RE: Proposed Bible-based marriage laws

Mar 22, 2004 humor suggest edit

Found this on another website. Sorta ties into my earlier rant about Bush’s stance on the whole gay marriage issue:

Lawmakers who use the Bible to justify their opposition to gay marriage ought to be consistent. Here are some other Biblical rules to add to the Bill of Rights :

Marriage shall not impede a man’s right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

Link

[Via Boing Boing]

Found a typo or mistake in the post? suggest edit

Comments

7 responses

B • April 1st, 2004
umm good points i guess, but doesnt the rest of the story explain it? Wasnt what the sisters did not what God wanted. They got their father drunk and it doesnt say this is what you shall do.its a story of what 2 sisters did to preserve thier line,, wheres the rest of the story? Wasnt it only kings that had the concubines, which not making it right but is not saying it is something everyone should do. Also The man if proven to lie about her virginity would have been punished. but culturally thats the harshness of being promiscous, it was greatly stressed to keep pure and the law, a great deal different to todays standards where virginity is as cheap as the quarter slots. Were these also stories that God approves of and says we should follow these ways, or are they old testament lessons we should learn from. and when he came he set the new laws in the new testament. Can we use these to disregard all the other commands directly given from God. Is it enough to mock the Bible and say its ridiculous? i myself am pretty ignorant but not ready to rely on my own intelligence or interpetations of the Bible by biased people who only use half the story of a book. but i guess being open to what the Bible says makes me pretty close minded.. this is not towards you but to the people that wrote the article.. love you tons!

Brian<><
Haacked • April 1st, 2004
Hey Bro, thanks for commenting and bringing context to the verses quoted in the article out of context. However, I think you're taking their point too literally and missing the key point.

The post was meant to be partly tongue-in-cheek and partly to point out the mistake in attempting to amend the constitution with Bible based laws. There's a very good reason we have a separation of church and state, and selectively choosing Bible verses to enforce (and not to enforce) as law both violates the separation, and is an affront to the Bible itself.

I'm sure you agree that the Bible wasn't meant to be followed selectively, but in whole. Likewise, as Jesus himself said, "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. And render unto God what is His"

For example, read the following post and tell me if we should pass an amendment

http://haacked.europe.webmatrixhosting.net/archive/2004/02/27/214.aspx to disallow divorces. When read in context, these verses clearly point out the Bible's stance on divorce, and though a slick talking pastor can try to work around the issue, it doesn't hold much water.
Jen • April 22nd, 2005
Hmm...looks to me like you are quoting the verses wrong to fit your bias. Good job.
Haacked • April 22nd, 2005
And how should these verses be quoted? And these religious lawmakers are quoting them correctly?
L to the T • June 12th, 2005
Thanks for bringing up this issue. Almost all Christian books concerning dating and sexuality do not have a strong biblical basis and are rather one person's view of morality. I have looked high and low for books that discuss the historical and cultural context behind scripture verses and Old Testament stories on sexuality and sexual relationships, but to no avail. The ONLY book I have found so far that does this is a book called The Struggle. It talks about what the Bible does (or rather doesn't) say about masturbation and looks at the cultural and historical context behind popular "masturbation" verses. It then discusses how this new information can be lived out. I have also talked with pastors who can't give a definitive answer and I am taking a class on this subject at a seminary because the answer to my question has proved so elusive. It saddens and angers me that the church pushes a certain view of morality without really being able to explain the context within which the scripture verses they use to defend their views are based. This can be so hurtful to people who struggle to fit a "church mold" that isn't well understood by the very people who are pushing it. I know because I work in youth ministry, I've heard the sermons, read the youth curriculum, and discussed the topic with many in the church. People only understand how to take these verses and directly apply them to life, rather than understanding their author's real intention by exploring the cultural and historical context in which they were written, and then applying them to life.

If anyone can shed light on this question of context or knows of books that address it, I would greatly appreciate the information. Thanks!
Aidil • December 12th, 2006
Marriage (as we know it in the USA) was borrowed from the Bible. The US government decided to formally recognize this Christian institution to encourage it. The institution of marriage as given to us in the New Testament (two folks together until they die, never marrying another until they are seperated until death) was good to create stable societies with growing populations. So needless to say, recognition and encouragement of this institution happened early in our nation's history. The government has allowed many things in their administration of marriage that the Bible did not originally intend, but then again, so has the church.
The church may have made a huge mistake when allowing government to handle an institution that was theirs to regulate in the first place. Government has been allowed by churches to take over the "process" of marriages which leaves marriage without the Spirit it should hold.
andrew • March 2nd, 2010
please can you explain this to me:
In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)