Any first grader growing up in America today knows that religion is built upon what is known as Faith. Faith is the key element of religious belief, for without any sort of Faith, religion would just be science - rational and objective science. In the Christian Tradition - which will be the group that this post is directed towards, since not many other religious groups have voiced as virulent an opposition to the Prop 8 decision - Faith is defined as " the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." (Hebrews 11:1). Thus religion is built upon a conviction and a hope/assurance of things that cannot be definitively proven or seen. This leads to Websters definition of Faith, which is the understanding of most people...
"An unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence."Now where am I going with this. Well first, we have established two things.
1. The main opposition from the Religious Right on the issue of gay marriage is that they believe that God instituted marriage between one man and one woman.
2. Christian belief structure is built upon Faith. - Most Christians would not argue this, for if they did, then they would have to claim that Christianity was rationally provable, something that they cannot do, because that would destroy the whole foundation of Christianity.
So if they believe that God defined marriage in the Bible between one man and one woman; it is just that, a belief. It is as Hebrews and Websters says, not provable, and not something that we know for sure!! Even I can claim that I ascribe to another divinely inspired book which might say that marriage is only between two people of the same sex, thus making every heterosexual couples marriage invalid, and because I believe its true then it is...for me at least.
You see this is the problem with basing a definition of something off of a religious belief, no matter what religious belief it is. What one person may believe, another one might not. So therefore whose definition is correct? Is it the person who has the most people believing what he believes? Is it the person who only believes it individually? Thus, in order for there to be an established definition of marriage for government to go by, there has to be some other arguments involved. Not just "God said it was so" arguments. Using the God said so arguments undermines the position of those against gay marriage, for one can just say, and many have, that they are just trying to push their belief system upon people who don't believe the way that they do. This my friends, is a failing argument in a pluralistic democratic society.
Later I will address another argument against gay marriage - that being the historical argument of marriage. So stay tuned!! And please feel free to comment.