Straw Men on Slippery Slopes

Right, can I just take a moment to remind you that we are in 2015? That we live in a supposedly enlightened society? OK. That done, can I ask why people are bemoaning the recent US Supreme Court ruling stating that two adult human beings who love each other are allowed to get married? I usually keep quiet about this kind of stuff because I've got a lot of respect for religion and my religious friends and when this debate comes up it is so often centred around religion. But I can't keep schtum any longer
   I recently saw a link to an article entitled "40 questions for Christians now waving rainbow flags" on facebook (don't search for it, they'll get money from their advertising space if you click on their page and I couldn't in good conscience allow any more to be contributed to the cause of hate).
   Well, I used to be a Christian and I've always waved the rainbow flag so I thought I'd address these questions. I think it's important to mention certain biases here. First, my religion. As I say, I'm not a Christian any more. This is not because I don't believe in God or Jesus but because, despite its other merits, I don't see them present in organised Christianity these days. Second, my sexual orientation. It's a topic for another day perhaps so all I'll say here is that if you insist on labeling me it's probably best to call me straight-ish. Despite these facts, I'm rooted in Christianity and still see myself as a follower of Christ and reverent of the Bible, so I suppose the questions are still aimed at me in some way.
   First up, here are the questions:

1.  How long have you believed that gay marriage is something to be celebrated?
2.  What Bible verses led you to change your mind?
3.  How would you make a positive case from Scripture that sexual activity between two persons of the same sex is a blessing to be celebrated?
4.  What verses would you use to show that a marriage between two persons of the same sex can adequately depict Christ and the church?
5.  Do you think Jesus would have been okay with homosexual behavior between consenting adults in a committed relationship?
6.  If so, why did he reassert the Genesis definition of marriage as being one man and one woman?
7.  When Jesus spoke against porneia what sins do you think he was forbidding?
8.  If some homosexual behavior is acceptable, how do you understand the sinful “exchange” Paul highlights in Romans 1?
9.  Do you believe that passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Revelation 21:8 teach that sexual immorality can keep you out of heaven?
10.  What sexual sins do you think they were referring to?
11.   As you think about the long history of the church and the near universal disapproval of same-sex sexual activity, what do you think you understand about the Bible that Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, and Luther failed to grasp?
12.  What arguments would you use to explain to Christians in Africa, Asia, and South America that their understanding of homosexuality is biblically incorrect and your new understanding of homosexuality is not culturally conditioned?
13.  Do you think Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were motivated by personal animus and bigotry when they, for almost all of their lives, defined marriage as a covenant relationship between one man and one woman?
14. Do you think children do best with a mother and a father? 
15.  If not, what research would you point to in support of that conclusion?
16.  If yes, does the church or the state have any role to play in promoting or privileging the arrangement that puts children with a mom and a dad?
17.  Does the end and purpose of marriage point to something more than an adult’s emotional and sexual fulfillment?
18.  How would you define marriage?
19.  Do you think close family members should be allowed to get married?
20.  Should marriage be limited to only two people?
21.  On what basis, if any, would you prevent consenting adults of any relation and of any number from getting married?
22.  Should there be an age requirement in this country for obtaining a marriage license?
23.  Does equality entail that anyone wanting to be married should be able to have any meaningful relationship defined as marriage?
24.  If not, why not?
25.  Should your brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree with homosexual practice be allowed to exercise their religious beliefs without fear of punishment, retribution, or coercion?
26.  Will you speak up for your fellow Christians when their jobs, their accreditation, their reputation, and their freedoms are threatened because of this issue?
27.  Will you speak out against shaming and bullying of all kinds, whether against gays and lesbians or against Evangelicals and Catholics?
28.  Since the evangelical church has often failed to take unbiblical divorces and other sexual sins seriously, what steps will you take to ensure that gay marriages are healthy and accord with Scriptural principles?
29.   Should gay couples in open relationships be subject to church discipline?
30.   Is it a sin for LGBT persons to engage in sexual activity outside of marriage?
31.  What will open and affirming churches do to speak prophetically against divorce, fornication, pornography, and adultery wherever they are found?
32.  If “love wins,” how would you define love?
33.  What verses would you use to establish that definition?
34.  How should obedience to God’s commands shape our understanding of love?
35.  Do you believe it is possible to love someone and disagree with important decisions they make?
36.  If supporting gay marriage is a change for you, has anything else changed in your understanding of faith?
37.  As an evangelical, how has your support for gay marriage helped you become more passionate about traditional evangelical distinctives like a focus on being born again, the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ on the cross, the total trustworthiness of the Bible, and the urgent need to evangelize the lost?
38.  What open and affirming churches would you point to where people are being converted to orthodox Christianity, sinners are being warned of judgment and called to repentance, and missionaries are being sent out to plant churches among unreached peoples?
39.  Do you hope to be more committed to the church, more committed to Christ, and more committed to the Scriptures in the years ahead?
40. When Paul at the end of Romans 1 rebukes “those who practice such things” and those who “give approval to those who practice them,” what sins do you think he has in mind?

(h/t thegospelcoalition.org)

   Now, I could spend the next four years answering each question individually, or I could simply point out the multitude of fallacies within the questions but the former is pointless and the latter's a little childish. Instead, I'll answer the key ones and address the flaws in some of the others. I might miss some out for reasons of not wanting to turn this into a book-length response but I intend to address all the issues raised and shirk nothing.
   I must first say that although I'm arguing against this piece, my primary concern is with its poor debating technique rather than its message (though I heartily disagree with the message). If you want to believe same-sex marriage is wrong, fine, but don't try to brainwash others as sure as hell don't try and do it with lame-ass arguments like those above.

   Fallacies first, I think, to save time: 

   Questions 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 28, 33, 40 are all predicated on the assumption of the absolute truth of every word of the Bible, which is a shaky concept on which to build an argument. Even if you yourself believe it to be the case, you must accept that not all Christians do and that for those Christians, these questions have no meaning. More on this later.

   Questions 6, 10, 15, 16, 17, 24 are all actually additional parts of other questions. This isn't a fallacy but it rather renders them redundant.

   Questions 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31 and 36 are examples of two fallacies at once. Straw men on slippery slopes, impressive.

   Questions 37, 38, and to an extent 34 and 39, presuppose a universal interpretation of Christianity, which is nonsense.

   I deem the following questions irrelevant, for the stated reasons:

   Question 1, because it doesn't matter how long you've believed something - is the belief of a recent convert to Christianity less valid than that of a life-long believer? I would argue it's more valid, since they are more likely to have used reason to come to their beliefs rather than simply being brought up into a tradition. So, if recent converts to Christianity are not less valid (we can agree on that at least, can't we?) then question 1 is irrelevant.

   Question 7, because the verse in question fairly clearly refers to reasons why divorce is allowed, which has got little to do with support for marriage equality.

   Question 13, because the opinions of others and their apparent changes of opinion have no bearing on one's own opinions. Unless the questioner wishes to imply that their audience are no more than lemmings?

   Question 35, because my ability to love and disagree with someone has three-fifths of sod all to do with marriage or my opinions thereof. This question was just filler, wasn't it?

   Which leaves four questions worth answering. That's right, four. And those are mostly worth answering to demonstrate their absurdity:

   Question 5: do I think Jesus would be ok with same-sex marriage? Clearly I, as a rainbow-flag-waving Christian, do. Next.

   Question 14: do I think children do best with a mother and a father? That depends entirely on the specific child and the specific parents. Many kids from "traditional" homes have horrible lives, many don't, so clearly the make-up of the household is irrelevant.

   Question 18: how do I define marriage? As a legal and/or religious commitment to another person, ideally because you love them. And?

   Question 32: How do I define love? I don't, it is subjective and indefinable by its very nature. If this was not the case then most of the major artworks since the beginning of time would not exist.
   Well, that's those questions answered or rebutted, am I supposed to feel wrong about supporting equality now? Or to have changed my mind? Or to feel a conflict between my faith and my ethics? Well, I don't and I haven't, and here's why:

   The majority of the "argument" put forth by these questions seems to be "the bible doesn't explicitly state that same-sex marriage is ok, and some parts of it suggest it is wrong."

   The weaknesses of this argument are myriad, but here is the important one: The Bible is not the direct word of God. I don't say this to cause offence and I'm really not trying to challenge anyone's faith, merely to put my side of the argument. So sorry if you believe that the Bible is God's word but even the book itself does not claim to be written by God, most parts of the book are named after the people who did allegedly write them (the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul's letter to... etc.). Are those people God? No. They were writing their view of events. Even if they did not embellish, even if they tried to faithfully represent facts, by the very fact of their humanity they were flawed and prone to error. Even if you believe God directly inspired these writings, you still can't completely rule out errors and you can not ignore the many things which were arbitrarily removed or omitted from the Bible by what is now the Catholic church. Who knows what Jesus said in the accounts that have been buried by organised religion?

   To call the Bible the word of God is blasphemy. It is the word of long-dead men who know nothing of faith in the modern world, who at worst used the names of God and Jesus to propagate their own world views and at best had the unenviable task of interpreting the inherently ineffable wishes of God through the prism of their own experience. How can you let these men tell you what to do, what to believe, even what to think?

   I did say I revere the Bible, and I do, the stories of Jesus are inspirational, but to take anything in the book as absolute truth is to narrow the infinite wisdom of God to something relevant only to ancient man or modern extremists. That is not my God.

Inspiration strikes

So, today I started work on my first... hmmm first novel? first short story? First something or other, anyway. I don't know where it's going to go but I'm finally writing something.

   Awesome.

   Yeah.

   Except...

   Well, what do you do when you have an idea that you think is really bad but is the only idea you seem likely to have for a while? And when you don't really think you can write well enough to save the bad idea by cocooning it in words that hide the flaws?

   Apparently you write it anyway, or that's what I seem to be doing. I foresee great danger here: either I'll hate the end product and be too demotivated to write anything else or I'll be so happy at finishing something that I'll love it too much to admit it's poor.

   Well, there's only one way to find out I suppose.