So?

It's a question that no one seems to ask. While the debate continues about the definition of marriage and the morality of homosexual behavior, there doesn't seem to be anyone asking, "So ... what?" What does it matter? What difference will it make?

The argument continues, it seems, because one side believes it is something to be cherished and protected and the other believes it is an immoral behavior. Simple as that. But, for just a moment, let's consider. What if we were to decide, by divine fiat or popular vote or whatever, that the Bible is accurate and the behavior is, indeed, immoral. What then?

Well, I suppose there are those who fear that it would then be outlawed or something. You know, like how we all agreed that premarital sex was immoral 50 years ago and that was outlawed at the time, right? Oh, wait, no, that wasn't the case. Well, it was stigmatized, so no one did it. Debatable, but it is just as moral today as it was then and look at what's going on now. Indeed, if the belief is that those who argue that the behavior is immoral are aiming to outlaw it if they can, now I'm a bit frightened. The belief, then, would be that "We should outlaw those who we deem immoral." And since they believe that we who believe it is immoral are immoral, then should we anticipate that we will be outlawed?

Of course, I don't actually believe that. Nor am I aware of anyone who believes it is immoral who would actually like to make it illegal. Oh, I suppose there are those on the fringe of the "gay rights" side who would like to outlaw the Christian view just as there are those on the fringe of those who consider it immoral who could potentially wish to pass laws on the subject. But I don't know anyone. On either side.

So ... what? Why is there such a fight? Why is it that my position that the behavior is immoral is such an affront? I'm frankly having a hard time figuring that out. I don't rationally believe they think I want to outlaw them. I don't think it's reasonable for me to believe that they would think I would curtail their activities. I've never suggested any such thing. I will vote to protect marriage, but what does that matter when the tide of public opinion is in their favor? And I'm not much concerned about others who think my particular stance is immoral. That doesn't bother me. It's okay for them to be wrong. So why would they care if I continue to hold and express my view that this particular behavior is immoral?

I don't really have an answer. The possible responses all sound too much like a conspiracy theory or a de facto religious response. "They want to silence us!" or "God is nagging them that we're right." That kind of thing. I'm not saying these are wrong, but they just sound too much like ... too much. Believing as I do that homosexual behavior (for example) is a sin, indeed, an abomination to God, I have never suggested or even thought that the proper response was criminalization, censure, or death (or whatever other evils some might guess). I've always believed that sin is simply a product of a sin nature and that people need Christ. On the other hand, it is fairly common to hear about folk who receive death threats for stating the position I hold. The responses don't match. I would say, "Your behavior is sin and you need Jesus." They would say, "Your position is wrong and you need to die." Doesn't seem ... equal.

So ... what? What is it? What causes the furor? What is it about people like me holding and expressing my view that makes people want us dead? I really don't get it. I have my own theories, but I won't venture to guess. Maybe you have an idea.