On Saturday, August 15, 2009 hundreds of couples (both straight and gay) assembled at public places throughout America for kiss ins in protest of the denial of civil rights of homosexual couples to marry in the manner of heterosexual couples. In an interview one young lady from Utah (an inactive member of the Mormon faith who is not gay or lesbian) said she decided to join in the kiss ins to support her gay father. She also said that she believed the Mormon organization should not be involved in political initiatives like California's prop 8 because "civil rights have nothing to do with religion." This statement begs the question: "Does religion have any right to impose its views on civil rights issues?" More specifically, does religion have a right to defend the traditional interpretation of marriage which is a union between one man and one woman and deny homosexuals their so-called civil rights to do the same?

The answer to the question of whether gay, lesbians and transgenders should be able to marry like heterosexual couples depends on which of the two hallowed documents (the Judeo-Christian Bible or the U.S. Constitution) has the greater authority. If marriage is a human invention than one could suppose that under the guidelines of the U.S. Constitution and the Equal Protections Amendment that individual citizens have the right to adjoin themselves to whomever they wish. But if there is a higher law handed down by One of greater authority than the men who wrote the U.S. Constitution then that which was handed down by the Higher Authority would supersede any rule that stemmed from the limited minds of mere mortals. If indeed the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible exists and if he made his will inexplicably known then religion would have the right to interject its views concerning civil rights. In fact, Mormons and Christians alike would have an obligation to defend God's way through initiatives like California's proposition 8.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (or Mormons) does not agree with all Orthodox Christian positions on all matters. However, in at least this one case, Mormons and Christians stand arm-in-arm as one; that is, the Christian Bible (which they are convinced contains the very Word of God) declares that marriage is between one man and one woman and they cannot approve of any other scenario no matter how many kiss ins the LGBT activists hold.

In light of this fact, some gay and lesbian activists want to kick God out of the public forum and say that to deny them the right to marry is discrimination. But even if God does not exist, then it would be nature that discriminated against homosexuals because it would be natural selection that chose to give them the sex organs they have. So, even from a humanistic, naturalistic point of view homosexual behavior is both unnatural and illogical. It is unnatural in that a man's penis was made (or evolved) for eliminating urine and for procreation; not for oral or anal sexual activity. It is illogical because (advances in modern reproductive technologies not withstanding) continuation of the human species can only happen through the union of a man and a woman. No doubt sex is meant to be pleasurable; yet still the male sexual organ is designed for a woman's vagina and nothing else. And that is true whether a person believes in God or not and will still be true no matter how many kiss ins homosexual activists attend across America .

And isn't it tragic how all types of venereal disease and STDs have broken out over the years due to indiscriminate sexual behavior of both homosexuals and heterosexuals alike. It appears that whether one breaks God's order or nature's order bad things result. Like a human being attempting to defy gravity by jumping off a 10 story building and flapping his arms because he believes he can fly; the end result will be less then pleasurable.

Furthermore it seems a bit ironic that the inactive Mormon girl aforementioned above was at the kiss in to support her homosexual father. Apparently, her father was heterosexual long enough to have a child. In July of 2009 the American Medical Association came out with a statement against attempts to rehabilitate gay or lesbians believing that any such attempt would be counterproductive and could result in irreparable psychological harm. But just because a person has a tendency towards a certain type of behavior does not make it natural or acceptable no matter how many kiss ins supporters might attend.

A note about marriage. In most US states, homosexual couples have the right to join in civil unions and are allowed most of the financial benefits of straight couples. If this is the case why do they need to have the word "marriage" rubberstamped across their relationship to legitimize it except to plagarize the concept from religion. Marriage is not a piece of paper signed by a justice at the county courthouse. Marriage is a not a ceremony in an ornate cathedral. Marriage is a sacred vow of life long commitment made between a man and a woman before God and consummated through mental, emotional, physical and spiritual intimacy. If God does not exist, then the lifelong commitment is all that matters in the end anyway. If gay and lesbian couples believe God is in favor of homosexual marriage then again it's the consecration of the heart that counts.Still, if God is truly the source of the institution of marriage and he has made known what is and is not acceptable then religion has a right (even an obligation) to join in and steer the civil rights debate back to God's ideal.