To the Editor:

In response to Thadd White’s “My take on Chick-fil-A”, in the first of the two commandments to which he referred, Jesus states, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your strength” (OT-Deut 6:5-Jewish Shema; NT-Mark 12:30) and the second is “Love your neighbor as yourself.” (OT-Lev 19:18; NT-Mark 12:31).

Love is a word that our society, unfortunately, connects solely with emotions.  It is a commitment – it is not an emotion.  Those who do love the Lord, as referenced in this commandment, understand that loving God involves keeping his laws and commandments and His law is clearly stated in Leviticus 18:22. Jesus said that He did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it.  (Matt 5:17)  To suggest that because Christians will not go against God’s law, then “they are guilty of hatred”,  is extremely narrow minded.

In our family and in our church, we all have friends and relatives who are openly gay and we love them.  Unfortunately some “open minded” individuals confuse emotions with convictions.  I would love my children no matter what lifestyle they chose, but I would not insist that the whole world – especially committed Christians – endorse that lifestyle.

A friend in church, speaking to a gay relative, put it the best way I’ve heard so far.  She was divorced and her gay relative challenged her with, “Do you consider divorce a sin?” Her response was, “Yes, but the difference between you and me is that I know divorce is a sin.”  Those who understand God’s laws, understand their sin and ask God’s forgiveness. They do not demand that God change His laws.

It is a shame that “open minded” people like Mr. White only fan the flames with their divisive rhetoric instead of trying to calm things down by suggesting alternatives.  Marriage is a sacrament of the church.  To demand that a church perform gay weddings – or pay for abortions as our president has done – is asking a Christian to break God’s law.

Civil unions are available to gay couples instead of marriage.   As I understand it, gay individuals want the monetary protection provided to married couples.  I’m not a lawyer, but wouldn’t it be a lot simpler and less divisive on the country to just strengthen the civil union laws to give gay couples the monetary protection they want and need and not turn the Christian church upside down to accommodate a minority of people?  You wouldn’t demand this of a Muslim temple, WHY demand this of the Christian church?

Thank you for allowing me to voice my opinion.

Bobbi Wise