“Where’s my Diversity?” asks the Polygamist
Does the Supreme Court truly believe in equality? If so, why is the long tradition of polygamy being discriminated against? As Steve Deace observes:
They’re just as guilty of discrimination as those dastardly conservatives still bitterly clinging to their guns and their religion. Why no argument for polygamy, polyamory and other forms of diversity? Why are they only defending their exclusive definition of diversity?
The LGBT should be up and arms about not valuing other types of consensual relationships like polygamy. Is this the next step? Or to put the question more forcibly, “is this the inevitable next step?” Comments on polygamy sites confirm this trend. The majority do not oppose polygamy, but simply the forced marriages of under-age children. As long as one man and three women come together voluntarily, then plurality should be left alone.
The Supreme Court ruling indicates a shift on this issue. While Deace played on this discrimination theme jokingly, his point is valid. It may be just a matter of time. If you think that is just too far, here is the reaction from the polygamy community:
The Supreme Court’s rulings in favor of same-sex marriage Wednesday were greeted with excitement by polygamists across the country, who viewed the gay rights victory as a crucial step toward the country’s inevitable acceptance of plural marriage.
Anne Wilde, a vocal advocate for polygamist rights who practiced the lifestyle herself until her husband died in 2003, praised the court’s decision as a sign that society’s stringent attachment to traditional “family values” is evolving.
“I was very glad… The nuclear family, with a dad and a mom and two or three kids, is not the majority anymore,” said Wilde. “Now it’s grandparents taking care of kids, single parents, gay parents. I think people are more and more understanding that as consenting adults, we should be able to raise a family however we choose.”
Should the majority of the SCOTUS become consistent in the years to come, the country may be celebrating another victory against “discrimination.”
Ultimately, the “slippery slope” argument has become a frightening reality. After all, why not? When God gives them over to the reprobate mind, hell is the limit.
If this is to be the case, how do we turn the tide? I can agree with Russell Moore that “the gospel doesn’t need “family values” to flourish.” However, the gospel does need the family to value goodness, beauty, and truth. All these things are turned upside down if the Protestant community continue to de-value what God has placed absolute value upon. The integrity of the biological family is significant for the progress of the Christian gospel. As I have demonstrated in The Church-Friendly Family, the biological family is the Church’s greatest tool in advancing the kingdom agenda. The family serves as the Church’s ambassadorial committee.
But doom should not be our expectation, rather these decisions serve to entice us to embrace a broader vision for familial purity in our societies. This serves as a call to restore the family into her proper vision; to see Jesus and his bride as more than a neat metaphor, but as the climax of God’s covenant promises to his people.
What this means for the evangelical faith is that husbands and wives need to embrace a public vision for marriage. Marriage needs to be lived out for the sake of the world. Our example and our commitment to fidelity must be a high priority in Christ’s Church.
The polygamist may ask for diversity, but God has already established the extent of his diversity family policy: one man and one woman.
Uri Brito is a pastor in Pensacola, Fl. He also blogs at Resurrection et Vita.