By Ken Koehler, Published January 24 2009
Sexual orientation bill denies centuries of cultural historyA bill is being considered that would add “sexual orientation” as a protected class to the North Dakota Human Rights and Fair Housing acts. Proponents of this bill have pointed out that neighboring Minnesota already has such a bill, and Montana is also looking at this same legislation – and therefore apparently, we should adopt it, too.
Some people mistakenly believe that it is hateful not to include sexual orientation along with a person’s race, color, religion, sexual gender, national origin, age, disability, or status with respect to marriage or public assistance. But there is a difference here from these other categories – and that difference is the reason it has not been included. That difference involves a most basic understanding of the naturally created order of relationships going all the way back to the beginning of history, and as summarized in Matthew 19:4-5, “At the beginning the Creator made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ ”
It then comes down to trusting whether God had it right with his original created design – versus the pressure of the political or societal correctness of our times. Our nation claims to trust that God’s designs are in the best interests of his creation. We have publically affirmed this in many ways throughout our history, including choosing the motto “In God We Trust” – even placing it on every piece of our monetary currency.
At this point there may be some who would ask: “But what about the separation of church and state?” Without going into a lengthy history lesson regarding this often misapplied phrase; we need to remember that President Thomas Jefferson’s original use of this wording was for the purpose of protecting the church’s free exercise of religion from government intervention, as well as to prevent our government from adopting any one single denomination from being designated as the official religion. It was never intended to disassociate our nation from God and his guidance.
While this bill may not specifically be seeking legal status for same-sex marriages, it appears to be supportive of that direction. This would run counter to centuries of cultural history which has always protected a one-man, one-woman marriage as foundational to society – even disallowing polygamist marriages. This has served our nation well throughout history, and I for one trust that God’s original created designs – including in matters of sexual orientation – are still best for the governance of society. That’s why I believe it would be a mistake to pass this bill.