Tish Harrison Warren Says Christians Have a Duty to Defend and Uphold Same-Sex Marriage
In an op-ed in the New York Times, author Tish Harrison Warren, who was last seen bashing “White Evangelicals” and the “White American Church” as a bunch of violence-loving racists, defends the practice of LBGTQ matrimony by saying that Christians have a duty to ensure gay people can be legally married.
Warren is a priestess in the Anglican Church in North America. (ACNA) and a regular contributor at Christianity Today. The founder of the Pelican Project, she can frequently be found arguing against complementarian ecclesiology and doing things like calling the Dallas Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel, “stupid” (that tweet was ‘liked’ by Russell Moore, by the way).
In her article, in the same breath as claiming conservative creds, she writes:
“…though I respect secular same-sex marriage, I am a priest in a denomination that understands holy matrimony to be the spiritual and sexual union of a man and a woman and that I would not preside over a same-sex wedding.”
She notes that “We must find ways to preserve and protect the civil rights of gay people” while suggesting that Christians in business should make gay wedding takes or photograph gay weddings as a matter of “hospitality” and “moral duty.” Warren concludes:
We need to ensure that gay people can continue to be legally married and live according to their deepest values. We also need to ensure that religious people are not compelled to participate in an event or voice approval of a marriage they object to and that they can form churches, schools and other ministries in line with their beliefs.
Gay marriages” are just as wicked and foul as marriage between siblings or marriages between a 30 and 13-year-old. Yet because Warren does not see them as particularity vile and grievous whose implementation and acceptance has paved the way for every sort of perversion a decade on- from not knowing what a woman is to the grooming of children, she argues that so long as society insists on calling them ‘marriages’, we ought to defend their right to do so, with seemingly no limiting factors.
There’s not a single defense made for sodomite marriages that could not be made for incestuous marriages if and when they gain social acceptance. Would Warren argue that “We need to ensure that a father and his adult daughter can continue to be legally married and live according to their deepest values“?
We suspect she wouldn’t, putting the lie to the whole article and betraying how theologically compromised she actually is.
About Author
Another reprobate “progressive” in sheep’s clothing. She might as well be trying to claim we must accommodate, support, and respect the deeply held “values” of cannibals, rapists, pedophiles, thieves, liars, nudists, drunkards, drug addicts, human traffickers, etc., and those who have some godless reprobate rationalized justification or excuse for every possible sin imaginable, to live out their wicked desires anywhere and everywhere, no matter who else is imposed upon, while the values set by God Almighty must be severely constricted to within the walls of certain select few ministries.
The morally relativist idea that we should live according to different changing values depending on the circumstances and location is about as antithetical to scripture as it gets. In fact, such “values” would not be values at all. At that point there are no values. The result is moral anarchy where anything goes. The end of which, nobody has any God-given inalienable rights at all because that notion is itself a deeply held value derived from scripture. We’ve seen it happen many times throughout history, just in the past century alone, mass genocide justified by wicked deeply held values and beliefs that the presumed good of some (as determined by other wicked deeply held values of certain select few) outweighs the right of others to even exist. Adolf Hitler acted on his deeply held values, for crying out loud. Would Ms. Warren, by her own reprobate, backward reasoning, respect and accommodate those deeply held values?
Nobody has an obligation to tolerate or accommodate sin. Every manner of wickedness and sin imaginable is rationalized and justified to some degree by the deeply held “values” of the one committing and living in that wickedness. I don’t give a flying flip about their supposed values. I will live and work according to the values set forth by God Almighty, and if they disrespect that right, they will face His wrath.
Well stated and absolutely correct, IMHO.
Never thought I’d see the day professing Christians would argue that abominable sexual perversion should rule the public square, and that we should bend to tolerate, accommodate, and respect it.