I wholeheartedly agree with what you're saying about "Christian" music (though for the record, I have never disagreed with you about anything). It's mostly cliche repetition. "Yes Lord, Yes Lord, Yes Yes Lord, Amen!" Really? That's why I listen mainly to Christian rock and/or metal. The lyrics are more often deep and meaningful (though not always, of course), and the message more true to life, and less cheesy and/or cliche. I don't know if you read these comments, but check out Matthias Replaces Judas by Showbread. That is easily the most passionately written and recorded Christian song I've ever heard. And keep doing what you do. It helps my belief that there is still some good in this world.

Hi Matt, you probably get millions of comments and won't notice this one, but still... I keep reading you and admiring your courage to speak out. I am not an American, co the legal nuances are not quite interesting for me, but I wholeheartedly support your 'voice on a desert'. What I think about this gay marriage redefinition - it is not so much about any right to any marriage. As statistics say, in the most rainbow countries, like Sweden, only about 1% of homosexuals decides to go into marriage... Their lifestyle is NOT about ties, responsibilities and kids!!! this whole circus is about ADMITTING THAT HOMOSEXUAL SEX IS NOT A SIN. This is what they want. They "feel bad" doing a thing listed as "wrong" - most people do in fact. So this whole human rights bullshit talk is a scream for approving what they do. I think we need to address that enemy correctly too! Straight to the point. The Bible forbids practising such a sex, we cannot allow this in any "marriage". Fullstop.

Matt, great points on the mythical right to and contractual myth of marriage. I've been uncomfortable with the "get government out" of the marriage business argument but it's where I've landed anyway. First, in our power hungry environment giving the gov’t the power to do anything legal regarding the institution of marriage (including the licensing of it) opens the door to it regulating your personal marriage itself or devolving marriage into meaninglessness as you addressed. I find no reason to believe the situation won't degrade to one extreme or the other. Second, getting the gov't out of marriage is a valuable tool, if used properly, much like Chesterton’s fence analogy. The political left keeps saying they want gov't out of the bedroom but they want to use it to force everyone else to accept the gay marriage myth. That makes gay activists and supporters look like the bullies they are. Taking away their façade of victimhood is, I think, an important thing in the battle.

Same sex marriage tips the scales in their favor.  If we hold on to the current catch-phrase of "social justice" , then anyone who agrees to this is being socially "unjust".  Nowhere in the Constitution does it grant ANYONE the right to marry.  How does one justify this whole stance then?  It is so dangerous to redefine what marriage is.  Funny how you mentioned 10 years ago this was considered so radical...well, around that same time, if you remember, the gay agenda was not for marriage, but simply for "partner equality" (the right for their partner to have the same insurance, benefits etc as afforded to married couples)-amazing how soon that was forgotten and now-YES, it is about making society bow down and accept gay marriage as the norm.

Matt your arguement that marriage is not a constitutional right is very interesting. I would say that if that is the case then all the government officials in all states must stop issuing marriage licences immediately. You see Matt it is not a one sided issue.Once you decide that it isnt a right it begins to effect everyone. The 14th amendment is not only protecting my right to marry the man i love it is also protecting you.Once you remove that protection then it is a slippery slope. The people that make this arguement make it from a falsely presumes position of entitlement..that some how through priviledge you can deny others the same things you would fight to keep for yourself.

I find your argument insulting, praise the Lord is not listening to your right wing podcast! All respect lost.

Matt, I've never heard of you until now, but . . .   Marriage is not a constitutional right?  Really? Maybe you should shut the hell up until you're sure you know what you're talking about.  The Supreme Court has said on 14 different occasions that marriage is a fundamental, constitutional right.  But you know, as I listen to more of your podcast, I realize that you are indeed a moron in general. That or just an attention hound.

Technically, marriage is a church sacrament that the county and state choose to acknowledge and create legislative protections. Ultimately marriage is meant to protect women and children that result from the union.  While I think a civil union should be available for homosexual couples, I don't think marriage (which initially is a sacrament of the church) should be available to them.  Two reasons, any culture that embraces homosexuality (especially male homosexuality) has crumbled. History bares this out. Those same cultures have always marginalized women - Ancient Greece is a perfect example.  In addition, there is starting to be ample evidence that homosexuality is NOT genetic. Identical twin studies are bearing this out. If it was genetic, like gender and race, I'd say it should be legal, but it's seeming that it might actually be a child development disorder instead. Not sure the state needs to legitimize it as a result.

Matt, I used to be surprised at how often your positions and mine align--like you're inside my head.  However, having happened so many times now, it's only surprising when our positions don't align.  With that said, while I agree generally in your point on Christian music--slapping a 'Christian' label on mediocre art doesn't magically make it good, but that's how a lot of 'Christian' consumers are manipulated into thinking it is --your choice of examples is ironic and misplaced.  Of all the 'Christian' bands out there, NeedToBreathe is actually one of the most vociferous in NOT assigning that label to themselves.  They see the same thing you do and have steadfastly, for their entire career, eschewed the 'Christian band' label, instead considering themselves a band that is comprised of Christians.  While there are plenty of examples of non-Christians flying under the Christian music banner ("As I Lay Dying" for one), NeedToBreathe is quite the inverse. You should dig deeper on NTB.

In this episode, Matt talks about the gay marriage controversy in Alabama and explains why the pro-gay marriage position is wrong. He also discusses 50 Shades of Grey, the Grammy's, and the perils of Christian music.

Marriage is not a constitutional right - 2/11/15

Matt Walsh is a blogger, writer, speaker, and professional truth sayer. Subscribe to his weekly podcast. 

http://www.theblaze.com/author/matt-walsh/

Comments

Jeff Johnson

Bill Zachar

redcarol57

Jim Zooter

PEC

Michael Demeule-Calella

murrah

Michael Fox 7

AleksandraR

Josh Peterson