business to put them together? Would it be a good idea to make it legal for murderers to kill people who want to die?
I think it would be abhorrent. I would suggest even Barney Frank would agree. But here’s a contradiction of this moral libertarian canard that anything two consenting adults do together is fine for all involved. It sounds good to man’s ears, but the consequences of it are hellish to even consider.
Some things are just wrong and some things are just right.
But who is to decide? Me? Barney Frank?
I don’t think so.
There’s only one Judge, one Lawmaker, one King who can make those determinations.
He has spoken.
There are consequences for individuals who don’t follow His rules. And there are consequences for nations that don’t.
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact [email protected].
|
