I heard you Mr. President, and “Hear” is What I have to SAY!!!

by Weldon McWilliams, IV
Rhetoric Race and Religion Contributor
From: Weldon Works

I have consciously kept quiet in regards to President Obama’s position on Same-Sex marriage. I have been asked by a few people what my position is and with some I have shared, with some I have not, but after much prayer, and reflection, I feel compelled to share now.

Whether or not you agree with Pres. Obama and his position on this issue, I think one would have to admit that it took a certain amount of courage for the President to make his statement. I know there were political risks that came along with his statement and ultimately the President felt he had an obligation to make a statement despite those risks (even though I believe that Vice-President Biden’s comments a week prior had much to do with the Presidents timing), and for that I say “Salute!”

After hearing the Presidents statement supporting Same-Sex marriage many in the religious community (clergy and laymen) immediately condemned his statement, including many clergy within the Black Church. There has even been talk about certain clergy refusing to support Pres. Obama’s re-election campaign. Now I have had my own issues with some of the policies and tactics of the Obama administration, and I am not 100% sure I will vote for him myself, but I am 100% certain of one thing, I will not vote for the policies and solutions being offered up by Republican candidate Mitt Romney! When I look at the policies of the two men (Obama and Romney), I think that the community I reside in and the community I represent and work for will benefit more if Pres. Obama is able to implement his positions. This does not mean I do not see flaws within Pres. Obama’s policies (i.e. very focused on the growth of the middle class while not being concerned with the current everyday struggles and realities of those in the poor, underdeveloped and impoverished communities), it just means I think his policies will be more of a benefit to the community I represent than his Republican opponent. That is all. If a 3rd party candidate that spoke to the concerns of the poor class and oppressed people of the nation and world was to get involved in the Presidential race, he/she would probably get my vote (calling Cynthia McKinney). The point I am making here is that for me and whatever I may define as politically important, it would take more than just one issue that would make me vote or not vote for someone. I would have to look at their position in relation to other positions and then come to a conclusion about them in totality. I hope that those in the religious community are doing this as well, especially clergy established within working class and underprivileged communities.

Now coming back to my thoughts on the President’s statements. I believe that when it comes to politics, and when it comes to laws in “Democratic” nations, no one group of people should have any more or less rights than another group of people no matter their race, class, gender, or sexual preference. If one group of people is given the opportunity to accomplish something under the law, then all groups should be given the same opportunity to accomplish that feat, under the law. I think that a politician who upholds “fairness” and “equality” should agree with this. President Obama, has admitted that he has had to “evolve” to come to this decision. I respect that but I am a little worried when a politician has to “evolve” on interpretations of fairness and equality. Barack Obama is the President of the United States of America for every day and every hour of his allotted term. Therefore when we hear from him we must understand that he is speaking to us as such and from a political position. He is not a Minister, or a Theologian and as president (and the nations position of “separation of church and state”) he has no obligation to speak as such. His obligation is to speak as President and as President of a nation that says it promotes fairness and equality, he should make sure he is upholding that. When I heard the President speak on his evolved view of being in favor of Same Sex Marriage, I took it as a necessary view if America is to live up to its ideals of fairness and equality. I did not look at it as a view that meant I would have to change or alter any of my views if I did not choose to.

Marriage is a sensitive issue. It is unique in the sense that it often holds spiritual/religious (non-state influenced) importance and legal (very much state influenced) importance. At times when talking about this issue, many will inadvertently (and I guess also purposely) cross those lines. President Obama stated in the interview that he did not plan to get the Federal Government involved in the Same-Sex marriage debate. He believed that the states themselves should have the primary say. Whether it every becomes Federal Law or remains on a state to state basis, I do not believe that the nation/state should force Clergy to perform Same Sex marriages if it is against their Theological position to do so. I performed my first wedding about 2 months ago, and I had several meetings and discussions with the couple, and based on the frequent dialogue I had to decide if I was comfortable enough to conduct the “religious” ceremony of consecrating their marriage. Since the couple wanted the wedding to be conducted by a minister, and I being the minister they selected, it was very important to me that I got a sense of their spirituality, and I had to examine if their spirituality was in similar alignment with mine. I felt that it was and I chose to officiate that religious ceremony. However, if I felt that their spirituality and my spirituality was not in alignment I had the right and authority (based on my selection of being the presiding officiate) to refuse presiding over it.

In most states (I am pretty sure all of them but since I have not done the research I will not assume) Weddings can be performed by clergy and/or certain elected officials. Elected officials are bound to uphold laws. If they believe that the marriage between 2 people violates certain laws, then they are not obligated to perform or honor the union of those two individuals. Their refusal to do so, however, must be due to a violation of the LAW, not of a Theological position. If I am an elected official, who can perform a marriage ceremony, I must do so unless it violates a national/state law. I say this to say that where Same-Sex marriage is permissible even if a clergy member does not agree to perform the same sex ceremony due to theological restraints, the same sex couple do have the option to go to a justice of the peace and have their marriage legally recognized and I can support the legality of it.

Lastly, I have consciously not stated my personal stance on the matter of Same Sex marriages because I am not sure if it is really important, but as I minister I will say that we really must examine how we come to theological positions. If a same sex couple asked me to perform a marriage ceremony for them, in all honestly, I would pray over the matter and seek a divine revelation and go from there. My point being that I do not think I would automatically reject the request. I take the role of Minister very seriously, I also struggle with and about theology. I would probably talk with fellow clergy and get their p

ositions, I would also talk with the couple a few times, I would articulate some of my positions and I would want them to articulate to me their positions and we would move from there. I have never had a conversation with a same-sex couple who wanted to marry. I feel that as a minister who is supposed to be upholding LOVE the way Yeshua (Jesus) the Christ did, I would have to seek dialogue and converse. We are living in a time where Ministers and Theologians are really going to have to seek GOD, more than they seek, stature, position, or fame. It is not enough to say, “I can’t do it because the Bible says so.” We as clergy and theologians must seek to find WHY the Bible says Thou shall… and Thou Shall not. So its not enough to say that “I won’t kill anyone because the Bible says Thou Shall Not Kill…” but as those who claim to have a calling from GOD into the Ministry we must seek to get to a place where we can tell someone WHY the Bible says “Thou Shall not Kill”. Now I have read about 80-85% of the Bible and I have not found any passage that talks about rejecting same sex marriages and I have not found any passages condoning them either. I have read passages where there was condemning of homosexual activity. The question I ask is was the condemnation based on the act, or based on what the act was rooted in. Just a thought!

The contemporary meaning of Marriage is not identical to what Marriage meant in Biblical times. Most of those marriages were arranged and the concept of falling in love with your spouse first before marriage was really rare. Marriage was more about the building, re-building, strengthening and re-strengthening of a nation that was constantly under or under threat of foreign rule. What would be the biblical position of Marriage if it was an arrangement that was based on the notion of “Romantic Love”?

In conclusion, I just wanted to convey that for me, even as a minister, the issue and legitimacy of Same Sex marriage is not open and shut. Even on a topic that many in the religious community feels is automatic, for me would require prayer, patience and revelation. I am sure some will look at this and feel that I am out of order and perhaps should not even call myself a minister. But I feel to walk in the ways of Yeshua (Jesus) the Christ is the most revolutionary act one can take, and one must look at all issues and seriously interrogate them. If Christ is your center then LOVE must be at the root of your theological position.