ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Social Issues

Same Sex Marriages Have Apparently Opened The Flood Gates To Incestuous Unions....

Updated on August 16, 2016

Same Sex Marriages Have Apparently Opened The Flood Gates To Incestuous Unions….

One need not have attended an expensive, accredited law school to know the meaning and its social ramifications of the “Flood Gates” being opened concept. It simply means that if there is a social issue that is in the spot light… where certain rights are allocated to a segment of our society then those same rights should be had to other segments of our society too. Let us take the issue of same-sex marriage where the United States’ Constitution was interpreted to allow gays and lesbians the right to marry - then why not those who believe in plural marriages like some Mormons or some Muslims or a mother and son who have pledged their incestuous love and are willing to go to jail for the right to be together? Incidentally, I have used the songs,The Old Rugged Cross and He Loves Us to flesh out the themes of this blog.

I am not simply making up this issue out of whole cloth of a mother and son vying to be recognized as a legitimate couple; there is indeed a mother and son, who are residing in New Mexico, who want the right to be seen as a ‘legitimate’ couple; however, the legal question that begs itself is why should we prevent this mother and son - no matter how disgusting we may think that this union is - from being together and even getting marriage… since we have done so for gays and lesbians?

What should be the societal and legal reasons for preventing this mother and son or the Muslims and the Mormons who want to engage in plural marriages (Polygamy)?

If one is objective and he or she wants to support the position where traditional society has not recognized incestuous relationships, then one only has to look at our history to know that the sexual union between or among family members has produced deformity in the offspring and has given us the disease of Hemophilia. And in addition, writing without the fetters of Political Correctness, should not the mother and son, who say that they are in love, respond by saying that there are diseases - AIDS, Hepatitis B and C - associated with the gay life too, yet the latter group is allowed to be treated as legitimate traditional couples? The forgoing legal argument of the incestuous couple is the “Flood Gates” concept explained in a nutshell!

On a personal note, I have always told you, the potential reader, about my Traditional Christian bias on the issues of the day like this one we are discussing now. I believe that marriage should be and will always be between a man and a woman, even if I, Jesus forbids, were to engage in homosexual behavior. The Christ Jesus who I believe in does not change – He does not evolve like the Supreme Court’s “Activist” Justices who see the legal prose of the Constitution as apparently pliable and elastic to carve out rights not readily conspicuous in that cherished, secular document. As I write this paragraph, the Holy Spirit is telegraphing to me that there are some Christians and those who are gay/lesbian and their advocates who are saying that Christ Jesus never spoke on the issue of Homosexuality.

To those who say that Christ Jesus never spoke on the issue of homosexuality, you are woefully in error! In our Bible, Jesus told the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well to go and Sin no more (John 4: 5-42) - what was the Sin the woman was engaged in… it was sleeping with married men, which is sex between a man and a woman - so this sex is Sinful to Christ Jesus, but not two men or two women sleeping together? John The Baptist – a man Jesus said was the greatest prophet who came through the womb of a woman - was beheaded because John criticized King Herod for sleeping with his brother’s wife (Mark 6: 14-29). Again, this was sex between a man (Herod the King) and a woman (Herod’s brother’s wife), yet this sex was a Sin, but not gay and lesbian sex?

After Mary Magdalene was rescued from being stoned (John 8:1-11), the Lord Jesus told her to go and Sin no more. Mary’s sin was sleeping with men for money before her conversion to Christianity… so again, the sex Mary Magdalene was having with men was deemed a Sin by Christ Jesus, but somehow this same Christ Jesus sanctions the sex between same sex couples? I end by giving you one more example where the Christ said If a man were to look at a married woman with lust, that man is guilty of Adultery (Matthew 5:28) - so this lusting by that man is in the hope of having sex, granted with a married woman, yet this sex is deemed a Sin by Christ Jesus, but sex between same sexes is morally ok with this same Christ Jesus? In the Book of John, it is recorded that before Christ Jesus came in the flesh, He was in Heaven - did not the Christ say that before Abraham was… I Am (John 8:58)! With that Biblical backdrop, was there a disagreement among Abba Father (God), the Son (Christ Jesus), and the Holy Spirit when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for inhospitality and Homosexual behavior (Genesis 19)?


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Verily Prime profile image

      Verily Prime 19 months ago from New York

      Sir - your response should have been a stand-alone blog... excellent, and, as it is my wont, do not be afraid to tell me where I have erred in any given blog because that is the hallmark of learning/sharpening one's point of view - of course with my take coming from the prism of my Traditional Christianity... meaning that if a given behavior was a sinful trespass when Christ came in the flesh... it is still so now.

    • Dont Taze Me Bro profile image

      Banned cause of pissants promisem and deantraylor 19 months ago from TWO OF THE MANY LYING LIB CRYBABIES OF HUB PAGES

      Well written and salient points VP.

      People also say nowhere does the Bible prohibit abortion.

      These people are merely not hearing what they don't want to hear because I have heard very intelligent people say this. They wish so bad to deny that it is sin they are blind to what the Bible does say about it. There is a small but influential circle of prochoice advocates who claim to base their beliefs on the Bible. They maintain that “nowhere does the Bible prohibit abortion.” Yet the Bible clearly prohibits the killing of innocent people (Exodus 20:13). All that is necessary to prove a biblical prohibition of abortion is to demonstrate that the Bible considers the unborn to be human beings. Throughout the Scriptures, personhood is never measured by age, stage of development, or mental, physical, or social skills. Personhood is endowed by God at the moment of creation - before which there was not a human being and after which there is. That moment of creation can be nothing other than the moment of conception.

      The Hebrew word used in the Old Testament to refer to the unborn (Exodus 21:22-25) is yeled, a word that “generally indicates young children, but may refer to teens or even young adults.” The Hebrews did not have or need a separate word for unborn children. They were just like any other children, only younger. In the Bible there are references to born children and unborn children, but there is no such thing as a potential, incipient, or “almost” child.

      So naturally, unbelievers, (even some "so called believers,"), uneducated in Scripture and rejecting the creator of their own being are going to try to insist on denying that their embraced sin is forbidden in scripture. That is the sin nature of fallen human beings.

      Floodgates to incestuous unions? Incestuous unions have existed since after the fall. The floodgate was opened when Adam and Eve sinned and it won't be closed until Christ returns and the wicked pay for their sins while the redeemed are washed clean of their sins by their redeemer.

      Thumbs up again, VP!